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…)

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…)

Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, appears for an interview with Katie Pavlich to outline the importance of bringing all of the information about the Intelligence Community targeting of President Trump to the public.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and We the People want to see accountability for the Machiavellian conduct.  The intelligence community targeted President Trump and people within the CIA ran an operation to remove him.  These people have names and titles that have remained hidden, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is putting those names, specific names into the public psyche so we can have a full understanding of what took place.

Now, for many here this may seem like information we have all known about; however, Gabbard is providing the receipts, the actual evidence, of how these IC operations took place.  WATCH:

.

DNI Gabbard is showing how specific people within government weaponized their positions to conduct some of the most insidious schemes in modern U.S. history.  The criminality of those schemes is for others in Main Justice to determine, but the evidence of those schemes is clear.

I am thankful that people are now starting to use the new information to review past timelines. [SEE HERE] What they will discover is that Michael Atkinson’s work with Mary McCord and the Lawfare network are not isolated events. This is a continuum of targeting against Donald Trump using all of the intelligence levers at their disposal.

Michael Atkinson and Eric Ciaramella are the current names, but beside them sits Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Dan Goldman, Benjamin Wittes and many others from the Lawfare community.  They intersect with various high level government officials in Main Justice, the FBI, the CIA, NSA and various intelligence agencies.

This is the nest of Deep State and Tulsi Gabbard is exposing it.

(more…)

I’m going to try and keep this short.

You can tell from the transcripts of the testimony from ICIG Michael Atkinson that at the time of his testimony, September 19, 2019 and October 4, 2019, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) was not in a classified session; simply closed-door.

In fact, during the October 2019 deposition, Ranking Member Devin Nunes went out of his way to clarify the status of the hearing itself.  Chairman Schiff reemphasized this was not part of the impeachment inquiry, simply a hearing to clarify questions from Republicans to ICIG Atkinson about the nature of the complaint created by CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.

This is interesting, because that means at the time of the hearing itself in 2019 any one of the members could have immediately gone to the microphones and discussed all of the information gained from within the questioning.   They didn’t.

Later on, Chairman Adam Schiff classified the Atkinson testimony in order to bury it.  The Lawfare impeachment crew, led by Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Mary McCord, Dan Goldman, Barry Berke, Stephen Castor and Norm Eisen also weaponized the “ongoing investigation” classification to keep the CIA/ICIG report hidden during the impeachment effort.

President Trump was not even allowed to see/review the classified IC IG information that was being used to impeach him.

Now, as you can see from the attendance above, John Ratcliffe was present for both Atkinson depositions.  Despite his immediate silence, we know John Ratcliffe was concerned about the content within ICIG Atkinson’s statements as he relayed in a series of questions during a public hearing December 9, 2019 {SEE HERE}.

Ratcliffe questioned both Dan Goldman and Stephen Castor who were part of Adam Schiff’s staff and present during the October 2019, testimony of ICIG Atkinson.  WATCH THIS: 

(more…)

It’s worth remembering how the IC silo process was used to manipulate proprietary claims by government agencies. These setups are intentionally designed this way, and none of the reasons behind them are good.

The CIA Whistleblower Complaint and subsequent Intelligence Community Inspector General investigation and report, falls under the work product of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.  The IC IG is quasi-independent but works for the ODNI.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard is releasing direct stakeholder information from within the ODNI with the release as noted – SEE HERE.  This is the background information that led to the impeachment effort.  The DNI is the Executive Branch.

The transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson was held within another branch of government, within the Legislative Branch, and as a consequence DNI Gabbard needed to gain permission from the House Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), another silo, in order to review the testimony that came as an outcome of the ICIG complaint and investigation. SEE HERE and SEE HERE.

DNI Gabbard then needed to request the release of the HPSCI transcripts [legislative branch] to her DNI office [executive branch] where all three aspects of the ICIG activity can then be examined and reviewed in full context.

The DNI then requests the HPSCI to permit declassification and public release.  HPSCI reluctantly agrees.  DNI declassifies then returns the transcripts to the HPSCI for public release – while simultaneously the DNI office declassifies and releases the baseline ICIG investigative material so the public can have context.

The resulting outcome is a combined work product from five silos (HPSCI, DNI, CIA, ICIG, NSC) along with a statement from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and a summary of what all the combined materials show:

(more…)