First, the context… On Thursday night Carl Bernstein said: William Barr is preparing to deliver “evidence of a deep state conspiracy.”  Bernstein’s statement followed on the heels of Chairman Jerry Nadler proclaiming: “The President dragged the Attorney General into this mess,” [Nadler wrote on Twitter after the transcript was released]. “At a minimum, AG Barr must recuse himself until we get to the bottom of this matter.”
Then on Friday during an interview on MSNBC Morning Joe, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said AG William Barr had “gone rogue” in his efforts to protect President Trump.
Amid the newly visible sense of urgency toward a Trump impeachment effort by all of the aforementioned soft-coup participants (and more), it certainly does seem like AG Bill Barr is at the forefront of their current concern.  Then there’s this…
Also on Friday, George Papadopoulos shared via his twitter account: “AG Barr has been on official travel in Italy for the past two days.” Referencing a possibility the Attorney General was in Italy for an interview with the mysterious Maltese professor/Western intelligence asset at the center of 2016’s ‘spygate’, Joseph Mifsud.  

Sound interesting?….  Well, if AG Bill Barr is indeed in Italy, and it certainly seems he is, then perhaps it’s worth re-visiting an explosive story from August that was overlooked amid a whirlwind of fast-moving political events.
According to an interview on August 18th, John Solomon reported the lawyer for Joseph Mifsud admitted his client was a western intelligence asset who was part of a CIA intelligence “operation” against candidate Donald Trump in March 2016.
Not only was the attorney admitting Mifsud was a western asset used by the CIA against Trump, but the lawyer also told Solomon about an audio-taped deposition that Joseph Mifsud gave prior to going into hiding after Trump won the 2016 Presidential election.
(more…)

Carl Bernstein is an insufferable propagandist for the political left; but sometimes you can get a sense of where things stand by listening to his partisan protestations.  Additionally, Bernstein was at the center of the media effort to engineer the Russia narrative by pushing disinformation from the intelligence apparatus in January 2017.

(L-R) Jake Tapper, Jim Sciutto, Evan Perez and Carl Bernstein.

Bernstein was one of the key media figures constructing and pushing the vast Russian election interference narrative.  He also worked closely with Jake Tapper, Jim Sciutto, and Evan Perez to promote the Steele Dossier as a valid intelligence product. In essence Bernstein is a part of the ‘resistance’ agenda writ large; he travels DC circles accordingly.
In a recent CNN interview, highlighted by the Washington Examiner, Bernstein outlined how his sources are telling him Attorney General William Barr is preparing to deliver “evidence of a deep state conspiracy.”   Accepting the general premise, and culling the accompanying political spin from it, the comments by Bernstein would seem to indicate Bill Barr is indeed investigating the background of the ‘soft-coup’.
Obviously Bernstein is a creature of the DC cocktail circuit; as a result perhaps those who operate in/around the same circles of the administrative state are recognizing their activity in 2016 and 2017 is about to be exposed.  Perhaps this explains the apoplectic responses and sense of urgency from the far-left political class over the past week.
(more…)

Today in a court filing, surrounding a FOIA case seeking access to the fully unredacted Carter Page FISA application, the DOJ clarified the position of the DOJ as it pertains to President Trump’s May 2019 declassification authority. (pdf available here)
The DOJ highlights that President Trump did not order AG William Barr to declassify anything.  Instead, according to the official position of the DOJ, President Trump “delegated authority” to the Attorney General to determine *if* anything should be declassified:

[Source – pdf]

Whether AG Bill Barr does actually declassify anything is open to debate.  The current odds remain slightly less than 50/50; however, those odds could diminish significantly if the impeachment effort is successful.
The current priority for the Dept. of Justice does not appear to be highlighting internal corruption that targeted President Trump.  The current institutional priority appears to be protecting Rod Rosenstein.  However, we should have a better idea exactly where this will all end when we see the IG Report on potential FISA abuses against Carter Page.
(more…)

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…)

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:

John Solomon is reporting on a myriad of documents that highlight how Vice-President Joe Biden engaged in a pressure and influence campaign upon the government of Ukraine to financially benefit his son Hunter Biden. [SEE HERE]  One of those documents is a sworn affidavit by former Ukrainian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin (pdf here and below):
[scribd id=427618359 key=key-W8vvN7MuvofxlKSpUdhx mode=scroll]

Details are beginning to emerge about the deep state political operative within the intelligence apparatus who wrote a ‘whistleblower’ complaint based on second-hand information he heard on the intelligence grapevine about President Trump.
According to the New York Times the complaint derives from a male who was a former CIA operative on assignment within National Security Council (NSC), who left the White House and returned to the CIA:
(emphasis mine)

WASHINGTON — The whistle-blower who revealed that President Trump sought foreign help for his re-election and that the White House sought to cover it up is a C.I.A. officer who was detailed to work at the White House at one point, according to three people familiar with his identity.

The man has since returned to the C.I.A., the people said. Little else is known about him. His complaint made public Thursday suggested he was an analyst by training and made clear he was steeped in details of American foreign policy toward Europe, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of Ukrainian politics and at least some knowledge of the law. (more)

The outlined profile, in combination with the political motive, have led many people to begin searching through: (1) current CIA operatives; (2) who come from the era of Brennan; and (3) were previously assigned to the White House (NSC); and (4) then removed; and (5) then returned to the CIA.  That profile has led to suspicions of identity.
(more…)

You know the Democrats had a pre-planned strategy to use the “whistleblower” complaint, because Adam Schiff has the production scheduled for 9:00am public hearing today.
Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire is appearing before the House Intelligence Committee to face lawmakers’ questions about his handling of the hearsay whistleblower complaint relating to a phone call between President Donald Trump and the president of Ukraine.  The transcript of the non-controversial call was released yesterday.
Lawmakers also received their copy of the 6-page complaint Wednesday afternoon after criticizing the White House and Department of Justice for complying with Office of Legal Counsel guidance and handling recommendations. The declassified complaint, consisting of hearsay and political media spin, is expected to be released to the public today.
C-Span Livestream Link – PBS Livestream Link – CBS Livestream Link

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…)

The completely over-the-top response by a Deep State embed whistleblower and his/her political allies within the administrative state now makes sense; it had nothing to do with Joe Biden.  President Trump asked President Zelenskyy about “Crowdstrike.”

(Page 3 – Source pdf)

To understand how important this is, we must remember the foundation for the entire Russian election interference narrative, ‘Muh Russia – writ large, is built on the claim Russians hacked the servers of the Democrat National Committee (DNC), and subsequently released damaging emails that showed the DNC worked to help Hillary Clinton and eliminate Bernie Sanders.
Despite the Russian ‘hacking’ claim the DOJ and FBI previously admitted the DNC would not let FBI investigators review the DNC server or cloud-based network.  Instead the original claim was that the DNC provided the FBI with analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike.
According to the original FBI statements made by James Comey: Crowdstrike did the captured imaging of the DNC network (servers/cloud), then conducted analysis, then provided a report to the DNC with their findings; and that report was given to the FBI.  At least that was the original 2017 claim.  However, during court filings in the case against Roger Stone, the DOJ/FBI later admitted they never even saw the Crowstrike final report.
(more…)