There is growing acceptance that federal officials feel they are above the law; two sets of legal principles that apply; one exclusive set for them, and another set for everyone else.
Though it might seem rather stunning for any federal official to make such an admission in public, that’s exactly what happened today. Lawyers representing former FBI Director James Comey made exactly that argument. Recognizing Mr. Comey had no legal basis to avoid a congressional subpoena, Comey’s lawyers actually said:

“Here’s your opportunity, judge, to make some law.” (link)

Former FBI chief James Comey is trying to avoid being deposed by a joint committee in congress for his conduct in the 2015, 2016 and 2017 DOJ/FBI operations against candidate Donald Trump. Today congressional lawyers responded to Comey’s lawsuit attempting to avoid questioning (full pdf below).
The statement from lawyers representing James Comey was made during a hearing in front of federal Judge Trevor McFadden.  They are asking the judge to create laws from the bench.
Think about this.
(more…)

The Daily Caller has an exclusive report tonight that is very troubling, and, unfortunately in alignment with a previous suspicion CTH shared when it was first announced that John Huber was scheduled to testify to congress on December 5th.

According to the Daily Caller: FBI agents raided the home of a recognized Department of Justice whistleblower who privately delivered documents pertaining to the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One to a government watchdog, according to the whistleblower’s attorney.

The Justice Department’s inspector general was informed that the documents show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, the Russian company that purchased Uranium One, a document reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation alleges.

The delivered documents also show that then-FBI Director Robert Mueller failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entities attached to Uranium One, the document reviewed by TheDCNF alleges. Mueller is now the special counsel investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election.

(more…)

A key point to finding truth in any theory is to apply the scientific method to the research; ie. question the assumption, reverse the hypothesis.

Throughout the research into the Machiavellian constructs of “Spygate” and the subsequent Mueller investigation, there have always been larger questions behind the stories.  It is a fact that most of the evidence surfaced after General Michael Flynn entered a plea agreement with special counsel Mueller on November 30th, 2017.
Why were the original Page/Strzok text messages released to the public in December 2017, and January 2018?  Perhaps more importantly: Who did the redactions within the text messages prior to their release? And why were those redactions ever made?

There’s a bunch of ‘unofficial’ evidence, or data-points, that no-one can explain how or why they came to be visible.  The data did not surface sequentially; but it surely surfaced purposefully from within the apparatus of government.
Just like the questions about who redacted information inside the 600 pages text messages between DOJ/FBI Lawyer Lisa Page and FBI investigator Peter Strzok; putting the downstream data-points together leads to a series of questions that remain the subject of much speculation through today:

• How do we find out about the Mark Warner text messages?
• Who publicly released the Carter Page FISA application?
• Where did the four day flood of information (Dec 1st – 4th, 2017) about Lisa Page and Peter Strzok come from?
• Who released that Page/Strzok information to the media?  Why?
• Who made the decision not to indict James Wolfe for leaking classified information?
• Why be so specific about details within the Wolfe indictment; then dismiss them?
• Who made the decision (FISA ap) NOT TO redact the key FISC clerk stamp?
• Where is all of this “unofficial” evidence/information coming from?
• Why?

For a long time CTH has looked at these questions from the position that the information was adverse to the interests of the DOJ; therefore we operated on the assumption that someone within the apparatus of government was leaving a trail of information with good intention.  However, over time – and with the absence of any accountability being delivered, there is also another motive that deserves attention and review.
(more…)

Former FBI Director James Comey exhibits hubris, sanctimony and stunning amount of arrogance today as he announces his intention to defy a congressional subpoena.
In essence, Comey openly announces his belief in a two-tiered justice system. One standard for the politically connected who float above the law; and another standard for you, me and everyone else:

The background motives of Comey’s refusal are transparent. He knows the dangerous questions cannot be asked/answered in an open or public setting. Additionally, it also seems a little rich for Comey to claim “selective leaking“, when he is an admitted selective leaker.
(more…)

Interesting report from The Hill today quoting an interview with Representative Mark Meadows.  According to the report U.S. Attorney John Huber is expected to testify to the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Reform about an investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

(Via The Hill) Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) said Tuesday that House Republicans plan to hear testimony on Dec. 5 from the prosecutor appointed by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to probe alleged wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation.
Meadows, who is chairman of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Government Operations, told Hill.TV’s “Rising” that it’s time to “circle back” to U.S. Attorney General John Huber’s investigation with the Justice Department into whether the Clinton Foundation engaged any improper activities.

(more…)

Back on July 22nd, the day after the July 21st surprise release of the Carter Page FISA Title-1 surveillance application, I wrote: “Oh My, This is Either A Sting -OR- The Most Corrupt U.S. Dept of Justice in History” (link).  The issue surrounded the seemingly transparent connection between the James Wolfe indictment and the FISA application.
Three months later, when James Wolfe accepted a single-count guilty plea offer around lying to federal investigators, the answer seemed obvious, at least to me.  Despite the evidence of leaking “top secret” classified documents within the Wolfe indictment DAG Rosenstein initially charged 3 counts of lying; and offered a lower guilty plea on one count.

Along with tenuous congressional testimony; a refusal to comply with document production; and a never-ending defense of the Mueller investigation; Rosenstein gives all appearances of an administrative state weasel.   However, there are solid and reasonable people who genuinely believe both Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller are doing a good, and fair, job for President Trump.
Jeff Carlson over at Marketswork does solid research and analysis.  His position on Rosenstein is far more favorable than mine; and in the interests of intellectual honesty, he could be correct [Here] and [here] and especially [Here], and  I could be entirely wrong.
(more…)

Robert Mueller (the entire team) was put into place by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in 2017.  The specific selection of Robert Mueller was an outcome of recommendations and advice from FBI Chief Legal Counsel, James Baker, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
In hindsight; and specifically against the backdrop of known illegal activity [remember, McCabe is under criminal referral] there was a motive of self-interest within Baker and McCabe, specifically to cover for the 2015/2016/2017 DOJ and FBI activity that preceded the firing of FBI Director James Comey.
From the initial perspective of self-interest, Mueller’s role had/has three essential aspects:

♦(1) Create an investigation – Just by creating the investigation it is then used as a shield by any corrupt FBI/DOJ official who would find himself/herself under downstream congressional investigation.  Former officials being deposed/questioned by IG Horowitz or Congress could then say they are unable to answer those questions due to the ongoing special counsel investigation.  In this way Mueller provides cover for officials.
♦(2)  Use the investigation to keep any and all inquiry focused away from the corrupt DOJ and FBI activity that took place in 2016, 2016, 2017.  Keep the media narrative looking somewhere, anywhere, other than directly at the epicenter of the issues. In this way, Mueller provides distraction and talking points against the Trump administration.
♦(3) Use the investigation to suck-up, absorb, any damaging investigative material that might surface as a result of tangentially related inquiry.  Example: control the exposure of evidence against classified leak participants like SSCI Director of Security, James Wolfe. In this way Mueller provides cover for the institutions and the administrative state.
In all of these objectives the Mueller special counsel has been stunningly effective.
(more…)

Contextual Background HERE and Background HERE

♦Adverse Action:  On March 15th, 2017 ODNI Dan Coats was confirmed.  On March 16th, 2017 the ODNI instructed the FISA court clerk to provide him with the Carter Page FISA application (not the DOJ file version); which was delivered March 17th, 2017 to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI). [It was immediately leaked]

Question: Who would likely be in a position to request, demand or influence the ODNI to produce the FISA application?  Most sensible, valid and likely answer would be: Gang-of-Eight oversight SSCI Chair Richard Burr/Vice-Chair Mark Warner.

♦Countermeasure: On April 26th, 2017, ODNI Dan Coats publicly releases a 99-page FISC opinion on systemic DOJ and FBI FISA-702(16)(17) abuse.

Question: Why?  Why make the Rosemary Collyer report public?  No-one was looking for it, and the statutory oversight of the report is the House Judiciary/House Intelligence.

(more…)

The Senate Judiciary Committee has released a lengthy report (full pdf below) containing the investigative material from the senate investigation of the Kavanaugh accusations.
On page #27 of the report the senate committee notes their intent to continue investigating the role of retired FBI Agent Monica Lee McLean, who appears to have been ‘handling‘ accuser and best friend, Christine Blasey-Ford:
It always seemed curious how the Senate committee never redacted the name Monica McLean when first releasing the investigative material containing her involvement.
Always curious…
(more…)

Critical – Critical – Critical

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the ongoing FISA abuse investigation; the use of Michael Sussmann to act as a go-between for the DNC and FBI; the status of Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, and his upcoming (10/11) testimony; current visible activity within the DOJ that points to their ongoing corruption; and how all of that relates to the Robert Mueller investigation.
This is a very important interview segment because it dovetails with the much larger issue CTH outlined about: “How Deep Is This Swamp“?  Believe me, you’re going to want to watch this several times to absorb the bigger-big picture that Nunes is careful to explain.

.
Working backwards from the interview content is perhaps the best way to discuss.  Nunes cannot say it out loud, but when he outlines what the Mueller investigation *is not* doing, he is highlighting the purpose of Special Counsel placement.
Robert Mueller (the entire team) was put into place, carefully selected by James Baker and Andrew McCabe, specifically to cover for the DOJ and FBI activity that preceded the firing of James Comey.   Mueller’s role has two essential aspects:
(more…)