Maria Bartiromo shares an earlier interview with Senator Ted Cruz after the House passed two impeachment articles. Senator Cruz is questioned about the impeachment fraud and the latest revelations in the 2016 election surveillance known as “spygate”.
LOL… “Welcome to the party pal“… Wait til Cruz finds out he too was a campaign target as outlined by the FBI instructions to Patrick Byrne; I digress. Within the interview Cruz actually does a good job of outlining a brief cocktail party-length explanation of corrupt FBI conduct toward the FISA court. WATCH:
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham appears on SMF with Maria Bartiromo to discuss House Speaker Nancy Pelosi withholding articles of impeachment from the Senate.
Senator Graham does a good job explaining the fraudulent visible reasons, purposes and strategy for establishing the House obstruction article; however, Graham completely overlooks the hidden motive for withholding it/them.
Moving to “spygate” Bartiromo points out Special Counsel Mueller never investigated the “dossier”; however, Bartiromo misses that Rosensteins’ second scope memo in August 2017 specifically empowered the research of (ie. use of) the dossier for his probe.
*POINT: In my opinion, this is the reason why the DOJ (AG Bill Barr) will not release the scope memos…. Barr is protecting DAG Rosenstein and his good friend Robert Mueller.
.
Lindsey Graham goes on to discuss the background surveillance on the Trump campaign; and outlines questions he has and potential witnesses before his committee. Pause for a moment in this part of Graham’s interview, and notice how the answer to every question is within the declassification documents we have discussed. We know where the answers are.
Amid the twists and turns many people have forgotten about the material congress asked President Trump to declassify a year-and-a-half ago. Additionally there has been some material cited that just seemingly slipped away without follow-up. Consider: (more…)
REMINDER: The House Judiciary Committee led by Chairman Jerry Nadler has been seeking: (1) Mueller grand jury material; (2) a deposition by former White House counsel Don McGahn; and less importantly (3) Trump financial and tax records. Each of these issues is currently being argued in appellate courts (6e and McGahn) and the supreme court (financials/taxes). There are court deadlines for #1 and #2 tomorrow.
It does not seem accidental the hastily defined two articles of impeachment mirror the arguments needed in two lower court cases brought by the House Judiciary Committee. [Go DEEP HERE] It is likely both articles of impeachment, “Abuse of Power” and “Obstruction“, are designed to support pending HJC court cases seeking: (1) former White House Counsel Don McGahn testimony; and (2) grand jury evidence from the Mueller investigation.
Because the full House did not originally vote to authorize articles of impeachment the House Judiciary Committee never gained ‘judicial enforcement authority‘. The absence of judicial enforcement authority was evident in the lack of enforcement authority in House subpoenas.
The House could not hold anyone in contempt of congress for not appearing because they did not carry recognized judicial enforcement authority. Additionally downstream consequences from that original flaw have surfaced in cases working through courts.
There is an argument to be made the rushed House articles 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…)
White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham appears on Fox News morning broadcast to discuss Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding back the articles of impeachment.
Unfortunately I have seen ZERO discussion about the obvious strategic legal benefits for Pelosi to withhold those articles. No-one seems to be paying attention to how those articles of impeachment have influence inside ongoing court cases.
Dan Bongino is very well versed in the details of Spygate; so it’s especially interesting when a person who knows the details interviews former House Intelligence Chairman, and current ranking member, Devin Nunes.
Keyword to focus attention; something CTH has drawn attention toward; is when Nunes says: “conspiracy” and “conspiring” in relation to conduct being illegal. Another interesting reference is when Devin Nunes outlines FBI supervisory special agent #1, or SSA1 is “deep throat”. We know from research SSA1 is Joseph Pientka.
So it was corrupt FBI Agent Joseph Pientka who was the workhorse organizing the various schemes and day-to-day FBI manipulations.
This is just a short article on a singular footnote within the Mueller Report that looks completely different in hindsight. Kevin Clinesmith was the lead FBI lawyer during the counterintelligence operation called Crossfire Hurricane; origination date July 31st 2016. When Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel (May ’17) he took over the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, adding additional DOJ lawyers to staff but retaining the FBI team which included Peter Strzok and Kevin Clinesmith.
When Kevin Clinesmith manipulated the CIA email to gain the third renewal for the Carter Page FISA (June 29, 2017) he was working on behalf of the Mueller investigation.
Clinesmith was removed from the special counsel team in February 2018 after his biased texts were identified by the inspector general. Clinesmith resigned in/around September 2019 “after the inspector general’s team interviewed him.” (link) Not coincidentally that Sept ’19 exit timeline aligns with the first notification to FISC Judge Coller. (link)
Obviously, special counsel Robert Mueller would know the issues regarding Clinesmith prior to removing him in February 2018; and well in advance of his report published in March 2019.
Now… take a look at footnote #1, of page 13 from Muellers report: (more…)
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s primary defense attorney Sidney Powell, appears for an extensive interview with Eric Metaxas. Ms. Powell uses her knowledge of the Flynn case to overlay some of the larger issues with prosecutions within the Department of Justice.
The overall interview is nearly an hour long, and the issues discussed are considerable.
Within the small group conducting the 2016 FBI investigation of the Trump campaign, the Steele Dossier was called “Crown Material“. A name relating to Christopher Steele’s British intelligence position. [James Comey testimony to congress]
The “Crown Material” has become more interesting recently against the backdrop of U.S. Attorney John Durham seeking the documents and communication from former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey [SEE HERE] where John Brennan wanted the Crown Material (Steele Dossier) included the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment.
However, there’s a coded email from Lisa Page, on January 10th, 2017, that might prove to be even more valuable for Mr. Durham as he investigates a possible conspiracy therein:
Note the highlighted box text in the email from Peter Strzok to members of the small group.
“CNN update – Per Rich, CNN to publish C material today betweeen 4 and 5″
The “C material” is a reference to “Crown Material”, and when put into context of the date and email participants this tells a remarkably explosive story. (more…)
Merry Christmas. The intercept is reporting that former NSA Director, Admiral Mike Rogers, has been working with U.S. Attorney John Durham for several months during his investigation into the origin of the 2016 intelligence operation against candidate Trump.
This is particularly important because NSA Director Mike Rogers’ knowledge is at the epicenter of the origination of almost everything related to the FBI data-surveillance that was happening in 2015 and 2016. (Via Intercept) Retired Adm. Michael Rogers, former director of the National Security Agency, has been cooperating with the Justice Department’s probe into the origins of the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump presidential campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, according to four people familiar with Rogers’s participation. Rogers has met the prosecutor leading the probe, Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham, on multiple occasions, according to two people familiar with Rogers’s cooperation.
While the substance of those meetings is not clear, Rogers has cooperated voluntarily, several people with knowledge of the matter said.
Rogers, who retired in May 2018, did not respond to requests for comment.
The DOJ-NatSec Division and FBI reported issues of fraud upon the FISA court in October and November prior to the IG FISA report release. Specifically the DOJ notified the FISC that OGC Kevin Clinesmith had manipulated and falsified evidence. On December 5th, Judge Coller responded to that series of notifications with an order.
On December 9th, when the IG FISA report was made public, the FISC was given a declassified version of the report and was able to review for the first time. It was from that IG review that Collyer was able to establish the full context of the fraud upon the court. The court was given no advanced notification as to the totality of fraud upon the FISC other than a preliminary ‘head’s up’ on the OGC Clinesmith compromise.
As a result of the IG report, Collyer told the DOJ to declassify her response of December 5th, because she was going to make it public. Today Collyer released that order. (more…)