Details are beginning to surface about the deep state Whistleblower complaint.  It is possible in the next few days the 6-page complaint, which utilized media reports to construct the supportive evidence for the phone call accusation against President Trump, will be made public.
That said, within a heavy propaganda report from the New York Times there are details about the Intelligence Community Inspector General that show the tell-tale fingerprints of the ICIG supportive intent (emphasis mine):

[…] Mr. Atkinson, a Trump appointee, nevertheless concluded that the allegations appeared to be credible and identified two layers of concern.

The first involved a possible violation of criminal law. Mr. Trump’s comments to Mr. Zelensky “could be viewed as soliciting a foreign campaign contribution in violation of the campaign-finance laws,” Mr. Atkinson wrote, according to the Justice Department memo. (read more)

Does the “foreign campaign contribution” angle sound familiar?  It should, because that argument was used in the narrative around the Trump Tower meeting with the Russian Lobbyist Natalia Veselnitskaya.  More specifically, just like FARA violations the overused “campaign contribution” narrative belongs to a specific network of characters, Lawfare.
The center of the Lawfare Alliance influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD.  It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok.  It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.
(more…)

The completely over-the-top response by a Deep State embed whistleblower and his/her political allies within the administrative state now makes sense; it had nothing to do with Joe Biden.  President Trump asked President Zelenskyy about “Crowdstrike.”

(Page 3 – Source pdf)

To understand how important this is, we must remember the foundation for the entire Russian election interference narrative, ‘Muh Russia – writ large, is built on the claim Russians hacked the servers of the Democrat National Committee (DNC), and subsequently released damaging emails that showed the DNC worked to help Hillary Clinton and eliminate Bernie Sanders.
Despite the Russian ‘hacking’ claim the DOJ and FBI previously admitted the DNC would not let FBI investigators review the DNC server or cloud-based network.  Instead the original claim was that the DNC provided the FBI with analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike.
According to the original FBI statements made by James Comey: Crowdstrike did the captured imaging of the DNC network (servers/cloud), then conducted analysis, then provided a report to the DNC with their findings; and that report was given to the FBI.  At least that was the original 2017 claim.  However, during court filings in the case against Roger Stone, the DOJ/FBI later admitted they never even saw the Crowstrike final report.
(more…)

This is too funny.  Serendipitous timing. President Trump is holding a bilateral meeting with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine on the same day the transcript of the call between both leaders has been released.  There are multiple media outlets streaming the upcoming meeting.  Trump and Zelenskyy meet at 2:15pm ET, links below:
Fox News Livestream Link – Fox Business Livestream – CNBC Livestream Link

(more…)

Good grief, talk about a nothingburger – this phone call is fine. Here’s the transcript of the phone call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy.

[White House] President Donald J. Trump has released a declassified, unredacted transcript of his telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy from July 25th, 2019. The transcript can be read HERE.
[scribd id=427409969 key=key-VGm7DyayAPURqtX76cpg mode=scroll]

According to the latest reports, the mysterious second-hand whistleblower was motivated by documented political bias against President Trump as discovered by the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael K Atkinson.
This information will likely be released tomorrow in combination with the transcript of the phone call between President Trump and President Zelensky:

Additionally, the New York Times is confirming that White House lawyers are trying urgently to clear a path to push the Whistleblower into the arms of the politically weaponized House and Senate intelligence committees:

White House and intelligence officials are working out a deal to allow the whistle-blower who filed an explosive complaint about President Trump to speak with congressional investigators.
[…] The director of national intelligence is also expected to release a redacted version of the whistle-blower’s complaint in coming days, people familiar with the situation said. (more)

Fox News’ Ed Henry has this:

It might be worth re-visiting President Trump’s earlier warning to the media when he was first hit with questions about the issue:
(more…)

Today Nancy Pelosi made an announcement with forethought, optical planning, teleprompter script, and a presentation intended to look serious.  But what she announced was simply a continuation of the status quo wrapped up in newly packaged lingo.
Pelosi stated she was herewith announcing an “official impeachment inquiry“. Everything remains ‘as is’, albeit with enhanced optics and new titles for the narrative engineers.

The Democrat stage managers forgot the trumpets…

Essentially she announced House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler will continue doing what House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler was already doing; only now House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, will start doing what he was doing with a new lingo.
There is not one thing different from today than yesterday, except the optics and new language to help the media hype something that doesn’t exist.   Speaker Pelosi did not announce her intent to hold a house vote to authorize an impeachment investigation; she didn’t even mention the word vote at all.   In essence what Speaker Pelosi has done is just satiate her base of Democrats with the fancy optics of something that doesn’t exist.
What’s the difference from Nadler’s “impeachment inquiry” yesterday, and Pelosi’s “official impeachment inquiry” today?…  Nothing.
(more…)

In a stunning and very rare move today Federal Judge Anthony J Trenga has thrown out the conviction of a Mike Flynn’s partner Bijan Rafiekian (Flynn Intel Group) and granted the defendants’ motion to acquit.  [Hat Tip to Techno-Fog for the ruling]
This is a huge blow to the DOJ-NSD who framed their special counsel case on sketchy FARA violations and bamboozled the jury with dubious legal theories.  This type of intervention by a federal judge is very rare.  Here’s the ruling:
[scribd id=427282559 key=key-FLrsDlBqLzfEi5EPcarr mode=scroll]
.
Highlights below:
(more…)

There has been so much we have documented about the corrupt intents of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), that it doesn’t take a deep-weeds political follower to see where this is going.
SSCI Chairman Richard Burr and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner now inject the Senate into the process of advancing Adam Schiff’s Ukrainian “whistleblower” narrative.  In a letter today Burr and Warner write to the attorney representing the “whistleblower”:

(Document Link)

As with the Trump-Russia investigation, Warner and Burr now insert themselves into position in order to advance the Trump-Ukraine investigation.
(more…)

For the past several weeks House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has been trying to get the grand jury transcripts from the Mueller investigation in order to further advance his political goal of a presidential impeachment.
However, Nadler has been stymied because the official -legal- House impeachment process has not been followed. A DC district court judge knocked down Nadler’s attempts.
The full House of Representatives has never voted to impeach the president, which would be the first step that authorizes Nadler to begin an “impeachment inquiry.”  Nadler needs that authorization in order to gain legal authority and access to Mueller’s investigative evidence that underpins the highly political Mueller report as it relates to obstruction.
Keep in mind… The Weissmann/Mueller and overall special counsel team investigative effort was always designed to construct the obstruction case. A minimal amount of time was spent on Trump-Russia collusion, because it did not exist.  The primary team effort was to assemble evidence that could give the impression of Trump-Obstruction; according to their map, that obstruction angle would ultimately lead to impeachment.
It does not seem accidental that Chairman Nadler was rebuked by the DC judge in mid-August; and then subsequently Adam Schiff steps forth with a mysterious “whistleblower” report and a fake Trump-Ukraine narrative surfaces.
Indeed, as many have noted, the Trump-Ukraine narrative and subsequent impeachment discussion has almost identical fingerprints as the Trump-Russia impeachment narrative.
Techno-Fog astutely notes the use of the faux-Ukraine narrative seems planned, designed and rolled-out to provide Nadler’s much needed Full House impeachment stimulus:
(more…)

A Judicial Watch FOIA Lawsuit has resulted in the release of a May 16, 2017, memo written by then Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe.  [Link Here]  Current media are focused on Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein willingness to wear a wire into the Oval Office to record the President; however, the memo content actually reveals much more.

There are three aspects to the McCabe memo that warrant attention: (1) Rosenstein’s willingness to wear a wire. (2) Evidence that Rosenstein took Mueller to the White House on May 16, 2017, as a set-up to interview Mueller’s pending target; and (3) the CURRENT redactions to the memo indicate CURRENT efforts by the CURRENT AG Bill Barr to protect the corrupt intent of Rod Rosenstein.  While all three points are alarming; the last aspect is concerning in the extreme.
In order to show the significance of this FOIA release CTH is going to present the McCabe memo in two different ways.  First, by highlighting the raw memo release; and then secondly, to highlight the important context by inserting the memo into the timeline.
First, here’s the McCabe memo:
(more…)