…and CTH has a pretty good idea exactly what “communications” Durham is looking for. It sounds like U.S. Attorney Durham is looking for what Comey outlined in the “crown material” discussion.  First, the article from the New York Times (emphasis mine):

WASHINGTON — The federal prosecutor scrutinizing the Russia investigation has begun examining the role of the former C.I.A. director John O. Brennan in how the intelligence community assessed Russia’s 2016 election interference, according to three people briefed on the inquiry.

John H. Durham, the United States attorney leading the investigation, has requested Mr. Brennan’s emails, call logs and other documents from the C.I.A., according to a person briefed on his inquiry. He wants to learn what Mr. Brennan told other officials, including the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, about his and the C.I.A.’s views of a notorious dossier of assertions about Russia and Trump associates. (more)

U.S. Attorney John Durham appears to be looking for a very specific email written by John Brennan to James Comey.  Because Comey wrote another email saying: ..”Brennan is insisting the Crown Material be included in the intel assessment.”

Do you remember the “crown material“?

The Christopher Steele dossier was called “Crown Material” by FBI agents within the small group during their 2016 political surveillance operation. The “Crown” description reflects the unofficial British intelligence aspect to the dossier as provided by Steele.
(more…)

The last Democratic primary debate of the year takes place tonight. Seven Democrats will take the stage: •Entrepreneur Andrew Yang; •South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg; •Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; •Former Vice President Joe Biden; •Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont; •Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota; •Entrepreneur Tom Steyer.
The debate is hosted by PBS Newshour and Politico. It starts at 8:00p EST and will last for 2-1/2 hours. The venue is Loyola Marymount University. TV broadcast: Local PBS stations and CNN.  PBS Newshour link – and PBS Livestream Link below.

(more…)

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News after a meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office.   Senator Graham states President Trump is “mad as hell” and “demanding his day in court” in the Senate.

(more…)

As expected the House of Representatives has passed the USMCA trade agreement with an overwhelming 385 to 41 vote.  Pelosi’s political objective was to use USMCA to water down the toxic political environment created by her impeachment fiasco:

Also as expected, after passing the USMCA the House went into immediate recess for the Christmas holiday without any movement on the fraudulent impeachment articles.
In the time-frame between today and the return to the next congressional session in January, House lawyers will attempt to use the passage of the articles to support their background court cases: (1) McGahn forced deposition; (2) access to Mueller 6(e) grand jury information; and (3) possible access to Trump family financial records.
[PREDICTION for bookmark: Upon return in January Speaker Pelosi will refuse to allow impeached President Trump to deliver a State of the Union address in the House.]
(more…)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded to questions and concerns about the construct of a heavily partisan impeachment process and her refusal to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Highlighting the tenuous nature of the position now held by her party, a barely coherent Speaker Pelosi attempts to explain. As reporters ask questions, Pelosi becomes frustrated and tells the compliant media no more questions on impeachment will be entertained.
A day after impeaching the President, the Speaker of the House refuses to answer questions.   [Video prompted to presser portion at 11:50 – watch until 14:00]

.
As noted by Jay Sekulow, the House portion of the impeachment effort is finished.  The constitution does not outline rules, managers, and delivery methods. Once the House votes to impeach, they are finished.  The Senate has full control now.
The Senate can begin their trial phase at any time and call for presentation of articles by the House.  If no-one shows up, case dismissed.  Pelosi/House has no role in next phase.
(more…)

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…)

The entire House effort to impeach President Donald Trump has been a one-sided partisan effort; built upon a foundation of manipulation of process and dismissal of the minority rights throughout.
After the House voted along party lines, and in an act of stunning hubris, Speaker Pelosi now declares she will withhold the articles of impeachment until the Senate makes rules that she determines will be “fair” to the prosecution.  [Video at 09:00 prompted]

.

(more…)

Seemingly overlooked by most, when the House voted on the ‘rules of impeachment’ they removed the traditional appointment of House Managers to a later date.
Normally the House Managers would be appointed at the same time as the impeachment vote; however, by withholding the appointment House Democrats are indicating they will not immediately send articles of impeachment to the senate but will rather hold the articles as support for pending court cases toward their judicial authority.
A cunning Lawfare ploy.

As interested observers will note the House never voted to authorize the full judicial impeachment process; instead they voted to approve an inquiry into whether an impeachment should take place.  By not voting to authorize articles of impeachment the House never gained ‘judicial enforcement authority‘.  The absence of judicial authority is now working its way through the courts in various cases.
It appears the absence of appointing House impeachment managers; and the decision to withhold sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate; is now a specific design.
As the process appears to be unfolding, the Lawfare contracted lawyers representing the House: chief legal counsel Douglas Letter, Barry Berke, Norm Eisen and Daniel Goldman will now argue before the courts that all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for a pending judicial proceeding, a trial in the Senate.
(more…)

During a stunning interview last Sunday Devin Nunes called for the FISA court to be deconstructed.  In my opinion it was that statement, not the IG report, that spurred FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer to make a public order today.
Today, hours after Judge Collyer released her order, Devin Nunes responded to the review of the FISC by stating, accurately, Judge Collyer doth protest too much.
In this interview Devin Nunes outlines his February 2018 notification to the FISC about the specific fraud upon the court; and as a result of that (and a follow-up) notification, Nunes again takes the FISC to task for saying they were not aware.  Collyer was aware because Nunes told her.
Accepting the totality of the FISC obfuscation, HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes again calls for the dismantling of the FISA court process. WATCH:

.
Despite the media ignoring the scale of Nunes prior statements, this is not some just some arbitrary representatives’ opinion.  Nunes was Chairman of the HPSCI when he informed the court of the abuse; and he is currently the ranking member of the same committee.
It is not a signal flare from the ranking member of the HPSCI to call for a structural removal of FISC authority.  This is a nuclear blast from the primary person who previously guided the FISA re-authorization that permits the court’s existence.
(more…)

To fully understand today’s response order (pdf here) from FISA Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer to the DOJ/FBI, a little background context is needed.
As we noted, last weekend HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes dropped the gloves and essentially stated the DOJ/FBI were conspiring against U.S. citizens with the wilful participation of the FISA court.  This was a stunning, albeit unreported, development.
Nunes change in posture is important because he outlined that without severe corrective action the FISC should be dismantled.  Additionally, on the specific issues of fraudulent applications to the FISC, in February  2018 Devin Nunes and former Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte had prior communication to Judge Collyer with warnings.  Very strongly worded warnings and concerns.  So there’s a history on this exact issue.
In their prior communication Judge Collyer, representing the judicial branch, downplayed the warning of the legislative branch, and told Nunes and Goodlatte to work it out with the executive branch.   The developments over the FISA fraud now stand against that context.
Today, Judge Rosemary Collyer responds to the DOJ and FBI about the inspector general investigation and subsequent findings. [pdf here – and full embed below] Having read her writings, and understanding that everything FISC is classified, it is possible to see between the lines she writes.
Collyer outlines in her order how the DOJ-NSD and FBI reported issues to the FISC in October and November prior to the IG report release.  Essentially, Collyer implies the DOJ informed the court that additional FISA applications should now be considered unreliable as a result of the FBI Office of General Counsel compromise (Kevin Clinesmith):
(more…)