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…)

Tammy Bruce is filling in for Sean Hannity. Refreshing. Congressman Louie Gohmert discusses the status of the political impeachment effort and Speaker Pelosi’s refusal to send the articles to the Senate.   Ms. Bruce notes the DC reaction to an outsider administration was predictable; President Trump is adverse to their self-interests.

(more…)

Following a Christmas eve call to U.S. service members, President Trump answers questions on a variety of topics from the press pool.  [Video Below]

(more…)

Joe diGenova radio interview discussing his perspective on revelations that former NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers has been working with U.S. Attorney John Durham:

.
BACKGROUND – With research files on the ’15, ’16 and ’17 political surveillance program; including information from the Mueller report and information from the IG Horowitz report; in combination with the Obama-era DOJ “secret research project” (their words, not mine); we are able to overlay the Obama-era domestic IC operations and gain a full understanding of how political surveillance was conducted over a period of approximately four to six years.
Working with a timeline, but also referencing origination material in 2015/2016 – CTH hopes to show how the program(s) interacted and operated. A full review explains an evolution from The IRS Files in 2010 to the FISA Files in 2016.
(more…)

Senator John Kennedy has many good quotes, his responses about constituent questions around impeachment are quite funny.
The impeachment issues are serious, but the way Kennedy encapsulates the nuttery of it all is actually representative of how/why President Trump’s polling continues to improve as more Americans are absorbing just how ridiculously political this has been.

(more…)

As we suspected, albeit against much criticism, House counsel Doug Letter has responded to the DC Appeals Court arguing the forced testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn is needed for evidence in impeachment trial. [Court pdf Avail Here]
This court filing today bolsters the unspoken background motive for delayed House Impeachment Managers.  The House Judiciary Committee is using impeachment as support for their ongoing effort to gain: Don McGahn deposition, and Mueller grand jury material (6e).  The goal is opposition research; impeachment is a tool to establish legal standing to obtain it.  Everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

[Scribd pdf link – Direct pdf link (w/ embed below)]

This court filing bolsters CTH analysis that 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.
This would explain why all the prior evidence debated for inclusion and legal additions to “articles of impeachment” were dropped. Instead the House focused only on quickly framing two articles that can facilitate pending court cases.
(more…)

House Leader Kevin McCarthy stated yesterday he would recommend John Ratcliffe, Jim Jordan and Doug Collins as House members who would represent the interests of President Trump if any Senate impeachment trial was to begin.  All three are exceptional legal orators who have displayed their skills during the House hearings.
Today Representative Doug Collins discussed the possibility:

(more…)

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:

(more…)

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…)