There’s a reason why the J6 Committee deleted the records of their activity, an angle missed by most.  When you understand what they hid and why they did it, you then understand why current Speaker of The House Mike Johnson will not go near the subject.

The J6 Committee used interfaces with the NSA database and pre-existing portals with aligned DHS Social Media databases (including Twitter, see prior “Twitter Files”), as research and evidence gathering mechanisms for their investigations.

🚨 BREAKING: Special Counsel Ed Martin has dropped a bombshell, announcing a full-scale investigation into the actions of the January 6th Committee for the deliberate destruction and tampering of evidence and the issuance of illegitimate pardons signed by an autopen. pic.twitter.com/qPWEJwb2UF

— TRUMP ARMY (@TRUMP_ARMY_) September 8, 2025

The J6 targets were identified through a collaboration between the legislative research group and the FBI. [That’s unlawful by the way – but that’s another matter]. The FBI contracted Palantir to identify the targets using facial recognition software and private sector databases.

Once identified, the targets were then searched in the NSA database for a fulsome context of identity. All subsequent electronic metadata of the targets was retrieved and utilized in prosecution; however, no one ever discovered this was the collaborative method. That has not come out yet.

Ultimately, the J6 Committee hiding and deleting their files and operational techniques was due to several issues. They really didn’t have a choice given the unknowns of an incoming republican majority.

(more…)

**BUMPED** How is it that an insignificant corner of the internet could predict the removal of the U.S. National Security Advisor, specifically as the first administration official to be removed, more than two months before Donald Trump was sworn in as President on January 20, 2025?

To understand the complexity of the intelligence information flow, consider:

The silo system is made up, in part, of: The National Security Council (10+ desks, 15 staff/analysts per), the National Security Advisor to the Office of the President, the Dept of Justice National Security Division [DOJ-NSD (foreign review section, counterintelligence export control section, cyber section, counterterrorism section)], Central Intelligence Agency [(CIA), National Intelligence Council, Directorate of Analysis], Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI (Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, WMD Directorate, Directorate of Intelligence, Cyber)], the Office of the Director of National Intelligence [ODNI (Requirements, Analysis, Collection, National Counterterrorism Center, Mission Managers)], the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Dept of Defense [DoD, (Nuclear, Chemical, Biological, Industrial, International)], the National Security Agency [NSA (Operations, Technology, Cyber], and many more.

Each agency/office a silo, with distinct sub-silos, each with equity stakes in the information they gather, review and analyze; ultimately attributing classification level and intersecting analysis with each other agency as mission aligned.

Sound ridiculous?  It probably is, yet we’ve merely scratched the surface of the networks and information flows that swirl around the Office of the President.

How does President Trump frame his world view?  Who organizes the information that is prioritized to reach his desk?

It is very easy to say, “President Trump has to know about (fill_in_blank),” without contemplating the process by which President Trump would know about (fill_in_blank).  The recent remarks by President Trump, surrounding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, should put a spotlight on this consequential dynamic.

(more…)

According to John Solomon speaking with Devin Nunes recently, there is likely nothing much left from the files of Kash Patel at the FBI to disclose to the public, perhaps moving to the Mueller information will be the next steps.

For most of us, bringing this storyline to the point of accountability is fraught with frustration.  Here are some of the issues as they present.

♦ The Big Problem Within Russiagate – Special Counsel John Durham previously indicted Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann.  Durham said Sussmann misled FBI investigators.  The case against Sussmann resulted in an acquittal.

During the trial of the Perkins Coie lawyer, depositions and testimony were given by the Clinton campaign.  Campaign Manager Robby Mook admitted the Trump-Russia storyline was a false political hit constructed by the Clinton campaign and launched with the full knowledge of Hillary Clinton.

Durham’s case against Sussmann was predicated on a baseline that the Clinton campaign duped the FBI into opening an investigation. This was the core of the Sussmann trial; that Michael Sussmann lied to and misled the FBI.

Anyone who researched the issues already knew the FBI was not “duped” or “misled” by the information; instead, the FBI were active participants. However, to make a case against Perkins Coie, Sussmann and Clinton, the Durham prosecution needed to pretend they didn’t know.  The jury saw through the pretense and Sussmann was acquitted.

At the time of the trial a few of us noted the motive presented by Durham (ie. FBI duped) had ramifications. This predicate claim essentially quashed any later criminal conspiracy as the court records highlighting how the FBI were duped would preclude any reversal of motive toward any other participant.  If the FBI were duped, how could the FBI participants be criminally negligent?

The Clinton team were direct. Yes, they manufactured a political smear about Trump/Russia, and yes it was all political.  The people who manufactured the false claim admitted Trump-Russia was optics and false narratives. So, what?  That’s politics.

(more…)

New York Representative Jerry “The Penguin” Nadler has announced he is not going to seek reelection in 2026.

78-year-old Nadler was going to face a significant primary threat from the far-left.

NEW YORK – “Watching the Biden thing really said something about the necessity for generational change in the party, and I think I want to respect that,” Mr. Nadler said, adding that a younger successor “can maybe do better, can maybe help us more.”

Rep. Jerry Nadler, was the former chair of the House Judiciary Committee who joined forces with Adam Schiff and spearheaded President Donald Trump’s impeachment effort.

Nadler and Schiff formed a joint House impeachment committee and then hired Mary McCord as the lead staff for the effort.

Mary McCord previously worked as DOJ-National Security Division head with Michael Atkinson as her office lawyer.

When McCord quit the DOJ and went to work for Schiff and Nadler, Atkinson was ¹moved to Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG).

As the ICIG, Michael Atkinson then changed the rules for whistleblowers within the CIA permitting a false assertion by Eric Ciaramella, who subsequently told a fictional story presented by Alexander Vindman.  The fake “Ukraine Impeachment” effort stemmed from this political scheme.

Vindman lied, Eric Ciaramella advanced the lie to ICIG Michael Atkinson who then spun the ²false allegation back to his colleague Mary McCord.  That’s the origin of the fraud behind the first impeachment effort.

(more…)

We watch and read these interviews not to learn details of events, but rather to gauge President Trump’s awareness of the events as contrast by the information management team around him.

Unfortunately, we have yet to see an approved interview where the interviewer has a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter around their questioning. The Daily Caller’s White House Correspondent Reagan Reese sat down for an hour-long interview with President Trump on Friday to repeat the pattern.

[(L-R) President Trump, White House Communications Director Steven Cheung, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Daily Caller journalist Reagan Reese] 

[READ THE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT HERE]

We pull the following quote from the transcript and ponder the ramifications against all previous research into the information control dynamic.

When discussing the activity of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, President Trump replies: “By the way, she’s coming along, right?”

(more…)

Former Missouri AG and current Senator from Missouri Eric Schmitt, appears on the Glenn Beck podcast to discuss his perspectives on Russiagate, government weaponization and the background of COVID-19 as he discovered it through lawsuits against the Biden administration.

Senator Schmitt offers a balanced and stable viewpoint as he gives background to his own investigation into how the Biden administration weaponized all the agencies of government to control information and silence dissent. It is an interesting discussion.

At the 23:00 point, Schmitt begins to talk specifically about the information surfacing as a result of DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts. Schmitt is hopeful for a conspiracy charge against the perpetrators of those who abused their office, falsified information, maintained the targeting of Donald Trump and used the power of government to target their political enemies.

.

(more…)

The Wall Street Journal wrote the hit piece against DNI Tulsi Gabbard, sourced to two “people familiar with the matter,” and “three other people with knowledge of the situation.”  They all needed to coordinate with the WSJ. Think about it.

The substance of the story is that among the 37 current and former Intelligence Community officials Tulsi Gabbard recently stripped of their security clearances, was an “undercover CIA agent” located within one of those agencies.

The story is written to say DNI Tulsi Gabbard should have vetted the list with the CIA for a longer period of time before she took action. Therefore, she is not doing her job correctly, or something.  The CIA was compromised by Tulsi Gabbard removing the security clearance of one of their hidden agents within the U.S. Government.

Before getting to the story at hand, just stop and think of what the story is selling.  The article says the placement of CIA agents throughout the administration’s agencies is commonplace.  The CIA Director is not necessarily aware of these CIA operatives or operations that are taking place within the government.  That point is one well worth thinking about.

However, there’s another larger point that will fly past most casual observers.  The Intelligence Community (IC), and let’s accept this one is likely the CIA (directorate of analysis) from the structure of the political hit, is leaking against DNI Tulsi Gabbard.  Again, think. The issue at the heart of the CIA complaint is null and void unless the CIA publicly complains about it.

If there was a valid, genuine, legitimate and valuable CIA asset within the 37 names who lost their security clearances, the issue would be quickly and quietly resolved by just not taking the action against that person.  Saying nothing, doing nothing, makes the “mistake” (if that’s what it was) disappear.

(more…)

The short answer is no; he did not.

Was NSA Director Mike Rogers aware that political spying was conducted through the use of searches on the NSA database?  Yes.  Did NSA Director Mike Rogers take action in April 2016 to stop the searches within the NSA database that were entirely due to political surveillance?  Yes.

Six months later, October 20, 2016, the extensive review of all the political surveillance searches done from November of 2015 to April of 2016 was completed; the NSA compliance officer briefed Director Rogers. Six days later on October 26, 2016, NSA Director Mike Rogers then informed the FISA court of the unlawful searches and his action to address the issue.

One month later on November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York.  –SEE HERE– Director Rogers never told his boss DNI, James Clapper.  The very next day, Friday November 18, 2016, The Washington Post reported on a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position.

“The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.  The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter.  […]  In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters.”

Notice how the WaPo conflates the two issues. (1) Meeting with Trump (Nov), and (2) the recommendation to fire him (Oct).  The October recommendation to fire Rogers was likely based on the outcome of his decision to fully stop “about queries” of the NSA database and speak to the FISA court.

The recommendation to fire Rogers preceded his visit to Donald Trump, though the IC effort may have provided some additional motivation for the Rogers visit itself.

NSA Director Mike Rogers traveled to New York November 17, 2016, when a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) was set up for President-elect Trump to use following the November 8, 2016, election.

The next day, November 18, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill.  Specifically, Defense, State, CIA and ODNI.

(more…)

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 the fifth.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.

What is the bigger threat to our nation?

♦ Russiagate, where the Hillary Clinton campaign manufactured a dirty political story during a presidential election that was supported by Barack Obama and the DOJ/FBI?

OR…

♦ Spygate, where full spectrum political surveillance was conducted on all political opposition using government access to the NSA database that contains the private metadata of every American citizen?

If you are a person of stable and reasonable mindset, you likely identify the second issue as a much bigger threat.  Not only is using the NSA database to conduct illegal surveillance a bigger threat; but it is also a threat that remains as current declassified FISA court statements show the NSA database is still being exploited.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, I would argue the first issue, Russiagate, is intentionally being leveraged as a shiny thing to stop people from realizing the second, much more unlawful issue took place.

Focusing on “Russiagate” leads you to a political storyline that is: harder to outline as unlawful, easily obfuscated, downplayed and subsequently dismissed.  Focusing on the use of the NSA database to spy on people is simple to understand, completely unlawful and in stunningly unconstitutional when contrast against 4th amendment protections.

(more…)

If you have followed the construct of the Trump-Russia collusion story, you are likely outraged that accountability has not followed.  There’s a very frustrating reason for that, and I will explain how two distinctly different issues are being conflated.  Separating them is the key.

The first issue is the FBI’s illegal surveillance of presidential candidates, including candidate Donald Trump.  The second issue is the Clinton campaign inspired Russia-Collusion story, that led to Crossfire Hurricane, colloquially known as “Russiagate.”  All investigative emphasis, including John Durham, has been on the latter which takes you into a DC silo construct where all tentacles lead to dead ends and inaction.

Russiagate was a Clinton-inspired political smear campaign that was given the patina of credibility by the FBI opening the investigation called “Crossfire Hurricane.”  If you focus on that storyline, you end up with zero accountability and endless talk that goes nowhere.

However, if President Trump and DNI Tulsi Gabbard reveal the first element, the FBI’s illegal surveillance of candidate Donald Trump, that path has a physical trail and documents that cannot be deflected by political obfuscation.

♦THE FBI SURVEILLANCE – The original agreement between Clinton and Obama, going back to 2008, was for Obama to take the nomination, the presidency and then eventually support Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election bid.

Obama would be President. Obama would appoint Clinton to Secretary of State, Hillary would then use her office to build wealth for herself and her family, and then HRC would exit the Dept of State to begin her presidential run.

John Podesta would enter the Obama administration as Hillary left (post Benghazi mess) in 2013.  Podesta would look out for Hillary’s interests from his position inside the Obama White House.  The Clintons and Obamas never fully trusted each other.

Barack Obama would put all the mechanisms into place that would transition his administration into Hillary Clinton’s.  That was always the plan running in the background.

(more…)