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…)

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…)

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…)

Maria Bartiromo shares an earlier interview with Senator Ted Cruz after the House passed two impeachment articles.   Senator Cruz is questioned about the impeachment fraud and the latest revelations in the 2016 election surveillance known as “spygate”.
LOL… “Welcome to the party pal“… Wait til Cruz finds out he too was a campaign target as outlined by the FBI instructions to Patrick Byrne; I digress.   Within the interview Cruz actually does a good job of outlining a brief cocktail party-length explanation of corrupt FBI conduct toward the FISA court.  WATCH:

(more…)

REMINDER: The House Judiciary Committee led by Chairman Jerry Nadler has been seeking: (1) Mueller grand jury material; (2) a deposition by former White House counsel Don McGahn; and less importantly (3) Trump financial and tax records.  Each of these issues is currently being argued in appellate courts (6e and McGahn) and the supreme court (financials/taxes).  There are court deadlines for #1 and #2 tomorrow.
It does not seem accidental the hastily defined two articles of impeachment mirror the arguments needed in two lower court cases brought by the House Judiciary Committee. [Go DEEP HERE]
It is likely both articles of impeachment, “Abuse of Power” and “Obstruction“, are designed to support pending HJC court cases seeking: (1) former White House Counsel Don McGahn testimony; and (2) grand jury evidence from the Mueller investigation.
Because the full House did not originally vote to authorize articles of impeachment the House Judiciary Committee never gained ‘judicial enforcement authority‘. The absence of judicial enforcement authority was evident in the lack of enforcement authority in House subpoenas.
The House could not hold anyone in contempt of congress for not appearing because they did not carry recognized judicial enforcement authority. Additionally downstream consequences from that original flaw have surfaced in cases working through courts.
There is an argument to be made the 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.
(more…)

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham appears on Fox News morning broadcast to discuss Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding back the articles of impeachment.
Unfortunately I have seen ZERO discussion about the obvious strategic legal benefits for Pelosi to withhold those articles. No-one seems to be paying attention to how those articles of impeachment have influence inside ongoing court cases.

(more…)

Dan Bongino is very well versed in the details of Spygate; so it’s especially interesting when a person who knows the details interviews former House Intelligence Chairman, and current ranking member, Devin Nunes.
Keyword to focus attention; something CTH has drawn attention toward; is when Nunes says: “conspiracy” and “conspiring” in relation to conduct being illegal.   Another interesting reference is when Devin Nunes outlines FBI supervisory special agent #1, or SSA1 is “deep throat”.  We know from research SSA1 is Joseph Pientka.
So it was corrupt FBI Agent Joseph Pientka who was the workhorse organizing the various schemes and day-to-day FBI manipulations.

(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…)

Merry Christmas.  The intercept is reporting that former NSA Director, Admiral Mike Rogers, has been working with U.S. Attorney John Durham for several months during his investigation into the origin of the 2016 intelligence operation against candidate Trump.
This is particularly important because NSA Director Mike Rogers’ knowledge is at the epicenter of the origination of almost everything related to the FBI data-surveillance that was happening in 2015 and 2016.
(Via Intercept) Retired Adm. Michael Rogers, former director of the National Security Agency, has been cooperating with the Justice Department’s probe into the origins of the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump presidential campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, according to four people familiar with Rogers’s participation.
Rogers has met the prosecutor leading the probe, Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham, on multiple occasions, according to two people familiar with Rogers’s cooperation.

While the substance of those meetings is not clear, Rogers has cooperated voluntarily, several people with knowledge of the matter said.
Rogers, who retired in May 2018, did not respond to requests for comment.

(more…)