I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is a recap of one key player who mysteriously seems to avoid scrutiny.

If there is one corrupt DC player who has escaped scrutiny for her corrupt endeavors, it would be Mary McCord.

More than any other Lawfare operative within Main Justice, Mary McCord sits at the center of every table in the manufacturing of cases against Donald Trump. {GO DEEP} Mary McCord’s husband is Sheldon Snook.  At a critical moment he was also the right hand to the legal counsel of Chief Justice John Roberts.

When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous ‘Woods File’).  That’s why the Steele Dossier ultimately became important.

It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump.

When the application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin.  Carlin quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016 just before the final application was submitted (October 21,2016).  John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.

♦ When the FISA application was finally submitted (approved by Sally Yates and James Comey), it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant.

(more…)

True character and integrity become most apparent when choosing between popularity and honesty, or between protecting revenue and speaking openly. That said, while I have little regard for a DC journalist who avoided meeting at the Trump International Hotel out of fear of being seen entering a venue deemed “controversial” by peers, at least Herridge keeps her act going by asking questions that play well with the crowd.

In an interview with former DOJ Prosecutor James Trusty, Ms. Herridge explores the potential for prosecuting those accused of deliberately targeting Donald Trump. Trusty points to 18 USC 242 as the key statute in the alleged “grand conspiracy” and considers how actions by former CIA Director John Brennan might have reset the statute of limitations. He also discusses James Comey’s recent “8647” threat indictment, possible additional false statement charges, and whether the underlying motive was to undermine an incoming President. WATCH:

CHAPTERS:
00:00 Intro
00:40 Legal Theory Behind “Grand Conspiracy” Against President Trump
01:30 Former CIA Director Brennan Investigation/Indictment
02:15 Florida Courts Are the Battleground

(more…)

My opinion on our current FBI Director is the same as it was the day his nomination was announced.  The best, the most competent, the smartest, the most insightful and stable thinking people do not originate on a track from inside government work.  The most effective way to get the best outcome is to approach and enlist the smart ones from outside government to come and assist.  Patel was always an insider.

The FBI is an institution built upon corruption and fraud.  Unfortunately, neither President Trump, nor the American people, will ever get the vindication and accountability he/we deserve until Kash Patel is no longer the one in charge of delivering it. It’s just that painfully simple.  Trying to reform a corrupt system while maintaining the structures that enabled the corruption leads to endless discussions and ‘trust me bro’ delays.

In this interview FBI Director Kash Patel sits down with Sean Hannity to discuss current and prior events within the FBI.  Patel’s primary objective is the performance; the presentation of what he thinks will endear him to President Trump the most. This is not effectiveness; the outcome is the illusion of leadership.  The video is prompted. WATCH:

.

Kash Patel is to the FBI as Pam Bondi was to the DOJ.

(more…)

I apologize for the deep weed details, but this stuff will soon become critical.  If James Comey is indicted for leaking the “Comey memos” suddenly the door opens wide to see how the Robert Mueller appointment was a coordinated ongoing ‘conspiracy’ effort to target Donald Trump.

Back in June 2017 CNN (and other media) filed a FOIA suit to gain the Comey memos.  As the lawsuit progressed through a lengthy battle -where the Mueller team did not want to turn over those memos- Mueller’s lead FBI agent, David Archey, made sworn declarations to the court. Those statements became known as the “Archey Declarations”.  Inside those declarations agent Archey provided a specific outline of the FBI and the memos.

There are two sets of documents that outline a very specific picture.  Robert Mueller’s lead FBI Agent David Archey made sworn declarations to the court. However, at the time of his sworn statement, Archey did not have knowledge of an inside FBI “whistleblower” who provided information to DOJ Inspector General, Michael Horowitz.

There is a distinct conflict within the IG Horowitz report on James Comey (and memos) [Available Here] and the David Archey declarations [Available Here].  However, beyond the conflict there’s an even more alarming picture of how Robert Mueller was deployed, when all the information is overlaid in a timeline.   A very clear picture emerges; very clear.

Note the date: Agent Archey states the “investigative team” came into full possession of the Comey memos: “on or by May 12th, 2017,”…

[Page #3 of Exhibit A – Archey Declarations]

The “investigative team” would be Andrew McCabe, Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and then James Baker as lead counsel for the group.  The “Director’s staff” would be James Rybicki, who is identified by Archey as having “maintained” possession of the memos.

This “small group”, particularly Comey’s Chief of Staff, James Rybicki, is the center of the team.  This team is also confirmed by the IG Horowitz report. This team had the memos on May 12th, 2017.

Now we move into the aspect where the motives and ideology become clear as we look at the IG custodial record of the memos, as outlined by the Supervisory Special Agent in charge of Comey’s documents within the IG report, compared to the Archey declarations.
(more…)

In the first case against James Comey for allegedly lying to Congress, there was no dismissal; instead, the judge rejected US Attorney Lindsey Halligan’s involvement. After that, the statute of limitations ran out.  However, if the report below is accurate, this would represent the third currently active investigation against former FBI Director James Comey, and Lindsey Halligan might get the last laugh.

The first investigative notice to Comey was in mid-March from the Sunshine State.  Essentially the ‘conspiracy case’ being reviewed by Jason A. Reding Quiñones, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida {SOURCE}.  The second investigative case was in North Carolina, where a grand jury released an indictment for threats against President Trump {SOURCE}.  Now, Bloomberg is reporting on a third investigation against Comey for leaking classified documents to his friend and special government employee, Daniel Richman.

BLOOMBERG – […] The investigation is tied to his dissemination of documents to Columbia University Law Professor Daniel Richman, the individuals added. If successful, it would be the Trump DOJ’s third time indicting Comey since last fall.

[…] It hasn’t been decided if the department will present an indictment to a grand jury in Eastern Virginia, where Comey resides, or if the case could be pursued in a different location—such as in Richman’s home of New York. (read more)

It doesn’t really matter whether New York or the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), either location would be the third state where the disgraced former FBI Director Comey would have to defend himself. Again, I remind everyone of ‘pressure points’ in Lawfare.

If the EDVA/NY case proceeds it is based around James Comey leaking his memos to his friend Daniel Richman.

(more…)

I have less than zero sympathy or consideration of credibility for both individuals in the video below.  Former Deputy Director Dan Bongino sits down for a dramatic, Q-feeding therapy session with Mr Tick-Tock himself, Sean Hannity.

In a widely discussed interview, the co-dependent enabler – masking himself as the victim of all things deep state, says on one hand there are honorable ‘rank and file’ within the FBI as an institution, and on the other hand he fears they will target him once President Trump leaves office.  Go figure.

If you face reality and stop pretending, you then look at the facts with cold pragmatism:  ♦The Robert Mueller investigation used 40 FBI agents, issued 2,800 subpoenas, executed 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 secret orders for communication records, used 50 pen registers and interviewed 500 witnesses, all to prove there was a Trump-Russia conspiracy afoot.  All of it was complete nonsense.  That is the reality of the thing.

On day #1, FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino should have terminated (or suspended pending criminal investigation) any and all of those FBI agents and support personnel with extreme prejudice and then held a press conference to make the announcement.

Delivering mysterious statements about the scale and scope of the institutional problem, pouring fuel on innuendo, proclaiming vague possibilities, while hiding behind some opaque ‘trust me bro‘ reasoning for a currently mysterious inability to explain exactly what the heck he is talking about, is unadulterated dramatic ‘clickbait’ prose intended to feed an audience willing to be deceived. WATCH:

.

(more…)

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced today a two-count indictment against former FBI Director James Comey from the Eastern District of North Carolina for threats against President Donald Trump. [Indictment Here]

According to the Press Release: […] “The Indictment includes two counts, first in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 871, alleging that James Comey, 65, knowingly and willfully made a threat to take the life of, and to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States. This charge alleges that on May 15, 2025, by publicly posting an image over the internet via Instagram depicting “86 47”, which a reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret as a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the President of the United States.

The Indictment also charges Comey in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), that James Comey consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communication would be viewed as threatening violence, and that he knowingly transmitted a communication in interstate commerce that contained a threat to injure the person of another, which a reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret as a serious expression of an intent to do harm to a person.” (SOURCE)

James Comey is charged with Threatening the President in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 871(a) and Transmitting a Threat in Interstate Commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c). If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

Additionally, similar to the criminal referral connected to former ICIG Michael Atkinson, today’s grand jury indictment creates a pressure point for ongoing DOJ investigations into additional related matters concerning FBI Director James Comey.

(more…)

Several people have inquired about the Washington DC subpoenas for former CIA Director John Brennan being withdrawn, and what does that mean. I intentionally did not write about it at the time because I wanted to look closely at the fact pattern.

The DOJ is still planning to send requests for voluntary interviews and grand jury testimony according to media reports.

From my perspective, this is a good sign. Potentially a very good sign.

The issues around the CIA targeting President Trump are extensive, attached to numerous individuals and entities, and generally complex.  Normally, an investigation of this scope would begin with questions to the outer perimeter individuals who were carrying out the instructions of those above them.

CIA Director, John Brennan and CIA Analyst, Eric Ciaramella

It is from those types of lower-level interviews that material is gathered for use in examining the truthfulness of those who organized and directed the operations.  In the example of John Brennan’s false statements to congress surrounding the ICA (Intelligence Community Assessment), or the inclusion of the Steele Dossier in the analytical material, there are key people within the Directorate of Analysis, National Security Agency and National Intelligence Council who can give first-hand statements about Brennan’s instructions.

Those types of interviews are just as important as questioning John Brennan himself, and for obvious reasons those interviews should come first.

♦ Here is where it becomes important to remember a key thing that happened between the time the investigation of Brennan began and the arrival of investigative Asst to the AG, Joe DiGenova.

Do you remember the recent criminal referral by DNI Tulsi Gabbard for former CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella?

(more…)

Prior to 2018 any public mention of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) would be cause for you to immediately lose your security clearance in government. However, by mid-2018 DC officials were not only openly discussing FISA in public settings, but the DOJ released a Top-Secret Compartmented Intelligence Title-1 FISA warrant.

Why was a TSCI Title-1 FISA warrant made public in 2018?

The Carter Page FISA application and subsequent warrant would have been the easiest document to keep hidden from the public. You cannot FOIA classified documents. However, someone in the DOJ released their exclusive national security equity. I am certain it was Andrew Weissmann who made the call.

Additionally, when the DOJ FISA application was made public, few people noticed the date stamp on the application itself [copy from FISC 3/17/17].

Why was the DOJ releasing the warrant to the public, and why did they use that specific copy that came from the FISC on March 17, 2017. Why not release their own copies from their own DOJ-NSD files? What was it about the FISC copy that made it the option of their choice?

Just as the Atkinson transcript, whistleblower report and IC IG investigative material showed a fraudulent and corrupt impeachment effort, the background details of the FISA application being made public shows the fraudulent and corrupt intent of the Robert Mueller investigation that preceded it.

You will remember the massive media debate in early 2018 about the FISA application deployed against former short-time Trump campaign aide Carter Page.  The DOJ, at the time under the control of the Mueller special counsel for all things Trump-Russia related, wouldn’t let congress see the FISA application. Devin Nunes complained to House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Eventually a deal was struck and two members from the House Intelligence committee (democrats and republicans) and two members from the House Judiciary Committee, were allowed to go to Main Justice and read the FISA application, but not copy it.  Four congressmen were allowed to go read and take notes. Trey Gowdy and John Ratcliffe represented the two republicans, and their notes formed the basis for what later was called “The Nunes Memo.”

The Democrats were not happy with the claims in the Nunes memo, and subsequently HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff wrote the democrat version.

Both of those sets of memos then needed to be declassified, more delays, before they could be made public.  For weeks and weeks, the Nunes -vs- Schiff memos were debated by both sides, with each saying their version was the truth and the other party’s version was spin and/or false.   All of this was happening in January, February and March 2018.

Then, later in the summer, something really weird happened.  On July 21, 2018, Main Justice completely reversed position on keeping the FISA application secret, and for the first time in U.S. history a top secret classified Title-1 FISA application was released to the public (with redactions).

People were so filled with curiosity about the Carter Page FISA application that few, heck, almost no one, stopped to ask why it was released?

Why the sudden secrecy reversal by the DOJ?

(more…)

Leaks, probably from individuals just starting to receive subpoenas, are now quickly making their way to the media. The goal seems to be to rally as much corporate media support as possible, with a subtle push to initiate an Alinsky process.

The media’s formerly predictable compliance toward generating a needed Alinsky lawfare strategy is, however, made more complicated by the recent purchases of several major corporate media conglomerates by Larry and David Ellison.  A shifted tone, that can be noted, is in the responsive outcome of the leak received by CBS News:

(Via CBS) – Former senior intelligence and FBI officials who are cooperating with the U.S. Justice Department’s criminal probe into whether former CIA Director John Brennan lied to Congress were subpoenaed over the weekend to testify before a grand jury in Washington, D.C., multiple sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.

The subpoenas went out shortly after the Justice Department appointed conservative Trump ally Joe DiGenova to formally take over the criminal investigation into Brennan after the career prosecutor handling the case was removed late last week, CBS previously reported.

DiGenova is a staunch loyalist of President Trump who previously represented his campaign in its failed efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. 

The cooperating witnesses are scheduled to appear before the grand jury as soon as this week, sources said. Many of them have been cooperating with the probe and were already scheduled to sit down for interviews with FBI agents and prosecutors before the new grand jury subpoenas came out over the weekend.

(more…)