The DOJ made a move today after a failed attempt to label Michael Flynn a co-conspirator in the case against his former business partner Bijan Rafiekian. [Backstory Here]
In today’s development [h/t Techno Fog] the DOJ is calling Michael Flynn Jr as a witness to replace the witness testimony of his father, Lt. Gen Gen Michael Flynn.

(Source Link)

Given what we know about how the DOJ pressured Michael Flynn Sr. to take the plea deal based on threats against his son Flynn Jr; and against the backdrop of the DOJ losing with Judge Anthony Trenga in EDVA; the DOJ now appears to be re-leveraging the original plea to compel cooperation from Jr.
This explains why the DOJ said yesterday they would await the DC sentencing (against Flynn Sr.) pending the outcome of the EDVA case against Bijan Rafiekian.
The DOJ in DC said they anticipated Flynn Sr might be a witness for Rafiekian’s defense; so they’ve moved to put Flynn Jr. in opposition to any potentially supportive testimony from Flynn Sr. in EDVA by revisiting (re-leveraging) the threat against Flynn Jr.
If Flynn Jr. didn’t agree to testify in the Rafiekian case, the DOJ would likely have cancelled his father’s plea agreement in DC and re-initiated cases -with new charges- against both Flynns’.
This also explains why corrupt U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu added new lawyers in the DC case.  Sneaky bastards.   In essence, Jessie Liu is anticipating a change in plea from Flynn, per new Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell, and proactively positioning the DC case to reignite against both the father and the son if: (a) the Rafiekian case goes sideways; or, (b) Flynn Sr. changes his plea agreement.
The benefits for purposefully charging in two distinct courts now surfaces.
(more…)

In our opinion the content of the diary by former FBI Director James Comey, as outlined in what has formally been called “The Comey Memos”, is devastating to the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI.   How do we know? Because the FBI is fighting like hell to keep even descriptions of the memo(s) content from becoming public.

Rather complex backstory with citations HERE and HERE and HERE.

In the background of what was The Mueller Investigation, there was a FOIA case where the FBI was fighting to stop the release of the Comey memos.  Within that courtroom fight Mueller’s lead FBI agent David Archey wrote a series of declarations to the court describing the content of the memos and arguing why they should be kept classified.
The FOIA fight shifted.  The plaintiffs argued for public release of the content of the FBI agent’s descriptions, now known as the “Archey Declarations”.
After a lengthy back-and-forth legal contest, on June 7th Judge James E Boasberg agreed to allow the FBI to keep the Comey memo content hidden, but instructed the DOJ/FBI to release the content of the Archey Declarations.
Today, the U.S. Department of Justice -under Attorney General Bill Barr- while waiting until the last minute (28 days since prior ruling), filed a motion [full pdf below] to block the release of the Archey Declarations, despite the June 7th court order.
(more…)

Alan Dershowitz appears with two panel members of the ‘Tick-Tock-Boom club’ to discuss the potential of Robert Mueller’s testimony.

.
On the issue of the May 16th, 2017, Mueller trip to the White House raised by ‘tick-tock’ chairman Greg Jarrett, his emphasis is on the wrong syllable.
If Mueller does appear before congress the substance of Mueller’s White House visit should be ignored, and his status within the visit should be the focus.  Not to beat a dead horse, but the purpose of Rosenstein taking Mueller to the White House had nothing to do with Mueller as a candidate for FBI Director.
Congress needs to skip the BS, and get right to the heart of the issue.  Here is five Minutes of rapid fire questions for Mueller on this subject:
(more…)

Those who haven’t followed the backstory might not catch what Nunes is saying.  However, if you followed closely, and accept that Rosenstein was part of the problem, then you see how FBI Director Christopher Wray came into office; and, more importantly how/why Wray selected former DOJ-NSD head Dana Boente to shift from main justice to be legal counsel for the FBI.
Boente took over for former chief legal counsel James Baker, after the discoveries around Baker and McCabe could no longer be hidden. After being removed from responsibility eventually Baker resigned and went to work with the Lawfare group.  Boente’s job at FBI was/is to bury information, block congressional inquiry, and protect the crew. Boente, along with Christopher Wray, is still there.
In a Fox News interview on Sunday, Nunes said “someone at the FBI” appears to have been “determined to hide” then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s notes from both the FISA court and Congress.  Our research identified that “someone” as Dana Boente and crew more than a year ago.

.
[*Note* There’s a snap-load of mistaken and ‘steered’ reporting by a bunch of people who have dined on the buffet of controlled leaks. Hopefully, that will all become clear soon.  Bookmark this ⇓ and prove me wrong]
(more…)

CHUCK TODD: If you could have one do over as president, what would it be?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Well, it would be personnel.
CHUCK TODD: Who is it?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I would say if I had one do over, it would be, I would not have appointed Jeff Sessions to be attorney general. That would be my one —
CHUCK TODD: That’s your, in your mind, that’s your worst mistake?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Yeah, that was the biggest mistake.
(link)

Twenty-three House republicans request declassification of documents directly from President Trump as soon as possible.  Despite the executive office directive to AG Bill Barr, the republican group seemingly do not trust the DOJ and FBI institutional interests.
It’s a smart move to keep the pressure on.
(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…)

Can you imagine the questions:

Q: Mr. Mueller, did you go to Oval Office on May 16, 2017, because you wanted to apply for the job of FBI Director?
A: No.
Q: Mr. Mueller, was the mysterious cell phone you left behind in the oval office that day actually yours?
A: No.

And then, as Rod Rosenstein takes a hard and uncomfortable swallow, the Weissmann constructed house-of-cards starts to collapse….

(CNN) Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team has expressed reluctance to him testifying publicly in front of the House Judiciary Committee, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The special counsel’s team has conveyed the notion that Mueller does not want to appear political after staying behind the scenes for two years and not speaking as he conducted his investigation into President Donald Trump.

(more…)

The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017.  However, the recently released Weissmann report shows there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe.  The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.
The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017.  The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes.  One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.
As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:

This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr.  Additionally and strategically (you’ll see why), this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.
(more…)

On Pages #11 and #12 of the Weissmann/Mueller report, the special counsel team outlines the purpose and intent of the probe as delivered by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.  Within these pages Mueller outlines the August 2nd Scope Memo that has previously been hidden and remains redacted through today.
Read the highlighted portion carefully to understand the scope of the instructions.  Note the careful wording “the Special Counsel had been authorized since his appointment to investigate allegations”… This means from Day #1 of the special counsel, the scope of the probe was always to investigate the claims within the Ohr/Steele Dossier:

The August 2nd Scope Memo additionally authorized the investigation of “certain other matters” specifically relating to Manafort (financial crimes), and Papadopolous and Flynn (FARA violations).
These paragraphs tell us a great deal about what originated the purpose of the FBI investigation and the continued purpose of the special counsel.  Remember, the special counsel was a continuance of the FBI counterintelligence operation which officially began on July 31st, 2016.  [The unofficial beginning was much earlier]
(more…)