Byron York has an interesting article today outlining his interview with former Trump campaign official Sam Clovis.  Within the article Clovis shares the unexpected contact he received, via email, from CIA Asset Stefan Halper.   As shared:

“I am a professor at Cambridge University lecturing on US politics and foreign policy. I am what is called a ‘scholar practitioner,’ having served in the White House and four presidential campaigns — two as policy director. Over the past month I have been in conversation with Carter Page who attended our conference in Cambridge on US elections. Carter mentioned in Cambridge, and when visiting here in Virginia, that you and I should meet. I have enjoyed your comments and appearances in the media; you hit the sweet spot focusing Trump’s appeal to working America. May I suggest that we set a time to meet when you are next in Washington. Meanwhile, all the best, Stefan Halper.”

The York article then goes through the hindsight possibilities Sam Clovis now considers amid recent revelations the FBI was using Halper as an ‘agent provocateur’.  Make sure you read it. However, journalist Byron York makes a critical assumptive mistake within his discussion with Mr. Clovis that misses a very important detail.

As York discuss the testimony delivered by Clovis to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), they cite further testimony by Carter Page. Unfortunately, both York and Clovis forget two critical points that must overlay any review of congressional inquiry.

(more…)

George Washington University Professor Jonathan Turley discusses the ramifications of the Obama administration conducting surveillance on the Trump campaign vis-a-vis ‘Spygate’, and the self-interested comments from former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates who participated in authorizing the DOJ national security division aspect to that surveillance.

Sally Yates signed the sketchy FISA Title-1 application against U.S. person Carter Page, a former low-level, unpaid, Trump campaign aide/policy adviser.  Recent congressional investigations have revealed that much of the FISC application was based on intentionally constructed false human intelligence, and fraudulent representations to the FISA Court.

(more…)

Fox News Host Trish Reagan sits in for Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures and interviews former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummings on the current issues surrounding the Spygate scandal:

.

It is important to note Democrats in general, and their media allies writ large, are having increasing difficulty obfuscating around direct questions about this scandal. The average American has a very adept BS monitor.

(more…)

Margaret Brennan starts off the interview asking former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper why presidential candidate Donald Trump would not have been informed of any potential issue if the intelligence community was truly concerned about Russia interfering in the election.

Watch his response; and more specifically listen to the language.  “Tactical judgement”?  Even the words he uses to explain the non-action involves admission of an operation:

.

Note how Clapper states he is unaware of the “predicate” for the FBI origination of the Spygate operation. Also note the proactive briefing mentioned for both campaigns was specifically framed around “cyber-intrusion”.

(more…)

With much of the media, and indeed the President himself, fueling the ongoing headline discussion over the ramifications of the Obama administration setting up “surveillance”, “informants”, counterintelligence operations and “agent provocateurs” against their political opposition, ie. “SpyGate”, it is perhaps time for some mental sorbet.

Relating to the overall issue, on March 28th, 2018, the DOJ Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz formerly announced an additional investigation of how the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation engaged with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in matters relating to the FISA Title-1 application filed against U.S. person Carter Page.  However, one part of the OIG notification was generously overlooked by a defensive and IC compliant media:

As part of this examination, the OIG also will review information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source. Additionally, the OIG will review the DOJ’s and FBI’s relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISC applications.  (pdf link)

Two months later on Monday May 21st, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein added a significant DOJ mandate to the Inspector General review.  Rosenstein expanded the original FISA review to include looking at whether officials within the intelligence community may have unlawfully used human intelligence assets to “spy” or “surveil” the Trump campaign:

“The Department has asked the Inspector General to expand the ongoing review of the FISA application process to include determining whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation of persons suspected of involvement with the Russian agents who interfered in the 2016 presidential election.” (link)

The overall FBI and DOJ corruption and political weaponization discussion has now shifted to issues of politically motivated spies, surveillance and the use of intelligence agents to conduct domestic operations.  There are obvious ramifications and seemingly and endless series of directions and outlines for evidence therein.

(more…)

The Broward County diversionary school discipline program known as the “Promise Program” has gained scrutiny since the Parkland shooting left 17 students dead.  The unstable shooter was identified as a prior benefactor of a county school district policy to reduced crime rates by exchanging criminal punishment for school discipline.

Many readers are aware CTH spent almost two years researching this practice in both Miami-Dade and Broward County.  The downstream consequences were predictable when it first began; unfortunately, no-one wanted to accept the warnings – and the corruption is so systemic within the School and Police leadership, there’s no hope to ever see it change.

(more…)

There is a particular coordination of events that has been visible since December 2017 when the first evidence of the FBI and DOJ operations against the Trump campaign surfaced.  In the past six months a great deal of granular timing relates to this coordination.  In January 2017 the DOJ IG began investigating FBI and DOJ conduct during the Clinton investigation in 2015 and 2016.

Toward the end of 2017 a joint House Judiciary Committee and House Oversight Committee venture was established to look into the FBI/DOJ handling of the Clinton investigation, and the Trump counterintelligence investigation.  Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte and Oversight Chairman Gowdy established the joint-oversight venture and then little happened as they awaited the completion of the OIG internal review.

Between the Fall of 2017 and May 2018 the final stages of the DOJ-OIG investigative inquires took place. In this period DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz was joined with federal prosecutor John Huber. Horowitz focused on the ongoing internal investigation, while Huber received evidence carved out that holds value for criminal prosecutions.

During the period of January through May 2018 all congressional witness testimony from the FBI and DOJ participants to oversight committees was filtered through the need for U.S. Attorney John Huber to retain the integrity of criminal evidence.  Toward that end, testimony from multiple witnesses, sought by congress upon members of the DOJ and FBI, was cancelled.  Some of that testimony was cancelled at the last minute as the DOJ negotiated with congress and likely explained the reasoning therein.  Example:

(more…)

A historic set of meetings within the deepest parts of the DC Swamp is on the schedule for this afternoon with a rather unusual set of alliances, conflicts and competing interests amid both parties and all three branches of government.

After much debate, scheduling, positioning, narrative selling, re-scheduling and changes in attendees, the legislative branch and executive branch are set hold a meeting to discuss oversight, document production and investigative authority over prior intelligence and justice department abuses.  It’s a very odd day indeed.

2017/2018 Intelligence Oversight “Gang of Eight”

♦At high-noon House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R), and House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R), are meeting with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. (link) and (link)

In this first meeting the legislative branch will be asking the executive branch, yet again, for unredacted documents relating to their oversight over the Intelligence Community and Department of Justice.  The concerns are prior IC, DOJ and FBI conduct in spy operations against the former campaign of current President Donald Trump. ie. “SpyGate”.

(more…)

Tucker Carlson led off his broadcast on Tuesday night with a discussion of the latest developments in “Spygate”.   An illegal operation by intelligence leadership within President Obama’s cabinet.

FBI Director James Comey, DOJ Attorney General Loretta Lynch, DNI James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan are all identified within the Spygate operation conducting and facilitating surveillance against their political opposition.

(more…)

Big picture move by President Trump today that has massive, and generally misinterpreted, ramifications for any trade deal with China, EU and most importantly NAFTA.

China is using U.S. nuclear negotiations with North Korea as leverage for more beneficial trade outcomes; the communist regime is in full manipulative dragon-mode. President Trump can see through the economic play and is dropping the Panda outreach.  Eagle-one now hits back at Chairman Xi for deploying such dangerous tactics.

If you have been following trade nuance, the Automobile Sector is one of the biggest points of contention within varying trade negotiations. In the NAFTA discussion the auto-sector, via rules of origin, runs at the heart of NAFTA’s fatal flaw.

The fatal flaw is the use of Asian, mostly Chinese, auto components within auto manufacturing. Mexico and Canada arguing to allow more Chinese auto parts in North American manufacturing; and President Trump demanding more North American parts for North American auto manufacturing.

Many U.S. Auto manufacturers have moved to Mexico to exploit the NAFTA loophole (fatal flaw). Vehicles assembled in Mexico use cheaper Chinese parts and are shipped into the U.S. without any tariff under NAFTA rules.

It didn’t take long before EU auto-manufacturers, mostly German, to begin taking the same approach. Albeit to a lesser extent, German auto companies also invested in building vehicles in Mexico/Canada for tariff-free transfer into the U.S. This works out great for Canada and Mexico auto-workers, but not for the U.S.

In essence, the auto-sector is representative of much of the manufacturing exploitation by multinational corporations beyond vehicle production. China has supported this approach because they produce the components for multiple sectors (furniture, appliances etc).

(more…)