On Sunday night the Justice Department was granted access to view the House Intelligence Committee memo known as the ‘Nunes Memo’.  In unusual timing, last night FBI Director Christopher Wray went to the secure facility (SCIF) in the basement of the House of Representatives to view the content of the House Intel Committee memo.
Today, the FBI releases an announcement saying Deputy FBI Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe has stepped down (been removed) from his position effective immediately.

Narrative engineers immediately began applying a typical spin to the announcement away from recent discoveries of corrupt behavior of the FBI, and inferring President Trump’s admonishments of Deputy Director McCabe were the impetus for removal.

Via NBC [Andrew McCabe] … served a brief stint as acting director of the bureau after Trump fired ex-FBI chief James Comey, will remain on the payroll until March, when he is eligible to retire with full benefits, NBC said. He had been expected to leave.

(more…)

Imagine that despite your always knowing the DC swamp was deep (dangerous and full of terrors), corrupt, and generally horrible, you decided to do it anyway. You “just had to”.
Imagine you have spent years thinking about it; thinking about every angle within it; thinking and talking to people who know almost everything about it, well, from their perspective anyway; and ultimately you decided to do it.
Imagine that even though you knew it was bad, it wasn’t until you actually began running that you discovered the depth of the corrupt nature with it. –SEE HERE– You see things in the campaign you never expected; things no-one ever talked about.
(more…)

Well, this is good news.  Chairman Devin Nunes, and House Speaker Paul Ryan have had ample time to discuss the larger ramifications to “The Big Ugly”.
Late last week Ryan and Nunes traveled together to Saudi Arabia to review the new Saudi Counter-Extremism Intelligence Center *cough* that President Trump, Saudi King Salman, MBS and Egyptian President Fattah al-Sisi *cough* opened last year.   Obviously Devin Nunes, Paul Ryan and their collective senior staffs would have a lot of time during travel to discuss the intelligence committee memo release.

*nudge*nudge*wink*wink*say-no-more*say-no-more*

According to Byron York when the House comes back into session tomorrow, the Intelligence Committee has a meeting scheduled for 5:00pm.  Likely that’s when the vote will happen to ‘release the memo’.

WASHINGTON DC – The House Intelligence Committee meets at 5 p.m. Monday in the Capitol. The meeting will give the committee its first opportunity to vote on the question of releasing the so-called “FISA abuse” memo that has captured Washington’s attention in recent days. Since the GOP holds a 13 to 9 advantage on the committee, the overwhelming likelihood is that if there is a vote, the panel will decide, along party lines, to release the memo.

(more…)

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte appears on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss his ongoing investigation into the DOJ and FBI.  Chairman Goodlatte holds primary oversight authority over the entire Justice Department.
Part of the conversation turns very interesting, and provides an indicator into the next phase, when Bartiromo mentions messages between FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ Attorney Lisa Page surrounding an intent to “destroy evidence”, during their participation in the Clinton investigation.  WATCH:

.
Additionally, it must be noted how the narrative engineers are specifically misleading everyone with their ‘memo reporting’.  They intentionally overlook the distinction between U.S. branches of government and the separation of power as it relates to Chairman Devin Nunes and the House Intelligence Memo.
(more…)

On the night of Thursday December 7th, 2017 it was announced that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was recused from the case against General Mike Flynn.  This recusal came five days after Judge Contreras accepted the initial pleading from Flynn.  Almost two months have passed, and there’s no explanation why?

(Reuters) The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia judge presiding over the criminal case for President Donald Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has been recused from handling the case, a court spokeswoman said on Thursday. (read more)

If sufficient judicial conflict existed on December 7th, why wasn’t that conflict present on December 1st, when Judge Contreras presided over Flynn’s initial pleading?

 
The story behind why U.S. District Court Judge would be recused, is transparently missing from any follow-up by media.  With all the current sunlight over possible manipulation of a FISA court application by the FBI, no-one seems curious if Judge Rudolph Contreras was the FBI’s FISA approval judge, and the U.S. DC Judge in the Flynn pleading.
The story has disappeared into the swamp; but the story is important.
There is a very strong possibility that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was forcibly recused by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, because Contreras is also the FISA Court Judge who signed-off on the 2016 FISA application (warrant) that led to the wiretapping and surveillance of General Flynn.  That FISA application is now being questioned.
(more…)

Since Thursday night we’ve been combing the FBI files to figure out exactly what FBI Agent Peter Strzok was referencing in one of the most recently released text messages.  We have discovered the context and the text is now damning.
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte read this specific text message on Thursday night during an interview with Sean Hannity:

At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.
On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:
September 2nd, 2016 FBI Press Release:

“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.
We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)

The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents.  On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview.  This investigative release was big news at the time.
(more…)

WASHINGTON – As part of their ongoing oversight efforts to ensure that the FBI’s law enforcement activities are free of improper political influence, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) yesterday sent six letters seeking information and documents regarding Christopher Steele’s work on behalf of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary for America.

The letters seek information and documents relating to those political organizations’ knowledge of and involvement in Mr. Steele’s work and his reported interactions with the FBI while he was working on behalf of these political organizations.

The letters were sent to:

• The Democratic National Committee (DNC)
• Hillary for America (HFA)
• Former DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz
• Former DNC Chair Donna Brazile
• HFA Chair John Podesta
• HFA Chief Strategist Joel Benenson

(more…)

Well, well, well…. that’s a shift in language.  Congressional Rep Matt Gaetz: “I believe there’s been a criminal conspiracy”…  This specific language elevates the current political dynamic toward an exponential level of risk for those within the “conspiracy”.

.
18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights: If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured — They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (link)
(more…)

With the latest information revealing that FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ/FBI Attorney Lisa Page were specifically leaking to their media sources to shape the underlying story of their political efforts, everything presented by the recipients of those leaks should now be questioned.
Page and Strzok were the “sources” for stories written by Devlin Barrett of the Washington Post.
As such, obviously the network of Page and Strzok’s professional colleagues, would also be considered part of a grouping of people who would benefit from specific leaks intended to shape the stories.
One of those initial stories was a December 2nd, 2017,  WaPo outline describing Page and Strzok against the backdrop of the DOJ Inspector General Horowitz investigation.
The Washington Post presented the story of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok having an affair to the world.
That presentation became the underlying assumption for all reporting that followed (despite the lack of supporting evidence).  That WaPo story (narrative), “The affair” was written by Devlin Barrett, who we now know was in direct contact with Page and Strzok.
As with all new information, all assumptions –driven by that WaPo original story– should be carefully reconsidered.
(more…)

There has been a great deal of speculation about FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Attorney Lisa Page leaking to media in their efforts to shape stories conducive to their pro-Clinton/anti-Trump efforts. Prior reporting showed the strong possibility Page and Strzok were leaking to the Wall Street Journal.

“Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can’t read it,” Page texted Strzok on Oct. 24, 2016.
“Wsj? Boy that was fast,” Strzok texted back, using the initials of the famed financial newspaper. “Should I ‘find’ it and tell the team?” (link)

Some new information today, and some additional research, and we can not only confirm the prior suspicions outlined by John Solomon (The Hill) – but we also discover the actual Wall Street Journal reporter they were leaking to.
Yesterday Senator Chuck Grassley released a series of text messages between Page and Strzok (full pdf here). Within the release there is a portion of messaging where Lisa Page is identified on the phone with “Devlin” (see page #5 – screen grab below):

[Peter Strzok is ‘INBOX’ and Lisa Page is “OUTBOX’]

It now appears the “Devlin” in question is former Wall Street Journal National Security reporter Devlin Barrett, currently with The Washington Post.
Here’s why? On October 28th, 2016 (as above), at the exact time the re-opening of the Clinton investigation hit the media news-cycle, Page and Strzok were texting.  From the released messaging we see at 5:19pm Lisa Page is on the phone with “Devlin”:
(more…)