With a general set of narrative ‘talking points’ in hand President Obama’s Former National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, appeared this morning on MSNBC for an interview with Andrea Mitchell.  This is the ‘We-Have-To-Respond-phase‘,  which necessitates the optic.

Andrea Mitchell is considered a trustworthy ally of the Clinton/Obama political networks; as such, it is not a surprise to see Mitchell selected as the interviewer.  Mitchell’s use of wording carefully guides Susan Rice through the narrow path of self-incrimination by providing plausible deniability for verbal missteps.

You already know the routine.  MSNBC is the favorable proprietary venue. Mitchell plays the role of media-legal-adviser, her client is Susan Rice.  Live interviews are always the greatest risk (see: Evelyn Farkas)  The full interview is below:

However, that said, there are some interesting aspects to the interview:

Susan Rice @00:51 – …”Let me explain how this works.  I was a National Security Adviser, my job is to protect the American people and the security of our country.  That’s the same as the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and CIA Director.; and every morning, to enable us to do that, we receive – from the intelligence community – a compilation of intelligence reports that the IC, the intelligence community, has selected for us –on a daily basis– to give us the best information as to what’s going on around the world.”

[Note, Susan Rice is describing the PDB]

“I received those reports, as did other officials, and there were occasions when I would receive a report in which, uh, a ‘U.S Person’ was referred to.  Name, uh, not provided, just ‘U.S. Person’.

And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance in the report – and assess it’s significance, it was necessary to find out or request, who that U.S. official was.”

OK, so right there, in the very beginning of the forward narrative, Susan Rice is confirming the “unmasking” request(s) which can be pinned upon her, are directly related to her need to understand -on behalf of President Obama- intelligence for the President’s Daily Briefing (the PDB).  This was a previous question now answered.

This is EXPLOSIVE, and here’s why.

(more…)

President Trump tweeted earlier today referencing a news report by Fox reporter Adam Housley which ran on Fox and Friends.

The substance of the segment (video below) is quite startling as it highlights reports from inside the intelligence community of surveillance on Donald Trump “for up to a year before inauguration”.

(more…)

Ranking House Intelligence Committee Member Adam Schiff appears on CNN Sunday Morning with Jake Tapper following Schiff’s review of the surveillance and unmasking intel previously discussed by Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes.

As anticipated, by reviewing the evidence of Obama’s surveillance activity Adam Schiff is now muted in his claim such surveillance and unmasking did not occur.  Schiff has a severe case of visible dry mouth as he attempts to use more obtuse claims to talk around the issue(s).   Schiff’s parseltongue now focuses on ‘process’ as his ability to deny has evaporated.

In addition, Schiff backed off his prior claims that there was “more than circumstantial” evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Today, when Tapper asked him if there was evidence of “collusion,” Schiff replies: “I don’t think we can say anything definitively at this point.” and “It’s too early in the investigation”. Too early? The investigation has been going on since July 2016.

(more…)

An interesting dynamic is set to unfold tomorrow when Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi visits with President Trump at the White House.

President al-Sisi represents the largest failure of the global left and their interventionist activism in the entirety of Obama’s tenure.  Diplomat Charles Rivkins’ multicultural approach toward eliminating the nationalism of France was small potatoes compared to the full-throated intervention of Hillary Clinton and President Obama in Egypt.

While average Americans were caught up with ObamaCare news in 2010, President Obama was building out a massive influence campaign in Egypt to install a Muslim Brotherhood candidate in Mohammed Morsi.   Almost no-one was paying attention to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s first foray into using social media to manipulate a population.

Zuckerberg was enlisted in the endeavor by like-minded travelers in Obama’s tight circle. The Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was John Kerry.  The Secretary of State was Hillary Clinton.  The U.S. State Department was in direct alignment with the White House policy objectives.

It wasn’t until the useful idiots were directed into the social media trap and took over Tahir Square, that most Western media began reporting in depth what was going on.

By the time the young Egyptians realized they’d been snookered by extremists, Hosni Mubarek was gone, the jails were open, a no-longer-captive Mohammed al-Zawahiri  (brother to al-Qaeda’s #2 banana Ayman al-Zawahiri) was stirring up trouble; and the Muslim Brotherhood was gang raping CBS producer Lara Logan just off camera.

(more…)

• Part 1 – Understanding Devin Nunes Paradox
• Part 2 – Deep State UniParty Positions Against Nunes
• Part 3 – Adam Schiff Attempts Deflection and Obfuscation
• Part 4 – White House Plays Trump Card –  [“The Reverse Castellanos“]
• Part 5 –  Schiff Responds to White House Intel Invite – A Controlled SCIF
• Part 6 – Media Frames Surveillance Excuse – Depth of Obama Spying Grows

LATEST –  Adam Schiff downplays intelligence reports, and falls back on same strategy deployed in Part 3.

Ranking Intel Member Adam Schiff releases a statement that is fraught with parseltongue and obfuscation in the hopes that average voters/Americans don’t know the difference between executive level intelligence (highest security level), used by President and only available to Oversight Gang-of-Eight, and committee level intelligence (lower security threshold) which can be reviewed by the entire House Intelligence Committee.

Even a public official openly discussing the various levels of “compartmented” intelligence and various differences within the authorized use of SCIF facilities, is itself a violation of classified intelligence rules.  This makes it easy for deceivers to manipulate their words knowing they cannot be publicly challenged.

If you are paying close attention, you’ll note this strategy is what Adam Schiff is using in the statement he released below: (more…)

• Part 1 – Understanding Devin Nunes Paradox
• Part 2 – Deep State UniParty Positions Against Nunes
• Part 3 – Adam Schiff Attempts Deflection and Obfuscation
• Part 4 – White House Plays Trump Card –  [“The Reverse Castellanos“]

If you’ve been following along you’ll note ranking member of the intelligence committee  Adam Schiff (pictured above) didn’t want to see the ‘Gang-of-Eight’ level intelligence previously reviewed by Intel Chairman Devin Nunes.

However, as a result of President Trump publicly sending a letter to Adam Schiff and Senator Mark Warner, ranking member Schiff no longer has an option to keep looking away.  If he refused to look at the surveillance intelligence Schiff would be exposing his political motivations – an entrenched ideology attempting to protect President Obama.

Trump smartly positions Schiff where his only play is to accept the invitation from the White House.   Thus the press conference below and his answers to the questions.  You only need to watch the first 10:00 minutes to get a sense of Shiff’s understanding of where he is:

.

However, that said, the moment at 08:08 is very revealing in that Adam Schiff states he wants to conduct an additional intelligence hearing with three specific people:  Former CIA Director John Brennan, former DNI James Clapper, and former interim Asst. Attorney General Sally Yates. (more…)

Mrs. Evelyn Farkas appeared on a Boston am news broadcast to explain her previous March 2nd comments about leaking intelligence information, gathered by the Obama administration, to “people on the Hill”.

Today’s attempt to obfuscate her prior revealing commentary is demonstrably false against the actual words she used in her prior statements.  Here’s her attempt at deflection along with the prior transcript of her words on MSNBC:

When you review her actual statements to MSNBC you can see how weak her current denials are:

“I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.”

“Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.”

“So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].  That’s why you had the leaking.”

In the White House letter today from Chief-Counsel Don McGahn to Democrat Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff, attorney McGahn queries the discovery and admissions of former Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas during her March 2nd MSNBC interview.

Remember, the letter to Adam Schiff and Senator Mark Warner was delivered at the exact moment Sean Spicer was giving his press conference:

Oh, sorry, I can’t stop laughing.  She is so busted.

In addition President Trump’s White House Chief-of-Staff, Reince Priebus, was discussing it earlier in the day –SEE HERE–  McGahn’s Letter Is Below:

(more…)

Many people were wondering why the White House was holding back on calling out the congressional intelligence oversight gang-of-eight regarding their political unwillingness to review the same executive intelligence previously reviewed by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes.
Today, you just got the answer.
White House Deputy Chief-of-Staff Katie Walsh was fired today immediately following a New York Times report which outed two National Security Council members as the source for Devin Nunes “tip” to review a specific batch of President Obama’s executive intelligence. The transparent sequence of events reveals that Walsh was the source of NYT reporter Maggie Haberman’s article; (Walsh and Haberman are “friends”).

And with the White House Leaker now identified and fired, the White House challenges the congressional intelligence committee leaders, four members of the oversight ‘gang-of-eight,’ to come and review the Obama intelligence report. That review request paints Intel Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff, and Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chair Senator Mark Warner into a corner.
President Trump is now challenging the House and Senate intel committee heads to review the evidence of President Obama’s surveillance. How can they refuse to see the truth without exposing their political agenda?
Well played, Team Trump, well played.
Here’s the play – FIRST THE LEAKER: (more…)

Following up on THIS EXPLAINER.
♦ Obviously Chairman Devin Nunes has placed himself outside the rails of Deep State.  ♦ The UniParty now wants him removed.  ♦ Nunes has become a risk.  ♦ Brutally obvious questions being ignored by media become focus of wider electorate.

2017 Congressional Intelligence Oversight “Gang of Eight”

Chairman Nunes is the only member of the Intelligence Oversight Gang-of-Eight who has reviewed the executive level intelligence product which caused him concern.  Nunes alleged in the last week he received evidence that Obama administration political figures gained access to unmasked American identities through foreign intercepts involving the Trump transition team between November 2016 and January 2017.
Media and congressional leadership intentionally skip the obvious questions:

♦ Why don’t the other seven members also go look at the same executive intel?

• Why, instead of looking at the same data, does the entire UniParty political apparatus and DC media now seem intent on eliminating Devin Nunes?
• Why doesn’t Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer or Mark Warner simply go look at the same executive intelligence product?
• Why doesn’t Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell or Richard Burr simply go look at the same executive intelligence product?
• Why doesn’t any member of the DC media ask such brutally obvious questions?
(more…)