I’m not sure exactly who they are, and there’s a possibility they might just be one person; however, it appears there are three distinct FBI officials engaged in an overall investigative capacity, attempting to break the truth through the corrupt machinery.
Each individual is noted within a specific event or outcome. Hopefully AG Bill Barr has tasked his deputy James Rosen to hold an honest ‘climate assessment‘ discussion with these individuals.
♦The first honorable FBI Agent is the FBI official who enhanced the DOJ sentencing memo for James Wolfe. The DOJ prosecution, namely DC U.S. Attorney Jessie K Liu -possibly following instructions from Rod Rosenstein- was trying to cover-up the classified intelligence leak of SSCI Security Director James Wolfe in order to protect powerful Senators.
One FBI agent was obviously not happy with that DOJ leadership decision and seeded the DOJ ‘sentencing memo’ with a key sentence that exposed the cover-up:

For him or her we are thankful. That sunlight, though unsuccessful in stopping the corrupt cover-up, provided just enough undeniable evidence to highlight the severity of a cover-up initiated by those running the DOJ in 2018.
We note everyone associated with that decision has since been removed.
♦The second FBI official to note, might actually be a key top-level DOJ official – though that seems less likely. The second FBI official is however high ranking. The high ranking FBI position is likely because the top level security clearance was needed for this FBI agent to travel to CIA headquarters and review the CIA operational file on Carter Page.
(more…)

To understand why there’s no-one in the administrative mid-tier of the FBI acting in a whistle-blowing capacity requires a background perspective looking at the totality of corruption.  The institutions are protecting themselves; and yes, that protection applies to the internal dynamics.
Former DAG Rod Rosenstein was dirty.  He might not have started out dirty, but his actions in office created a dirty mess.  Rosenstein facilitated the McCabe operation against Trump during the May 16th, 2017, White House FBI sting against Trump with Mueller.  Rosenstein also facilitated the special counsel (writ large), and provided three scope memos to expand the corrupt investigation of President Trump.  According to the inaction of AG Bill Barr, we’re not allowed to see those authorizing scope memos.

Additionally, despite knowing the Trump investigation held a false predicate, Rosenstein signed the 3rd renewal of a fraudulent FISA application.  Worse yet, even if Rosenstein was caught up by corruption around him, he did nothing to stop the fraud once identified.
Why is Rosenstein a key inflection point?  Because Rod Rosenstein recommended current FBI Director Christopher Wray to President Trump.  POTUS then allowed Wray, as he does all department heads, to select his deputy – Wray chose David Bowditch.
♦Keep in mind the National Security Division of the DOJ (DOJ-NSD) was/is the epicenter of many corrupt activities, including filing the fraudulent FISA application, manipulating interpretations of law for FARA (§901) violations, and doing all of this while denying any inspector general oversight. As FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer recently noted, the DOJ-NSD is positioned as a rogue legal arm of the U.S. intelligence apparatus.
(more…)

Yesterday we identified one FBI Confidential Human Source who was part of the Trump campaign [SEE HERE].  Today we identify another, more interesting, one.
Throughout the 478-page IG report on FBI FISA misconduct there are several mentions of Confidential Human Sources (CHSs) who were either officially “tasked” or unofficially involved in the 2016 FBI investigation of the Trump campaign.
The inspector general review of the CHS activity is fraught with examples of the FBI denying many of the numerous “non-tasked” sources were acting in an official capacity.
The inspector general’s office knowing the FBI were lacking candor is one thing; however, proving that is another matter entirely.  The ‘having to take them at their word‘ dynamic appears throughout the chapters on the use of Confidential Human Sources.
Horowitz report shows the level of denial and justification by FBI officials in Washington DC surrounding the deployment of human sources stretches credulity. It really is quite something to take the totality of the FBI denials, for repeated and specific events, place them all together and then determine all of this is just random, happenstance activity.
Despite FBI denials, perhaps because of them; and despite the IG not being able to find specific evidence that would refute their denials; the IG found far too many coincidences for all of the activity to be coincidental.  This led to Inspector General Horowitz writing a break-out report on just the use of Confidential Human Sources [Nov. 19, 2019].
CTH has identified another key “non-tasked” (their claim) CHS that appears to have been the final straw for Horowitz amid a mountain of FBI denials.  The FBI claims around this specific person is what eventually led to the November 19th, 2019, break out report.
[NOTE: I am identifying these redacted individuals and sources because there is a bigger issue at stake.  There is growing evidence of an ongoing battle within the current FBI.  One side wants to push out the truth, the other side is intent on hiding it.]
(more…)

CTH was always curious why one specific member of the Trump campaign and transition team was abruptly departed (Nov 15, 2016) immediately after the visit by NSA Director Mike Rogers was scheduled, and two-days prior to their meeting.  It’s a weedy question, likely only considered by those who were watching closely at the time…
However, perhaps Inspector General Michael Horowitz has provided some background on the move. [Page 336, 337, fn #474]

Based on the arc of the post-election timeline described in the segment of the report that touches upon “non-tasked” Confidential Human Sources (CHSs), beginning page 336; and based on other information in/around the specific CHS described; there’s a very strong likelihood we can identify this one.
(more…)

Following a Christmas eve call to U.S. service members, President Trump answers questions on a variety of topics from the press pool.  [Video Below]

(more…)

Joe diGenova radio interview discussing his perspective on revelations that former NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers has been working with U.S. Attorney John Durham:

.
BACKGROUND – With research files on the ’15, ’16 and ’17 political surveillance program; including information from the Mueller report and information from the IG Horowitz report; in combination with the Obama-era DOJ “secret research project” (their words, not mine); we are able to overlay the Obama-era domestic IC operations and gain a full understanding of how political surveillance was conducted over a period of approximately four to six years.
Working with a timeline, but also referencing origination material in 2015/2016 – CTH hopes to show how the program(s) interacted and operated. A full review explains an evolution from The IRS Files in 2010 to the FISA Files in 2016.
(more…)

The New York Times has a curious article posited today surrounding U.S. Attorney John Durham who is doing the deep investigation into DOJ, FBI, CIA and intelligence community political espionage in the 2016 election and early Trump presidency.
CTH readers are very familiar with the granular details of what’s commonly referred to as “spygate”; the unofficial weaponization of the intelligence apparatus against candidate Donald Trump, president-elect Trump, and later President Trump.
The Times posts their article about Durham’s investigation against the backdrop of the completed inspector general report on DOJ/FBI misconduct in their FISA exploits.
While the majority of the narrative engineering is oddly irrelevant; and it doesn’t take a long review to notice the Times scribes have a motive to frame Durham’s eventual outcome as adverse to their own political interests; there is one particular paragraph that seems exceptionally curious:

[…] The inspector general’s report makes no substantive reference to Mr. Durham’s investigation. But before the report’s release, Mr. Durham got into a sharp dispute with Mr. Horowitz’s team over a footnote in a draft of the report that seemed to imply that Mr. Durham agreed with all of Mr. Horowitz’s conclusions, which he did not, according to people familiar with the matter. The footnote did not appear in the final version of the report. (link)

(more…)

As we suspected, albeit against much criticism, House counsel Doug Letter has responded to the DC Appeals Court arguing the forced testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn is needed for evidence in impeachment trial. [Court pdf Avail Here]
This court filing today bolsters the unspoken background motive for delayed House Impeachment Managers.  The House Judiciary Committee is using impeachment as support for their ongoing effort to gain: Don McGahn deposition, and Mueller grand jury material (6e).  The goal is opposition research; impeachment is a tool to establish legal standing to obtain it.  Everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

[Scribd pdf link – Direct pdf link (w/ embed below)]

This court filing bolsters CTH analysis that rushed House articles are a means to an end. That is – a way for House lawyers to argue in court all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for pending judicial proceedings, a trial in the Senate.
This would explain why all the prior evidence debated for inclusion and legal additions to “articles of impeachment” were dropped. Instead the House focused only on quickly framing two articles that can facilitate pending court cases.
(more…)

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham appears on SMF with Maria Bartiromo to discuss House Speaker Nancy Pelosi withholding articles of impeachment from the Senate.
Senator Graham does a good job explaining the fraudulent visible reasons, purposes and strategy for establishing the House obstruction article; however, Graham completely overlooks the hidden motive for withholding it/them.
Moving to “spygate” Bartiromo points out Special Counsel Mueller never investigated the “dossier”; however, Bartiromo misses that Rosensteins’ second scope memo in August 2017 specifically empowered the research of (ie. use of) the dossier for his probe.
*POINT: In my opinion, this is the reason why the DOJ (AG Bill Barr) will not release the scope memos…. Barr is protecting DAG Rosenstein and his good friend Robert Mueller.

.
Lindsey Graham goes on to discuss the background surveillance on the Trump campaign; and outlines questions he has and potential witnesses before his committee.  Pause for a moment in this part of Graham’s interview, and notice how the answer to every question is within the declassification documents we have discussed. We know where the answers are.
Amid the twists and turns many people have forgotten about the material congress asked President Trump to declassify a year-and-a-half ago.  Additionally there has been some material cited that just seemingly slipped away without follow-up.  Consider:
(more…)

This is just a short article on a singular footnote within the Mueller Report that looks completely different in hindsight.
Kevin Clinesmith was the lead FBI lawyer during the counterintelligence operation called Crossfire Hurricane; origination date July 31st 2016.  When Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel (May ’17) he took over the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, adding additional DOJ lawyers to staff but retaining the FBI team which included Peter Strzok and Kevin Clinesmith.
When Kevin Clinesmith manipulated the CIA email to gain the third renewal for the Carter Page FISA (June 29, 2017) he was working on behalf of the Mueller investigation.
Clinesmith was removed from the special counsel team in February 2018 after his biased texts were identified by the inspector general.  Clinesmith resigned in/around September 2019 “after the inspector general’s team interviewed him.” (link)  Not coincidentally that Sept ’19 exit timeline aligns with the first notification to FISC Judge Coller.  (link)
Obviously, special counsel Robert Mueller would know the issues regarding Clinesmith prior to removing him in February 2018; and well in advance of his report published in March 2019.
Now… take a look at footnote #1, of page 13 from Muellers report:
(more…)