The Decepticon snake rears its ugly head once again as a recent report indicates the Senate will not confirm President Trump’s nominees for Ambassador to Afghanistan and Germany.  Nothing within the Senate happens without Mitch McConnell directing it.

According to sources cited by the Washington Free Beacon the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a hotbed for Decepticon payments by foreign governments, will not take up the nominations of retired U.S Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor (Germany) or U.S. Navy reserve officer William Ruger (Afghanistan) because they do not hold the correct and appropriate thinking of the republican controlled Senate.

[…] “The administration has sent the Senate three foreign policy nominees with no chance of clearing the Senate, which has to be some form of Guinness World Record for incompetent congressional relations,” said one senior GOP congressional official, citing opposition to Ruger, Macgregor, and Anthony Tata, who was recently tapped to become the Pentagon’s number two spot. (read more)

This is not a surprise.  As CTH has noted since the republicans took control over the senate in 2014, the upper chamber is opposed to anything President Trump supports.  In the final analysis this is a large part of the reason why the republican led Senate Intel Committee was used as part of the usurpation effort.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is full of McConnell’s apparatchiks, and each carries an assignment to resist the Trump administration effort.  Control over the committee assignments is one way Mitch McConnell retains his grip on power and carries out the objectives of his allies on Wall Street and the administrative state.  We noted this power dynamic when McConnell assigned Mitt Romney to the committee.

(more…)

To honor the memory of those lost on September 11th/12th 2012:

The Benghazi Brief

The “Benghazi Brief” remains the most controversial research report we have ever produced. The brief contains over two years of research and hundreds of very specific factual citations supporting it. Six years after it was originally written, in 2014, and not a single aspect outlined within the brief has ever been identified as inaccurate.

(more…)

Michael Flynn defense attorney Sidney Powell appears for an interview with Liz MacDonald to discuss the developments in the Flynn case (note: Sullivan’s court appointed amicus response brief is due tomorrow), and the background information recently highlighted.  As you review this interview, retain the 30,000/ft perspective.

Ms. Powell also discusses the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel erasing evidence by wiping phones and hiding evidence of their corrupt activity.  Additionally, Liz Mac circles back to the 2017 FISA report by Rosemary Collyer to support the most recent 2019 opinion filed by the FISA court showing the NSA database search abuse is ongoing.

.

(1) We know to a demonstrable certainty the special counsel took apart the FBI investigative file of Washington Field Office Supervisory Special Agent Brian Dugan in order to protect their corrupt investigation and the collaborative effort of the Senate Intelligence Committee.  And Durham/Aldenberg knows that we know.

(2) We also know with a high degree of certainty the special counsel created a missing Woods File for the Carter Page application when the IG started sniffing around and announced his intent to review the four FISA applications. And Durham/Aldenberg knows that we have strong, very strong, evidence pointing in that direction.

(3) And now today we discover the same special counsel team destroyed their iPhones in an effort to cover their tracks.  These three events all happened within an almost identical time-frame.  C‘mon man… this is not coincidental.

(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…)

Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin appears on Fox News Sunday to talk about negotiations with Speaker Pelosi for a funding mechanism for government.  Mnuchin outlines another “CR” (“Continuing Resolution”) that will extend funding through December 2020.

Additionally, Mnuchin discusses a “very targeted” COVID-19 support bill for those sectors, industries, companies and small businesses feeling the strongest impact. As the treasury secretary outlines, the administration is seeking optimal solutions for the current status.

(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.

In November 2019 activist Federal District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled former White House counsel Don McGahn must appear before Congress; however, she also ruled McGahn retained the ability to “invoke executive privilege where appropriate” during his appearance. The central issue is separation of power.

The White House appealed the ruling to the DC appellate court on constitutional grounds, and on February 28, 2020, a three judge panel from the DC circuit agreed with the White House position.  The House of representatives could have appealed the decision; however, instead, the main lawfare activist, House counsel Doug Letter, took a different approach and sought to argue the case based around their right to enforce a subpoena.

Today a politically divided DC appeals court panel ruled the House can’t go to the judicial branch to enforce legislative subpoenas because there is no statute giving the legislative chamber the authority to force the executive branch to enforce an action against its own constitutional interests.

DC Via Politico – […] “The decision is likely to spark a renewed debate over the House’s power of “inherent contempt” — its long-dormant ability to fine or jail witnesses who refuse to comply with its oversight requests.

(more…)

Former Acting DNI Richard Grenell appears on Sunday Morning with Maria Bartiromo to expand on the challenges facing current DNI John Ratcliffe.

(more…)

Carter Page appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo to discuss a book he is publishing about the DOJ and FBI targeting him for surveillance and identifying him as “an agent of a foreign government” in 2016 and 2017.

Interestingly, Page notes [@02:56] he had five interviews with the FBI in March of 2017, and he connects those interviews to the possibility of leaks to the Washington Post.  However, it would be interesting to find out the exact dates of those interviews because the FISA application identifying him, leaked by James Wolfe, was delivered to the SSCI on March 17, 2017, as a “read and return” document.  It was after March 17th when the Washington Post wrote the article mentioned by Carter Page.

.

There is strong circumstantial evidence when the FISA application was delivered to the SSCI on March 17, 2017, that only James Wolfe and SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner reviewed it.  First, it was “read and return”, back to the equity provider, FBI SSA Brian Dugan.  Second, if any other member of the SSCI had reviewed the application it’s doubtful they would have been requesting to review it in December ’17 and early ’18.  Common sense would indicate only Warner and Wolfe saw the application, and Warner never informed the committee of his review; hence their later requests.

Additionally, another unusual aspect to the FISA application delivery surrounds the 2018 letters written by Chairman Nunes (HPSCI) and Chairman Bob Goodlatte (House Judiciary) to presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer, where both chairman were being blocked by the special counsel from obtaining the FISA application and both were seeking to gain it from the FISA Court.

(more…)