Folks, this “Ukraine Whistleblower” event was a pre-planned event.  As we begin to understand the general outline of how the Schiff Dossier was assembled, we are now starting to get into the specifics.  First discovered by researcher Stephen McIntyre, there is now evidence surfacing showing the ICIG recently created an entirely new ‘whistleblower complaint form’ that specifically allowed for the filing of complaints “heard from others“.

Prior to the current “whistleblower complaint” the Intelligence Community Inspector General did not accept whistle-blower claims without first hand knowledge.  However, the ICIG revised the protocol in August 2019 allowing for the EXACT type of complaint now registered from the CIA whistleblower.
The IGIC revision was made at the same time HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff was tweeting in August about President Trump, Rudy Giuliani and holding back funding pending assistance with political opponents.  Note the Date: (link)
(more…)

There has been no push-back from the democrat allied media about HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff completely manufacturing quotes about the phone call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy. Chairman Schiff made up fabricated quotes and read them during his opening statements at the HPSCI hearing yesterday.
Some people criticize President Trump for his twitter retorts. However, with the media covering for the deceptive conduct of democrats, Twitter is a way for President Trump to set the record straight:

(more…)

48 Hours after the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call transcript has been made public, and 24 hours after the “whistleblower’ complaint is made public, Things are now becoming much more clear… The whistleblower complaint is the “Schiff Dossier.”
After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the House “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare Group members to become committee staff.
Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired  Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link), all are within the Lawfare network.  You probably saw Berke questioning former Trump campaign chairman Corey Lewandowski.
It now looks like the Lawfare network constructed the Schiff Dossier, and handed it to allied CIA operative Michael Barry to file as a formal IC complaint.  This process is almost identical to the Fusion-GPS/Lawfare network handing the Steele Dossier to the FBI to use as the evidence for the 2016/2017 Russia conspiracy.
While Devin Nunes cannot describe the specifics of what I just outlined, he explains the process in the bigger picture.  WATCH:

(more…)

National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow discusses the forecast for ratification of the USMCA against the backdrop of Pelosi’s announced focus on impeachment.
Additionally, Kudlow discusses the status of Chinese trade negotiations and the recently affirmed trade deal with Japan.

.
 WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives is proceeding with efforts regarding the Trump administration’s trade deal with Mexico and Canada, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters on Thursday, saying House Democrats had discussed the pact a day earlier.
“We’re moving ahead on the U.S-Mexico-Canada agreement,” Pelosi said at a news conference. “We’re, again, hoping to be on a continuing path to ‘yes’” to approve the deal aimed at replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). (link)
(more…)

If you have read any of the documents that came from Fusion-GPS, Nellie Ohr and Christopher Steele, you will likely find an amazing amount of similarity to the format and writing in this “whistleblower” complaint.
It was obviously written by a Lawfare member.
The complaint is the same structure as the Steele Dossier.  No direct knowledge; no direct evidence to the claims; second-hand gossip, rumors from people who might have known another person to have overheard something, mixed with prior media reports to narrate a story as told by the author. Here is the complaint:
[scribd id=427562713 key=key-6T7Fy4sGJpb6SmFtAHcq mode=scroll]
.
The complaint is based on the July 25th phone call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy of Ukraine.  Here’s the transcript of that call:
(more…)

Details are beginning to surface about the deep state Whistleblower complaint.  It is possible in the next few days the 6-page complaint, which utilized media reports to construct the supportive evidence for the phone call accusation against President Trump, will be made public.
That said, within a heavy propaganda report from the New York Times there are details about the Intelligence Community Inspector General that show the tell-tale fingerprints of the ICIG supportive intent (emphasis mine):

[…] Mr. Atkinson, a Trump appointee, nevertheless concluded that the allegations appeared to be credible and identified two layers of concern.

The first involved a possible violation of criminal law. Mr. Trump’s comments to Mr. Zelensky “could be viewed as soliciting a foreign campaign contribution in violation of the campaign-finance laws,” Mr. Atkinson wrote, according to the Justice Department memo. (read more)

Does the “foreign campaign contribution” angle sound familiar?  It should, because that argument was used in the narrative around the Trump Tower meeting with the Russian Lobbyist Natalia Veselnitskaya.  More specifically, just like FARA violations the overused “campaign contribution” narrative belongs to a specific network of characters, Lawfare.
The center of the Lawfare Alliance influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD.  It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok.  It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.
(more…)

A much anticipated bilateral meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukraine President Zelenskyy. [Video and Transcript Below]

.
[Transcript] – PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, thank you very much, everybody. We’re with the President of Ukraine, and he’s made me more famous, and I’ve made him more famous. (Laughter.) I will say he’s got a great reputation. He’s very, very strongly looking into all sorts of corruption and some of the problems they’ve had over the years. I think it’s one of the primary reasons he got elected. His reputation is absolutely sterling. And it’s an honor to be with you.
(more…)

The political planets are aligned to provide a considerably interesting day today.
If events happen as outlined in recent media reports, the White House will release the transcript of a call (underpinning a hearsay whistleblower complaint) between U.S. President Trump and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine (pictured below).
Additionally, the Intelligence Community Inspector General is expected to release research documents from his office showing a concerning political motive behind the hearsay whistleblower; a person who complained about the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call while not actually hearing the call, or reading what the call content was all about.

Exactly when the call transcript and ICIG documents are going to be released is an unknown. President Trump has a 12:10pm bilateral meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.  PM Abe is a very good friend of President Trump and together they have recently agreed to a set of sector specific trade deals; with more stuff in the works.
At 2:15pm things really get interesting, as President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy will be holding their own bilateral meeting at the UNGA.  Media cameras are generally present for a short Q&A at the start of every Bilat, and obviously the #1 topic will be this mysteriously alarming phone call; with an opportunity for President Zelenskyy to address the U.S. political narrative therein.
(more…)

Today Nancy Pelosi made an announcement with forethought, optical planning, teleprompter script, and a presentation intended to look serious.  But what she announced was simply a continuation of the status quo wrapped up in newly packaged lingo.
Pelosi stated she was herewith announcing an “official impeachment inquiry“. Everything remains ‘as is’, albeit with enhanced optics and new titles for the narrative engineers.

The Democrat stage managers forgot the trumpets…

Essentially she announced House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler will continue doing what House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler was already doing; only now House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, will start doing what he was doing with a new lingo.
There is not one thing different from today than yesterday, except the optics and new language to help the media hype something that doesn’t exist.   Speaker Pelosi did not announce her intent to hold a house vote to authorize an impeachment investigation; she didn’t even mention the word vote at all.   In essence what Speaker Pelosi has done is just satiate her base of Democrats with the fancy optics of something that doesn’t exist.
What’s the difference from Nadler’s “impeachment inquiry” yesterday, and Pelosi’s “official impeachment inquiry” today?…  Nothing.
(more…)

For the past several weeks House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has been trying to get the grand jury transcripts from the Mueller investigation in order to further advance his political goal of a presidential impeachment.
However, Nadler has been stymied because the official -legal- House impeachment process has not been followed. A DC district court judge knocked down Nadler’s attempts.
The full House of Representatives has never voted to impeach the president, which would be the first step that authorizes Nadler to begin an “impeachment inquiry.”  Nadler needs that authorization in order to gain legal authority and access to Mueller’s investigative evidence that underpins the highly political Mueller report as it relates to obstruction.
Keep in mind… The Weissmann/Mueller and overall special counsel team investigative effort was always designed to construct the obstruction case. A minimal amount of time was spent on Trump-Russia collusion, because it did not exist.  The primary team effort was to assemble evidence that could give the impression of Trump-Obstruction; according to their map, that obstruction angle would ultimately lead to impeachment.
It does not seem accidental that Chairman Nadler was rebuked by the DC judge in mid-August; and then subsequently Adam Schiff steps forth with a mysterious “whistleblower” report and a fake Trump-Ukraine narrative surfaces.
Indeed, as many have noted, the Trump-Ukraine narrative and subsequent impeachment discussion has almost identical fingerprints as the Trump-Russia impeachment narrative.
Techno-Fog astutely notes the use of the faux-Ukraine narrative seems planned, designed and rolled-out to provide Nadler’s much needed Full House impeachment stimulus:
(more…)