Representative Doug Collins appears on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the status of the ‘stalled’ impeachment articles and the lack of congressional curiosity toward the DOJ and FBI outcome in the Horowitz investigation.
Fox News host Dan Bongino interviews Rudy Giuliani for his podcast. The topics include increased crime in New York City; Iran, the ‘Spygate” surveillance scandal; the IG report on FISA abuses against the Trump campaign, and Joe Biden’s history of corruption.
The interview starts around 04:00 minutes into the video.
Yesterday CTH noted 2020 as the year when a variety of prior democrat operations will converge with a single goal in mind. We will see several years effort merging. Today, more evidence toward that objective is visible.
The House Judiciary Committeee (HJC) argued in the DC court of appeals to obtain the Mueller grand jury information [6(e) material], and compel testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn. Also today, more leaks from the inside the administration.
The House has a group of dozens of various DOJ and former Obama officials working on their behalf. That House network also has several currently employed DOJ, FBI, State Department and Intelligence Community officials feeding them information on current real-time events. The HJC are currently arguing the Mueller material and the McGahn testimony are needed for the impeachment trial of President Trump.
First, if the HJC team wins the argument to the three member DC Appellate Court, the DOJ will likely file for a full ‘en banc’ review by the entire panel. If the HJC wins the ‘en banc’ argument the DOJ will likely appeal for an administrative stay by the Supreme Court.
(more…)
This court case is the background to remove President Trump. Everything else, including the impeachment effort, is chaff and countermeasures. Conservatives are oblivious.
Today the DC Circuit Court heard oral arguments from House legal subcontractors representing lawmakers, in their attempt to unseal grand jury testimony and documents from the Mueller investigation. [Remember, the subcontracted lawyers were part of Nancy Pelosi’s changed House rules in 2018… These moments were all pre-planned.]
To give further indications of the landscape, U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr sent his weakest constitutional lawyers, Mark Freeman, Justice Department Civil Division Appellate Staff Director, and Deputy Asst Attorney General Hashim Mooppan to face-off against Douglas Letter, U.S. House of Representatives General Counsel, and approximately two dozen House contracted lawyers.
The hearing lasted for an hour and thirty-seven minutes. [Full Audio Here] The three panel judges are tackling the unprecedented attempt by House lawyers to gain access to the Mueller material.
During one segment of the hearing House Lawyer Douglas Letter discussed the serious possibility of sending armed House officers to the DOJ to engage in a gun battle with the Dept. of Justice if needed. Not joking – serious stuff:
(more…)
NOTE: For interested readers it will be impossible for me to summarize the background for each step prior to putting the next puzzle piece into place. Therefore I strongly suggest bookmarking posts for later reference because it would take tens of thousands of words to understand for anyone who steps into the light mid-way through. [Just an FYI]
Tomorrow, January 3rd, 2020, the House Judiciary Committeee (HJC) will be presenting oral arguments in the DC court of appeals for their effort to obtain the Mueller grand jury information [6(e) material], and also compel testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn.
The House has a group of dozens of various DOJ and former Obama officials working on their behalf. That House network also has several currently employed DOJ, FBI, State Department and Intelligence Community officials feeding them information on current real-time events. The HJC are currently arguing the Mueller material and the McGahn testimony are needed for the impeachment trial of President Trump.
If the HJC team wins the argument to the three member DC Appellate Court, the DOJ will likely file for a full ‘en blanc’ review by the entire panel. If the HJC wins the ‘en blanc’ argument the DOJ will likely appeal for an administrative stay by the Supreme Court.
(more…)
Nuttery. Abject Lawfare nuttery. Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe lied four times to internal FBI investigators, three times under oath, in 2017. This led to his firing in March 2018.
(Source)
In a remarkable act of hubris, in late 2018 Andrew McCabe sued the DOJ for wrongful termination through Lawfare lawyer Michael Bromwich. The legal argument was/is essentially that McCabe was allowed to lie to FBI investigators because he was the head of the FBI (an employee of the agency).
In response to the McCabe lawsuit the DOJ filed a motion for summary dismissal due to McCabe’s lying, and an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) affirmation, saying the termination was valid.
In today’s response motion opposing the summary judgement [cloud pdf here], using a new batch of lawyers, McCabe’s legal team argues President Trump called McCabe a “dirty cop” last month, and that proves McCabe’s firing in March 2018 was wrongful.
Yes, that is their argument.
(more…)
The FBI official who led the team effort to violate the fourth amendment rights of U.S. person Carter Page via unlawful surveillance, is now claiming his first amendment rights to free speech were violated when the FBI fired him for gross misconduct.
WASHINGTON DC – Former FBI agent Peter Strzok, a onetime member of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, is claiming the FBI and Justice Department violated his rights of free speech and privacy when firing him for uncovered texts that criticized President Trump. (link)
Our research indicates the lawsuits filed by Peter Strzok & Lisa Page have an undisclosed purpose. It appears both lawsuits are designed to block the DOJ from releasing the unredacted text conversations. The redactions are hiding evidence of FBI motive.
The “direct evidence” for FBI bias the inspector general says he could not find is likely located behind the redactions; the lawsuits help to block sunlight. However, that said, the complete failure of AG Bill Barr to declassify any of the primary material also highlights an institutional motive cover-up the abuses of power by both agencies.
Almost three years after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein gave special counsel Robert Mueller investigative authority; and almost a year since that investigation was completed; and We The People are still not allowed to see the underlining justification the DOJ used to authorize and continue that investigation.
It’s not just what was being said, and how it was being said, but it’s also the chyron to accompany the statements that stands out in this brief panel segment about the goals and objectives of the House impeachment agenda.
Notice “lawyers for House dems suggest”, which is the framework for the broadcast. This is a key point; an absolutely vital point; that we have discussed here at great length but almost no-one is correctly considering. The Lawfare crowd is controlling the political activity, not the moonbat politicians. WATCH:
Oral arguments in the DC Court of Appeals for the House Judiciary Committee to obtain Mueller’s grand jury information, are scheduled for January 3rd, 2020. The HJC is leveraging the Senate impeachment trial in their arguments to gain access to the Mueller material. This approach is by design.
With that in mind it seems likely any House impeachment articles will not be delivered to the Senate until after the DC court arguments, and likely not before the ruling:
[HJC -vs- DOJ full brief link here]
In addition to the Mueller evidence, the HJC is seeking judicial enforcement authority to force the testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn. Both HJC appeals court arguments are using the Senate trial to bolster their case.
The rushed House articles were/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…)
Logical thought is antithetical to the interests of the coup-plotters. Nuance and obfuscation are their shields; that’s why they, writ large, will not release the classified documents. A common sense American Thinker article cuts through the chaff and countermeasures for many interests:
[…] The implications of intercepting the communications of a U.S. citizen who is associated with the political campaign of a candidate seeking the presidency rings nearly every “bell” in the FBIs and Attorney General’s Guidelines for sensitive investigations. As discussed in the IG report, by regulation, these cases cannot be initiated without the written approval of the Director and the Attorney General.
In addition to the approval obviously granted by the Director and AG, the IGs report identified the following additional high level officials who reviewed and approved the Page FISA affidavit: “NSD’s Acting Assistant Attorney General, NSD’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General with oversight over 01, 01’s Operations Section Chief and Deputy Section Chief, the DAG, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, and the Associate Deputy Attorney General responsible for ODAG’s national security portfolio.”
The suggestion that somehow, seventeen significant errors, omissions of fact, falsehoods, or deliberate misrepresentations made their way into a FISA affidavit/s (accidentally, at the hand of an anonymous case agent) and then were not immediately noted and corrected throughout the course of this exceptional review process is simply not believable. ~ Continue Reading