After a court filing revealed how Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller carefully edited the telephone message by John Dowd to Michael Flynn’s attorney, Dowd points out the motives of Weissmann and Mueller was to create a fraudulent report.

Backstory Below
In the Michael Flynn sentencing phase Judge Emmet Sullivan requested the Mueller prosecution team provide records related to the case. [Backstory Here]
Among other evidence, the judge ordered the government to file on the public docket “the transcript of the voicemail recording” from President Trump’s attorney John Dowd to Michael Flynn. The transcript of that voicemail recording was cited in the Mueller report as evidence that team Trump was trying to obstruct justice by shaping witness testimony.
(more…)

Representative John Ratcliffe is one of the few (only 3 or 4) who has seen all of the known classified documents surrounding the corrupt DOJ and FBI effort.  In this interview Mr. Ratcliffe discusses the ongoing issues within the review of the corrupt DOJ/FBI activity.
Interestingly Ratcliffe uses specific wording in his notation of the appointment of John H Durham; akin to Attorney General Bill Barr appointing a “special counsel”.

(more…)

CTH shared a prediction in September 2018 which bears repeating.  However, prior to revisiting the past let us overlay today’s events. Keep in mind, much of what is happening is downstream from predicate events that took place long before AG Bill Barr was confirmed to run the DOJ.  Actually, while not intending to defend Bill Barr, some of the recent events are beyond his control.  Here’s how:
First, if you remember when the 568 page IG report on FBI/DOJ conduct was delivered in June 2018, you might remember how the ‘executive summary and conclusions’ were disconnected from the main body of evidence within the report.  In 2018 CTH warned this “disconnect” was by design; essentially the corrupt officials were laying down a defense for any conduct, later outlined, that is connected to the body of the IG review.

When IG Horowitz announced last year he could find no evidence of actions taken as a result of political bias by FBI and DOJ officials; he also stated he could not rule out bias within their investigation.  Horowitz pointed to the lack of action by FBI Agent Peter Strzok -following the September 28th, 2016, notification of Clinton emails on Abedin laptop- as lacking reasonable explanation.  Essentially, despite suspicions, the summary conclusion was the IG could find “no evidence of intentional wrongdoing“.
The 568-pages contained a multitude of examples of FBI misconduct (media leaks etc.), but the same IG report summary said “no illegal activity was discovered.”  In the Sessions/Rosenstein led DOJ there was a disconnect between the summary/conclusions and the body of evidence.
With that in mind, how could the Bill Barr DOJ prosecute on evidence of behavior from within a report where the Rod Rosenstein DOJ conclusion was no evidence of “intentional wrongdoing”?
In short, he can’t.
(more…)

Citing the ongoing internal investigation of FBI leaks to media, from the 2018 OIG report on FBI conduct, today the Office of Inspector General outlined a preponderance of evidence against a corrupt FBI Deputy Asst. Director.  However, the DOJ is refusing to prosecute:

(Source)

The most alarming aspect is the OIG finding of the Deputy Asst. Director leaking grand jury information to the media, and yet the DOJ is declining to prosecute.
Incredibly, the inspector general (IG) indicated, without explanation, that “prosecution of the DAD [deputy assistant director] was declined.”  Instead, the investigation’s findings will be referred to the FBI for “appropriate action”.   What the hell is going on?
(more…)

A carefully redacted footnote within a report by FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer has always appeared to be a clue to a domestic surveillance program.  Now details behind the redactions tell a concerning story.

A brief refresher is needed for those new to the story. In April 2017 Judge Collyer wrote a highly critical FISA Court opinion following discoveries by Director Admiral Rogers of government contractors accessing the NSA database, and extracting illegal search results from the electronic records of every American.
The scale of abuse was incredible [SEE HERE] and the surveillance issues had been covered up for years.  Collyer cited the Obama administration as having “an institutional lack of candor” in their responses to her and the FISA court.  The judge focused her criticism after a review of the period 2012 through April 2016.
Using the non-compliant admissions by NSA Director Mike Rogers and the results of the compliance audit, Judge Collyer used the period of November 2015 through April 2016 to gauge the scale of abuse at 85 percent. Eighty-five percent of all database search queries were unlawful, and she extended her analysis to say:
(more…)

When President Trump announced the futility of attempting an infrastructure bill with Pelosi and Schumer as they simultaneously tried to impeach him, the president certainly knew he was going to issue a declassification memo within hours.
The declassification directive to AG Bill Barr creates a dynamic ensuring Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer will align with the former intelligence officials and further attack the offices of the President and Attorney General; they have few options.
Those who participated in the creation of Russia-Gate or Spy-Gate have few options except to manufacture a narrative shield and accuse the President of unethical, immoral and criminal conduct.  See: Pelosi’ recent “cover-up” charge.
By advancing even stronger attacks against the president, the ‘small group’ position any investigation into their wrong-doing as political retaliation.  Their best defense is to build a deeper foundation for their political retaliation claim.  Therefore a House impeachment investigation, in some manner or form, is more likely than ever.
The legal risk for participants in ‘Russia-Gate’/’Spy-Gate’ seems very real.  The best defense against that risk is political.  Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer know how to lead the defense by saying any evidence discovered by AG Barr is merely weaponized retaliation from the Trump DOJ.  The media are already supporting that cause.
(more…)

Repost by Request – Considering the upcoming declassification window…between Trump’s state visit in Japan (5/25 – 5/28) and the state visit with the U.K (6/3 – 6/5).

Bucket Five – Intelligence documents that were presented to the Gang of Eight in 2016 that pertain to the FISA application used against U.S. person Carter Page; including all exculpatory intelligence documents that may not have been presented to the FISA Court.  Presumably this would include the recently revealed State Dept Kavalac email; and the FBI transcripts from wiretaps of George Papadopoulos (also listed in Carter Page FISA).

Now that we have significant research files on the 2015 and 2016 political surveillance program; which includes the trail evident within the Weissmann/Mueller report; in combination with the Obama-era DOJ “secret research project” (their words, not mine); we are able to overlay the entire objective and gain a full understanding of how political surveillance was conducted over a period of approximately four to six years.
This is why there’s panic.
Working with a timeline, but also referencing origination material in 2015/2016 – CTH hopes to show how the program operated. This explains an evolution from The IRS Files in 2010 to the FISA Files in 2016.
More importantly, research indicates the modern political exploitation of the NSA database, for weaponized intelligence surveillance of politicians, began mid 2012.
(more…)

Now that President Trump has officially designated the Declassification Memorandum we can review the specifics for process, content and timing.  Our previous research led to a set of expectations for the directive. Now, that we have the directive in hand, we gain increased clarity of purpose.

♦ First, President Trump has assigned ownership of the Directive to U.S. Attorney General William Barr. This part was predictable because the purpose of declassification would be to facilitate a DOJ review of how the intelligence apparatus was used in the 2016 election.
Additionally, because the DOJ review encompasses intelligence systems potentially weaponized in 2016 for political purposes and intents, President Trump carries: (a) declassification authority; but also: (b) an inherent conflict.  In this DOJ endeavor candidate Trump would have been the target of corrupt agency activity; and therefore would be considered the target/victim if weaponization were affirmed by evidence.
To avoid the conflict President Trump designates the U.S. Attorney General as arbiter and decision-maker for the purposes of declassifying evidence within the investigation:

…”The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long-established standards for handling classified information.” (link)

Additionally, AG Bill Barr does not need to assemble the intelligence product for approval by the executive (Trump).  Instead the office of the president is granting the AG full unilateral decision-making as to each product being considered for declassification.
This is a huge amount of trust from the President to the Attorney General, and a big responsibility for William Barr:
(more…)

There was a DC rumor that “a website” was “surprisingly spot-on” when CTH posted the likely declassification structure, agency process and timing… [Here and Here and  Here]
Tonight, President Trump signs a declassification memo that identifies the intelligence units, and issues guidelines therein:

WHITE HOUSE: “Today, at the request and recommendation of the Attorney General of the United States, President Donald J. Trump directed the intelligence community to quickly and fully cooperate with the Attorney General’s investigation into surveillance activities during the 2016 Presidential election.

The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long-established standards for handling classified information. Today’s action will help ensure that all Americans learn the truth about the events that occurred, and the actions that were taken, during the last Presidential election and will restore confidence in our public institutions.” (read more)

Memorandum for Agency Guidance below:
(more…)

Sally Moyer was FBI unit chief in the Office of General Counsel (counterintelligence legal unit within the FBI Office of General Counsel). Moyer reported to an unnamed section chief, who reported to Trisha Beth Anderson, who was deputy legal counsel to James Baker.
Ms. Moyer is responsible for the legal compliance within the FBI counterintelligence operations that generated FISA applications:
[scribd id=411004527 key=key-MV1XTw9YPfPUa7ZOaXdp mode=scroll]
(more…)