Judge Brett Kavanaugh releases the following letter amid the face of malicious allegations from two politically motivated accusers.

Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein: When I testified in front of the Senate three weeks ago, I explained my belief that fair process is foundational to justice and to our democracy.

At that time, I sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 31 hours and answered questions under oath. I then answered more questions at a confidential session. The following week, I responded to more than 1,200 written questions, more than have been submitted to all previous Supreme Court nominees combined.

Only after that exhaustive process was complete did I learn, through the news media, about a 36year-old allegation from high school that had been asserted months earlier and withheld from me throughout the hearing process. First it was an anonymous allegation that I categorically and unequivocally denied. Soon after the accuser was identified, I repeated my denial on the record and made clear that I wished to appear before the Committee. I then repeated my denial to Committee investigators—under criminal penalties for false statements. All of the witnesses identified by Dr. Ford as being present at the party she describes are on the record to the Committee saying they have no recollection of any such party happening. I asked to testify before the Committee again under oath as soon as possible, so that both Dr. Ford and I could both be heard. I thank Chairman Grassley for scheduling that hearing for Thursday.

(more…)

It’s clear the stall tactic behind the original Christine Blasey-Ford strategy was likely due to democrats understanding the accusations would collapse under scrutiny; and as a consequence they needed more time to concoct the Deborah Ramirez construct; which is even more flat out ridiculous than Blasey-Ford.
Judiciary Chairman Grassley releases a batch [see here] of letters and documents.  One of them is the original unsigned Blasey-Ford letter to Feinstein of unknown authorship:

Judge Brett Kavanaugh doesn’t need to grant credence to the accusations by denying them.  Instead just refer to the accusers own witnesses.  Both political accusations from Ms. Ford and Ms. Ramirez are refuted and denied by the witnesses they stated would back-up their claims.  This is a transparently political con-job.  Nothing more.

LIES !

The professional political-left have turned the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh into an absolute kangaroo court.  The latest reports are that Ms. Christine Blasey-Ford has agreed to a senate hearing next week, well, maybe.
A letter from Team Ford (outlined below) carried multiple caveats and vague terms for appearance that cast doubts on the seriousness of the accuser to appear.
Additionally, and with another level of bizarre overlay, Michael Bromwich is now joining Debra Katz to represent Ms. Ford.
Michael Bromwich was/is the legal counsel of fired FBI Director Andrew McCabe; and Bromwich’s appearance within the current scheme only serves to underline the political nature of the current resistance maneuvering to block a Brett Kavanaugh confirmation.   Bromwich is directly connected to the usurping Lawfare group leading the DC resistance. At this point, the fiasco is an embarrassment upon the Senate; then again, that’s likely part of the strategy.
Perhaps strongly plausible – Team Ford is paying off the legal debts of McCabe hence the hiring and representation of Bromwich as part of a reciprocity deal.  According to CNN insider Laura Jarrett, Bromwich has to resign from his law firm to join Team Ford.
(more…)

The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Bob Goodlatte, tweeted today their intention to immediately subpoena the memos written by fired Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.   The memos were part of an article presented by the New York Times citing evidence of Rod Rosenstein making statements about President Trump.

The House Judiciary Committee announced on Friday that it intends to subpoena memos from former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe detailing reported comments made by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in which he proposed secretly taping conversations with President Trump and initiating a process to remove the president by invoking the 25th Amendment.  (read more)

However, the subpoena alone that’s not the revelation-angle within the story. There’s a bigger story as noted by judiciary committee Representative Jim Jordan: “Mr. Rosenstein, give Congress the McCabe memos that we asked for in July and all the other documents we’ve requested so we can all judge for ourselves.”
The bigger revelation here is how someone, some unknown FBI officials, kept the McCabe  memos from congress and subsequently from a previous internal INSD investigation of McCabe.
(more…)

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes appears on Fox News this morning to discuss the ongoing battle between the corrupt elements within the DOJ and FBI who are working feverishly to hide information from the public.  This interview happens shortly before President Trump announces his decision to reverse course on the declassification request.

House intelligence committee chairman Devin Nunes discusses the four categories of documents that will come as a result of the declassification directive from President Trump.  [More Here]
Most people already know what is behind the redacted segments of the FISA application, it will be good to see the specifics.  However, the directive to release all of the text messages without redactions is where many of the bombshell discoveries will be located.  Few people know the scale and importance of the redactions, because very few people even took the time to read all 450+ pages of text messages.

Representative Jim Jordan delivers poignant remarks and introduces HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes to receive the 2018 Keeper of the Flame Award.

Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes appears with Maria Bartiromo for a wide-ranging discussion on a variety of current issues and events.  The interview begins with a discussion on China’s strategic economic objectives and continues into issues surrounding congressional investigations of the DOJ and FBI.
In the second half of the interview Chairman Nunes shares some insight from interviews, testimony and depositions from approximately 70 former administration officials and calls for the release of the transcripts.  According to Nunes 70 to 80% of all testimony is not classified.  The remaining 20% could be declassified for release by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Dan Coats.  The interview is in two segments:

Many column inches and media discussions surround the recently released “NEW” text messages and emails attributed to FBI Agent Peter Strzok.  “NEW” revelations that show how the FBI was coordinating a “media leak strategy”; which essentially further evidences the level of corruption within the DOJ and FBI & weaponization for political motives.

However, there is a particular pattern and familiarity to these releases for those who follow the Administrative State, aka “Deep State”, within Washington DC closely.  According to Sean Hannity (Friday broadcast) next week there will be several thousand more of these “NEW” messages released. [Up to 50,000]
Amid these latest developments is where we find the all-too-familiar pattern. Where exactly were these “NEW” emails for the past sixteen months? Who is releasing these “NEW” messages? Why? And why now?
According to Joe diGenova, there’s a seated grand jury ready to pounce on Andrew McCabe, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Peter Strzok and all the corrupt elements associated within “spygate” and “fisa-gate”.   As the diGenova story is told, former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker has “turned states evidence”, and is now testifying to the grand scheme, etc. Exposing all those who participated. (Prompted – Just Hit Play)
https://youtu.be/KQDSdTM3kus?t=4m57s
.
Perhaps diGenova is right; perhaps all of those wonderful things are about to happen.  However, I’m of a generally more cynical disposition after years of following these creeps.  I hope diGenova is correct, but I fear he is fraught with misplaced optimism and/or bad information.  Here’s why:
(more…)

Finally we are starting to see articles outlining the actual reality of the issues behind the congressional declassification request, and the challenges for President Trump. Last week we outlined “The Classification Conundrum“, it is complex.  If you have reviewed the prior outline today’s expanded and specific follow-up will make more sense.
The congressional request is for President Trump to declassify and release the Carter Page FISA applications (including specifically pages 10-12 and 17-34 and relevant footnotes), all of the Bruce Ohr 302s and other relevant documents, including exculpatory evidence regarding Carter Page and others, that were presented to the Gang of Eight, but not presented to the FISA Court.

There are officials within the executive branch who are against the declassification because there is an inherent risk for two agencies: The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).  Their self-serving anti-declassification position is bolstered by the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC); and conniving tricks previously played by internal usurpers within the DOJ Special Counsel “small group”.
First, within a Daily Caller article, which nibbles around the edges, you will note the following current state of the issues:

[Daily Caller] White House lawyers are actively reviewing controversial FBI and Department of Justice documents relating to the 2016 presidential campaign for possible declassification, multiple sources with knowledge tell The Daily Caller News Foundation.
The review process is being led by Emmet Flood of the White House Counsel’s office at the urging of an insistent president, two sources with knowledge of the process told TheDCNF. A source close to the president noted that Flood and his colleagues within the counsel’s office are generally opposed to declassification, out of the concern for the precedent it would set as well as any unintended consequences of making the information public.

(more…)