Well, well, well.  This is likely to be quickly brushed under the proverbial rug.  If you have followed the case against SSCI Security Director James Wolfe you will note the original indictment against him outlined, obliquely, how Wolfe took custody of the Carter Page FISA application and then leaked it to his concubine at Buzzfeed Ms. Ali Watkins.
The leak of the FISA application was a rather explosive issue not readily identified when Wolfe’s indictment was first presented (June ’18).  It was only possible to connect the dots after the FISA application was released (July ’18) and a comparison on specific dates, times, contacts and chain-of-custody, was possible.

In response to his indictment, Wolfe’s lawyers said they would force Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) members to participate and testify in any trial.  This was a rather stunning approach.  A few months passed and a plea bargain was struck.  Wolfe would plead guilty only to one count of lying to FBI investigators.  The charges of the leaking “top secret and classified” intelligence were dropped.
Wolfe was not ultimately charged with leaking the FISA application.  We sniffed a quid-pro-quo.  We suspected Wolfe was instructed by at least one senator, likely  SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, to leak the information.  This would explain Wolfe’s extraordinary defense position – and the DOJ response therein.
Think about it.  A gang-of-eight member (Warner), who happened -as a consequence of the jaw dropping implications- to be one of only TWO SSCI members who was notified by the FBI that Wolfe was compromised. The ramifications cannot be overstated.
(more…)

Forget the unmentioned brutally obvious political motives and intents behind the operation against Donald Trump for a moment; and focus on the collective Obama activity as if they actually believed the claims they have since presented…
The counterintelligence investigation into candidate, president-elect, and president Donald Trump was predicated on the Obama’s intelligence community believing that campaign officials were colluding, conspiring and otherwise coordinating to take over the office of the presidency, with help from a foreign government.  So why wouldn’t the intelligence services of the United States government conduct wiretaps and full blown surveillance upon that incoming administration?

The John Brennan CIA presented a classified electronic communication, “ec”, origination memo (we are not allowed to see) to ODNI (Clapper) and FBI (Comey); who then opened a full-blown counterintelligence operation against officials within the Trump campaign.
We know this operation was political, but again, ignore that aspect and just look at the issues, details and activity while accepting -at face value- their demonstrably dubious claims.
Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn provided the opening for operational surveillance of the Trump team. We can argue about how they were framed in that regard; however, it is factual that FISA-Title-One surveillance is all encompassing.
The target is validated and defined by the FBI as “an agent of a foreign government”. This legal distinction permits full surveillance: electronic, physical, the works.  Everything is on the table, no limits or boundaries.
(more…)

Tick-tock-bombshell club member John Solomon drops an explosive statement on Sean Hannity.  Oddly, there’s a factual part of his statement CTH agrees with; and a structural part of the background that is almost certain never to reach sunlight.  First, the substance:

(Transcript) […] “In May of 2017 there was a document identified to a small number of people in the United States government. It’s in the possession of the Defense Intelligence Agency.  For eighteen months there’s been an effort to resist declassifying that document; I know that that document contains extraordinary exculpatory information about General Flynn. I don’t believe the president has ever been told about the existence of this document.  One lawmaker discovered it, but was thwarted by the Defense Intelligence Agency in his efforts to disclose it. I think we should all ask for that declassification; get that out; it may enlighten the judge; it will certainly enlighten the American public.”

From the time-frame disclosed we can reasonably infer what this document is; at least what background surrounds it.
♦“In May of 2017”… The document is likely part of an intelligence product that was produced for President Obama’s Daily Briefing (PDB), and contains unmasking information (likely done by Susan Rice) on Michael Flynn as a surveillance target.
♦“One Lawmaker discovered it”… You might remember way back in March 2017 when HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes was taken to the White House SCIF by then white house official Ezra Cohen-Watnick; and that began a series of cascading events.
(more…)

Another Inspector General Michael Horowitz report; ..another exercise in futility.

The DOJ Office of Inspector General has filed a 35-page report (full pdf below) outlining the issues with recovery of text messages from devices belonging to FBI attorney Lisa Page and FBI agent Peter Strzok.
Page and Strzok transferred to the special counsel team when Robert Mueller took over the counterintelligence investigation, ie. “muh Russia”.  Within the report the IG notes that after the special counsels office was notified of the biased text messaging identified by Strzok and Page; and after Mueller removed them from the investigative team; the phones issued to Ms. Page and Mr. Strzok were reset removing any communication during their time on the special counsel team from discovery.  Here’s the pertinent part:
The full IG report is below.
(more…)

The transcript from the first James Comey interview with the joint house committee is rather revealing for several measures.  One of the more interesting aspects surrounds Comey claiming the FBI never investigated the Trump campaign; and yet also claiming four Trump campaign officials had FBI investigative files opened on them simultaneously.
Apparently, Comey wants everyone to believe it was a coincidence or something.
Additionally, within his ‘interview’ Comey confirmed our previous hunch on a very specific redaction within the Nunes memo:

Chuck Ross expands: The FBI opened counterintelligence investigations into four Trump campaign associates in late July 2016, earlier than previously known, former FBI Director James Comey told Congress Friday.

(more…)

Representative Jim Jordan discusses his perspectives on the closed-door testimony of former FBI Director James Comey.

(more…)

Here’s the transcript (full pdf below) of the December 7th, 2018, deposition of former FBI Director James Comey to the joint house committee headed by Trey Gowdy and Bob Goodlatte:
[scribd id=395239462 key=key-mrRcuymxydLx1G9aSbLV mode=scroll]

(Oversight pdf link – scribd pdf link)

This is breaking.  CTH analysis to follow…

Former FBI Director James Comey gives a brief press conference following his testimony before a joint congressional committee.  Notably, Comey references the importance of saving the ‘institutions’ (and all the corrupt interests within it) above all other aspects.
When the institutions are corrupt; and the officials within the institutions are corrupt; and there is inquiry into the corrupt activity of the officials within the institutions; then retaining the institutions is the priority.  It’s that simple.  If you take down the institution you run the risk of exposing the corruption…. So anyone associated simply demands another coat of paint.

Additionally, Comey seems to infer that the removal of Jeff Sessions is now part of the Mueller/Rosenstein/Democrat approach to frame obstruction against President Trump.  Quite simply, any action by Trump to expose the previously described corruption is viewed as unlawful obstruction.  That’s their plan, and the approach has worked so far.
Comey is scheduled to return for more testimony on December 17th. Transcripts of today’s hearing should be available soon.
(more…)

Apparently the institutional protection system was in full force today as current FBI lawyers blocked any questions directed toward former FBI Director James Comey as they related to FBI investigations of Hillary Clinton; applications to the FISA court and the use of the Steele Dossier.  Darryl Issa explains a transcript will show the severity of shielding:

(more…)

In a May 2017 testimony to congress former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates explains the details surrounding her engagement with White House legal counsel Don McGahn.  However, for the purposes of truthful discussion, the important part of the back-and-forth between Senator Graham, Sally Yates and former DNI James Clapper is not the aspect about Flynn or McGahn.
Listen carefully to the first three minutes; specifically the part about the Flynn transcript leak to the Washington Post.  Notice Graham outlining how easy it would be for the intelligence apparatus to find out who: (A) unmasked the Flynn communication; and (B) likely then leaked the Flynn communication.  Pay close attention:

Now ask yourself…. If Graham, Yates and Clapper are correct; if there is a paper trail; if it would be essentially a simple process to discover that detail; then WHY hasn’t that been done?
Attorney General Jeff Sessions and DNI Dan Coats made a big deal of stating they were committed to finding out who would leak such critical and sensitive ‘top secret’ information.  And Graham tells everyone how easy it would be to do… and Yates and Clapper agree… So, why wasn’t it done?
Want to drain the swamp?  Start there !
(more…)