John Durham is a name attached to an internal DOJ investigation; however, it is William Aldenberg who is the real investigative lead.  Aldenberg is the technical center; and Aldenberg provides Durham the results of the investigation he is directing.

Lou Dobbs and Devin Nunes discuss the frustration and slow-pace of the current DOJ probe under the office of USAO John Durham.  Recently AG Bill Barr has inferred that more indictments are possible as an outcome of the background investigation. We’ll see.

(more…)

Newly released records [SEE HERE] from a FOIA show the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel team “accidentally” wiped 15 iPhones of data early in 2018 after the phones were requested by the office of inspector general for review.

Mueller’s lead investigator Andrew Weissmann accidentally wiped two phones himself; through a lengthy process of entering the wrong passcode several times over a period of three hours; removing data to show his activity during the special counsel.  Weissmann claimed to have entered the wrong password (takes ten attempts) and that erased all the data.  Greg Andre, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department’s criminal division, made the same claim.

Wiping your phone to hide damaging information only works if the other phone you are communicating with wipes the same data.  Guess what happened?  Yup, exactly that.

James Quarles III who worked with Mueller in private practice at the Washington office of Wilmer-Hale, claimed his iPhone magically erased itself.

Before joining the special counsel team Rush Atkinson worked under Andrew Weissmann in the DOJ’s criminal fraud section where he specialized in financial fraud.  Atkinson claims he too entered the wrong password ten times and accidentally erased all the data.

At least twelve other people assigned to the special counsel investigation had similar “phone wiped/erased” issues which blocked the inspector general from his review.

(more…)

According to a pre-release excerpt from the Washington Post Bob Woodward writes about a discussion between General James Mattis and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats about a plot to overthrow the elected government of the United States.

[…] “Mattis quietly went to Washington National Cathedral to pray about his concern for the nation’s fate under Trump’s command and, according to Woodward, told Coats, “There may come a time when we have to take collective action” since Trump is “dangerous. He’s unfit.” (read more)

What do you call a conversation between the Defense Secretary and the head of the U.S. intelligence apparatus where they are talking about taking “collective action” to remove an elected President?  That’s called sedition…. A seditious conspiracy.

As alarming as that sounds on its face, this actually aligns with our own previous research into key military leadership, the joint chiefs, and their corrupt intent to overthrow the elected government.  Readers will remember when we noted this very issue after Lt. Col  Alexander Vindman compromised his position yet was not removed by his command structure within the Pentagon.

(more…)

White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows discusses ongoing stimulus negotiations on Capitol Hill and the issues facing the Trump administration. Additionally, Meadows recaps the status of the Durham probe as it is best known to him.

“Additional documents that I’ve been able to review say that a number of the players, the Peter Strzoks, the Andy McCabes, the James Comeys, and even others in the administration previously are in real trouble because of their willingness to participate in an unlawful act and I use the word unlawful at best, it broke all kinds of protocols and at worst people should go to jail as I mentioned previously.”..

(more…)

The ‘Woods File’ is the mandatory FBI evidence file that contains the documentary proof to verify all statements against U.S. persons that are contained in any FISA application. Remember, this is a secret court, the FISA applications result in secret Title-1 surveillance and wiretaps against U.S. persons, outside fourth amendment protections.

The absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. However, in the case of the “missing” or “reconstructed” Woods file used to gain a Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant against U.S. person Carter Page, the overwhelming evidence shows there never was one. The Special Counsel manufactured the appearance of one ex post facto in 2018.

Here’s how we can tell:

♦ FIRST – Common Sense: Recent reports of the DOJ, FBI or NSD “losing” the Woods file are abjectly silly on their face. Given the specific importance of this specific case there’s no reasonable person who would believe such a critical file of underlying evidence would just go missing and have to be recreated by the Weissmann special counsel.

♦ SECOND – Precedent: In the March 30, 2020, memorandum written by the Office of Inspector General after review of 29 DOJ-NSD FISA applications, the IG noted the absence of Woods Files is not an uncommon occurrence. Factually within the 29 FISA applications reviewed, four were completely missing the Woods File. Meaning there was zero supportive evidence for any of the FBI claims against U.S. persons underpinning the FISA applications. [ie. The FBI just made stuff up]

(more…)

Trey Gowdy appears for an interview with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the latest known information from the background of the John Durham probes into DOJ, FBI and CIA corrupt intent and activity in the “spygate”, Trump surveillance, saga.

Within the interview Gowdy notes he does not expect to see any legal consequences as an outcome of the John Durham investigation beyond the current pleading by former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith.  While Gowdy can be an insufferable voice at times, on this issue and given the nature of the current political calendar, he would appear to be correct.

Gowdy asks the question about where everything started.  In the earlier interview with Peter Strzok (CBS), the FBI justification (current narrative) was pointed back to George Papadopoulos and his thin gruel conversation with Australian diplomat Alexander Downer.

.

At this point the corrupt DC elements appear to have successfully ran out the clock for 2020; and that is very frustrating from the position of two-tiers of justice.

However, that said there is a possibility more focus on the special counsel operation could lead to some rather eye-opening information. The public needs to know how corrupt the special counsel investigation was; what their exact intents and purposes were; and there is ample evidence mounting.

(more…)

It should be remembered that CBS interfered in the 2012 election by purposefully hiding an interview with President Obama where the former president denied terrorists were involved in the attack in Benghazi, a statement he denied in the 2012 debates.  As a result the politics of CBS are very clear in the narratives they choose to advance.

That said, in a heavily edited interview with former FBI Agent Peter Strzok, CBS once again attempts to shape a defensive narrative to cloud the truth of the DOJ and FBI intents within the 2016 election.  You’ll note this interview is actually very light on broadcasting the actual interview statements by Peter Strzok because: (a) Strzok has legal risk from any statement; and (b) the intent of this interview is shaping a defensive narrative.  WATCH:

.

This interview is frustrating on many levels.  First, because it shows how the absence of accountability by current DOJ officials has led to Strzok’s brazen ability to lie publicly.  Strzok has no fear in his appearance and is shamefully blame-casting and pushing a justification that is completely devoid from truth.

Secondly, this interview is a direct result of AG Barr failing to aggressively hold these former FBI officials accountable for intentional wrongdoing and purposeful corruption. There is no excuse.

(more…)

A rather odd situation all things considered.  A FISA Court opinion, based on 702 modifications and submissions to the court from the DOJ, dated December 6, 2019, has been released to the public (release date Sept. 4, 2020) [pdf link].

The opinion date is December 6, 2019, which was three days before the IG report was released on December 9, 2019…. which sets up an interesting situation. This report is based on the DOJ and intelligence equity holders (DOJ, FBI, NSA and NCTC) telling the FISA court what compliance modifications they had made to the FISA 702 process.

The “702” topic relates to the electronic communication of American citizens. “702” is literally the designation for a process that intersects with an American, at home or abroad,  who is protected from warrantless searches and seizures by the fourth amendment.  By now everyone is a little more familiar with the FISA-702 importance.

The primary issues involve intelligence gathering by DOJ, FBI and the National Counter-terrorism Center (NCTC), and exploitation of electronic metadata searches that capture the communication and private information of American citizens without a search warrant.   This 702 issue has been the subject of multiple efforts (albeit some rather obtuse refinements) by the U.S. intelligence apparatus to be in compliance with the legal restrictions and protections afforded by the fourth amendment.   So far, no process put into place has been effective at stopping the abuse.

(more…)

Red State has a good article expanding consideration of the Sara Carter exclusive this week surrounding a recent DOJ and FBI admission to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about the special counsel, Andrew Weissmann, “recreating” the original Woods File to support the June 29, 2017, Carter Page FISA application.

[Red State Here -AND- Sara Carter Here]

In essence the questions are: why would the special counsel need to re-create a file?  And if so what would be the purpose behind “losing” their original?

However, CTH would add an overlaying question: What investigative event would precipitate the DOJ approaching the FBI to inquire about investigative “files” secured and handled by the special counsel?…..  Such that the SSCI would need to be brought into the information pipeline recently.

Perhaps !

The 2018 timeline here is very specific.  Both the Wood’s File (for Horowitz review) and the investigative file of SSA Brian Dugan (for Jessie Liu review) would have to be handled within a very similar special counsel time-frame.   Questioning one could certainly lead to more sunlight upon the other. Perhaps time will tell.

The DOJ and Michael Flynn defense attorney Sidney Powell have filed a joint status report and motion for expedited hearing with Judge Emmet Sullivan. [pdf available here] According to the filing the DOJ and defense have conferred with the Sullivan appointed amicus (Gleeson) who will respond to the motion to dismiss by September 11th.

Following the Sept. 11th amicus briefing, the DOJ and defense will jointly respond and that should end the need for further briefings and replies. As a consequence the proposed date for court appearance, and hopeful final disposition, are: Sept: 23, 24, 28, 29.

(more…)