“In this lengthy interview with John Ratcliffe and Maria Bartiromo, the former Director of National Intelligence, the man who has likely seen every document that may have eventually ended up in Mar-a-Lago, is challenging the nature of the classified status of those documents. Ratcliffe does not believe the Mar-a-Lago documents are true national security documents, but rather documents that outline fraudulent ‘sources and methods used by the DOJ/FBI in their Trump targeting operation.

Keep in mind that as the DNI during 2020, Ratcliffe saw the documents that eventually became the material President Trump declassified and left with the DOJ to release after the Durham investigation was complete. If Ratcliffe’s suspicions are correct, and there is a more valid reason to support his suspicions than oppose them, then the entire construct of the DOJ-NSD operation to retrieve those documents from Mar-a-Lago is factually one big cover-up operation.

Ratcliffe suspects the documents are essentially the DOJ and FBI work products, including interviews with ‘sources’ like Igor Danchenko, from their fabricated case against President Trump. If accurate, the objective of the DOJ/FBI would be to avoid sunlight on their political targeting operation. This viewpoint makes sense when you consider the DOJ/FBI position that no one should ever be allowed to look at those documents, including the appointed Special Master in the case, Judge Raymond Dearie. WATCH:

(Conservative Treehouse, 9/19/2022)  (Archive)

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse)

Independent journalist Matt Taibbi has released the sixth installment after review of more Twitter File data [SEE HERE].  Keep in mind, the research group containing Mr. Taibbi are only seeing the consequences side of the content removal process.  What specifically happened in/around the portal of information flowing into Twitter HQ is a different division.  Taibbi et al are only seeing the consequences from the requests that entered the Twitter system.

The first section of Taibbi’s analysis is the most interesting.  Having tracked the issue for several years, I would modify some of the descriptive language Taibbi presents yet agree with the overall context of his presentation.

Taibbi begins by noting, “Twitter’s contact with the FBI was constant and pervasive, as if it were a subsidiary.”  I would safely take that a step further, yes there is a subsidiary relationship; however, as years of government involvement continued by 2016 Twitter became the subsidiary of DHS, not vice-versa.  This dynamic within the relationship explains some of the more curious elements that Taibbi struggles to fully understand.

Notice the timing of escalation by DHS/FBI: “The FBI’s social media-focused task force, known as FTIF, created in the wake of the 2016 election, swelled to 80 agents and corresponded with Twitter to identify alleged foreign influence and election tampering of all kinds.”

As we have noted from the lead into and out of the 2016 election, the surveillance state took action specifically to protect itself from President Trump.   This activity included the NSA, FISA court, FBI, DOJ-NSD, CIA, ODNI while specifically and purposefully enmeshing the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).

Protecting Washington DC from the risk President Trump represented was a whole of government approach.  The executive and legislative branches worked together and weaponized national security claims to involve the judicial branches in the effort.  In the aftermath of the 2016 election outcome, now we see social media being pulled further into the approach.

The next three paragraphs are key in this Taibbi outline:

8. Federal intelligence and law enforcement reach into Twitter included the Department of Homeland Security, which partnered with security contractors and think tanks to pressure Twitter to moderate content.

Highlight: “security contractors,” now where have we heard that before?  Yes, the same FBI contractor access to raw/bulk NSA metadata that was discovered being extracted in the height of the 2016 GOP nomination contest.   In the aftermath of the election, and in coordination with the Twitter context, now those same security contractors are part of the surveillance system generating actionable items.

9. It’s no secret the government analyzes bulk data for all sorts of purposes, everything from tracking terror suspects to making economic forecasts.

Here’s where Taibbi comes dangerously close to realizing the inflection point created by President Obama and AG Eric Holder.  Prior to the arrival of the Obama administration the bulk data was a process of collection by the NSA (while looking outward for threats and limited in review by 4th amendment protections) and then delivery to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for transfer to DHS and FBI in order to take action on anything flagged.

When the flagged data was transferred into and out of the ODNI, the constitutional and lawful processes around the 4th amendment needed to be applied.  That’s where the FISA court comes into play and applications for surveillance, that pass through the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), based on the intelligence data from the ODNI office, are put together.

The NSA was/is monitoring the raw data with a radar turned outward toward foreign entities.  When something is flagged, that data is then transferred to the ODNI and exits toward the Dept of Homeland Security.  The fourth amendment protection against unlawful search and seizure of private papers is supposed to apply when the data leaves ODNI.  Before the FBI can use anything, the DOJ-NSD has to get a warrant, either from a federal judge or the FISA Court depending on the issue.

This process was what Barack Obama and Eric Holder worked around as they created a quasi-constitutional surveillance system.  That’s where Taibbi’s next paragraph comes into play.  Remember, even though President Trump was in office, the system operators in the institutions were from the Obama-Holder era:

10. The #TwitterFiles show something new: agencies like the FBI and DHS regularly sending social media content to Twitter through multiple entry points, pre-flagged for moderation.

Security contractors were reviewing the public information pages, then transmitting results to DHS and FBI…. who would then use their portal connection into Twitter to make “pre-flagged” requests.   What type of requests?  Example:

This example is only on the subject of the 2020 election; however, you can see what bullet point #3 requests, “any location information associated with the accounts that Twitter would voluntarily provide.” 

Don’t get too hung up on the example, because it only references a priority of looking at the 2020 election.  Instead ask yourself the bigger question, what other priorities would be in the mind of political ideologues within DHS and FBI?   What other DHS tasks, DHS assignments and FBI operations would take place that would benefit from the networking between the government and social media?

In 2011 the DOJ was using IRS filings to conduct investigations of Americans.  That was what the entire IRS Tea Party scandal was really about.  It wasn’t the IRS wrongdoing that led to the class action settlement, it was the DOJ origination of a request for information from the IRS about the 501-c (3)(4) groups, specifically their “schedule B’ forms, that triggered the problem starting.

After the IRS issue surfaced publicly in 2012 the DOJ immediately dropped their use of the data that was contained on 21 CD-ROMS delivered by the IRS.

Aided by advances in technology, the Obama administration switched to surveillance via direct review of available metadata.  Social media platforms were enlisted as DHS partners under the auspices of ‘national security’, and suddenly there was a full-fledged surveillance state underway.

The exploitation of the FISA process and the exploitation of the social media partnership is all connected to the same surveillance effort.

Taibbi posits a question in paragraph 12, “An unanswered question: do agencies like FBI and DHS do in-house flagging work themselves, or farm it out? “You have to prove to me that inside the fucking government you can do any kind of massive data or AI search,” says one former intelligence officer.”  A question he previously answered when he talked about federal contractors.

The government doesn’t need to violate the constitution directly with unlawful searches and seizures.  The government can outsource that part to national security contractors.

What the government needs to do is collect all the data, then pay or contract someone else to search it based on the needs of the DHS, FBI, DOJ-NSD etc etc.

That domestic surveillance system is what President Obama and Eric Holder created.  That system is defended under the shield of ‘national security‘ as noted in the judicial ruling in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (Trump Mar-a-Lago case):

The remainder of the Matt Taibbi outline showcases how various organizations could also reach out to Twitter and request content removal.  Taibbi concludes, “what most people think of as the “deep state” is really a tangled collaboration of state agencies, private contractors, and (sometimes state-funded) NGOs. The lines become so blurred as to be meaningless. 

Indeed, those lines were erased Matt.  Indeed, they were.

Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; the institutions were already weaponized by the Patriot Act.  What Obama and Holder did was take the preexisting system and retool it, so the weapons of government only targeted one side of the political continuum.

This point is where many people understandably get confused.

Elevator Speech:

(1) The Patriot Act turned the intel surveillance radar from foreign searches for terrorists to domestic searches for terrorists.

(2) Obama/Biden then redefined what is a “terrorist” to include their political opposition.

(3) The DHS, ODNI, DOJ-NSD and FISC became the four pillars of this new surveillance system. Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government.

DEEP DIVE HERE

This is the scale of corrupt political compromise on both sides of the DC dynamic that we are up against.  Preserving this system is also what removing Donald Trump is all about.  The targeting of President Trump in order to preserve the system, the system that was weaponized during the Obama administration, is what the actions of the DOJ and FBI are all about.

What would powerful people in DC do to stop the American people from finding this out?

(Conservative Treehouse, 12/16/2022)  (Archive)

“Matt Taibbi [@mtaibbi] is a smart guy, he’ll get there.  I’m not sure why my gut says to trust him, but it does – and I do. Recently he’s been getting hit by the leftists who are asking why Taibbi is not looking at the Trump administration pressure on social media to control and manipulate public information [Twitter Here].

Taibbi has been hitting back against his detractors by saying, there’s no evidence of Trump doing that; yet there is massive evidence of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) contacting Twitter to do exactly that.

This is interesting to me and CTH readers because we outlined in real time what the SSCI and HPSCI were doing in order to promote the Trump-Russia conspiracy before and after the 2016 election.

What’s fascinating about this… is that the same people who are attacking Taibbi right now, are the same people who received and promoted the propaganda from the SSCI (Burr and Warner) in addition to the HPSCI (Schiff and Swalwell).

In essence, the ancillary media attack hounds are attacking Taibbi because at the end of the research trail Taibbi is following he will find the same names of the ancillary media who are attacking him.

[SEE SHORT THREAD HERE]

In my opinion, Taibbi is on the right trail in following the SSCI and HPSCI manipulation of the social media platforms, specifically Twitter.  In addition to the SSCI creating the structure that supports the intelligence weaponization by DHS and FBI, Senate Intel Chair Richard Burr and then Senate Intel Vice-Chair Mark Warner are at the epicenter of it.

I know I sound like a broken record on this, but it’s been true since the outset of my own research discoveries of the issue four years ago.  The entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative couldn’t exist without the SSCI participating in it.   This is why I have talked and written so much about it.

James Wolfe (Credit: public domain)

Factually, and I say this with no compunction for attribution, if you want to tell the public the story of the larger issue, the absolute best starting point is how SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner told SSCI Security Director James Wolfe to leak the Carter Page FISA application to then Politico journalist Ali Watkins.   It’s an easy story to outline because there is ample evidence to highlight it, including open admissions by the DOJ and FBI (in documented court records) that the leak event on March 17, 2017, took place.

That week in mid-March, 2017, when Mark Warner leaked the Page FISA application followed two days later by James Comey testifying to congress (March 20th), was/is the most openly documented evidence-based story that leads to everything that follows.

On March 17, 2017, Senator Mark Warner leaked the FISA in order to stimulate the media to support the demand for a Trump-Russia special counsel.  On March 20, 2017, holding the exact same motive, FBI Director James Comey first made the public admission that President Donald Trump was under FBI investigation for the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy.   Senator Warner and Director Comey held the exact same motive.

Everything done by the SSCI before and after that mid-March event, touches everything before and after the special counsel was appointed.  It’s like a fulcrum point that creates massive tentacles into the entire apparatus of the effort by the legislative branch, the executive branch, the intelligence community and the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel to cover it up.

Expose that moment on March 17, 2017, and the entire house of cards built by Weissmann/Mueller and the DC media apparatus collapses.

There is not another single moment during the entire arc of the Trump-Russia madness, that creates the inflection point as well as the March 17, 2017, leak.  EXAMPLE:

(Source)

Keep cheering on Matt Taibbi.  Keep supporting him as he follows this trail.  Yes, you know where it ends, but you are a select rare few who have followed this story.  Taibbi can blow it wide open if he continues.

Additionally, remember and understand that the entirety of the media apparatus was in on this scheme.

Every single outlet promoted the narrative that was collectively pushed by Senator Mark Warner, Director James Comey, the corrupt intelligence apparatus and the Robert Mueller special counsel.  They are all opposed to Taibbi following this trail.

(Conservative Treehouse, 2/20/2023)  (Archive)

“Ugh, it makes me sick to see these schemes as they are constructed and yet feel helpless to stop them from organizing.  Remember which media outlets push the PR campaigns of the U.S. Govt.  (1) CNN drives Dept of State; (2) Washington Post drives CIA; and (3) NYT/Politico advance the interests of the domestic intelligence apparatus.

With that in mind, here comes the Intelligence Community laying the groundwork for reauthorization of the FISA-702 surveillance system on American citizens.

They are so damned transparent in their agenda, the stenographers have even dropped “FISA,” the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as the term within the construct.  Now they are just calling it “702 reauthorization.”

(VIA POLITICO) – The intelligence community has a critical congressional ally in its bid to reauthorize a sweeping warrantless surveillance program. However, even he thinks its officials aren’t making a convincing enough case.

“One of the things the community’s got to do a better job of is explaining, in practical non-classified terms, how valuable this tool is,” Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) said in a recent brief interview. “And they’ve not done that as well as they should.”

Warner sits at the heart of what will be a months-long, knockout debate about whether to reauthorize the warrantless surveillance program, known as Section 702, by the end-of-year deadline. The program is designed to gather the electronic communications of foreigners abroad, but has the potential to sweep up those of Americans.

The Virginian, who argues continuing the program in some form is essential but is open to changes, will have his work cut out for him. Influential and newly emboldened House Republicans have made it clear they won’t let Section 702 stay alive without significant changes — if they support reauthorization at all — amid an all-time-low relationship with the Justice Department and the FBI.

And the intelligence community can also count Section 702 critics among House Democrats and senators in both parties, many of whom believe this is their best chance to force more limits on the program. (read more)

As most people are now aware, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) sits at the epicenter of how the surveillance state is weaponized against American citizens.  It is the SSCI who helped create the surveillance network, and it is the SSCI who now seek to defend the unconstitutional system they have created.

Pretenses are being dropped, and you will note how in this reauthorization schedule they are dropping “foreign” communication with American citizens, as a limitation on the authority they have already usurped.  Yes, it is factually true the ‘foreign’ aspect was always a ruse, a false premise, that granted the Dept of Justice, National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and FBI legal authority to conduct intrusive Title-1 surveillance on any American citizen.

Well beyond the “cell phone metadata,” in the era of your portable transponder having internet and social media connection, just about everyone has metadata connected to a foreign person or entity.  Use the Twitter app on your phone, you are connected to foreign entities.  Use Instagram or Facebook, WhatsApp or Telegram, same/same/same/same.

TicTok? Fughetaboudit.  The auspices of only looking at U.S. persons engaged in foreign contacts is totally moot.

The “702 authorities,” which is an innocuous term for a “U.S. Person“, permit DHS, DOJ, FBI and any national security apparatchik to open up your data and check you out. This is the reality of the modern era.  This total surveillance reauthorization is what the SSCI wants to permit.  It must be stopped completely.  It cannot be “reformed.”

4th Amendment – “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” the United States Constitution, or you are not.

Either you are secure from federal search of your “private papers,” as outlined in– 

There is no aspect of this “702” nonsense, where a secret court grants a secret authorization, to engage in secret surveillance, by some secret entity of government – which might be a contractor, just to “see if” you might be doing something suspicious, or against the interests of the federal government.  The premise behind “702” reauthorization is unconstitutional. (Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 3/6/2023)  (Archive)

Much has been made of the events of January 6, 2021, and with the latest broadcast of CCTV video from inside the Capitol Hill complex, more questions have been raised.

Within the questions: the FBI and government apparatus had advanced knowledge of the scale of the J6 mall assembly yet doing nothing?  Why were the Capitol Hill police never informed of the FBI concerns?  Why didn’t House Speaker Nancy Pelosi secure the Capitol Hill complex, and why did she deny the request by President Trump to call up the national guard for security support?  Why did the FBI have agent provocateurs in the crowd, seemingly stimulating rage within a peaceful crowd to enter the Capitol building?  There have always been these nagging questions around ‘why’?

Long time CTH reader “Regitiger” has spent a great deal of time reviewing the entire process, looking at the granular timeline and then overlaying the bigger picture of the constitutional and parliamentary process itself.  What follows below is a brilliant analysis of the federal government motive to create a J6 crisis that permitted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to trigger an emergency session and avoid the 2020 election certification challenges.

Those congressional floor challenges, known and anticipated well in advance of the morning of January 6, 2021, would have formed a legal and constitutional basis for ‘standing’ in judicial challenges that would have eventually reached the Supreme Court.  The certification during “emergency session” eliminated the problem for Washington DC.

Regitiger explains below, only edited by me for clarity and context:

I think most, not all, but a large number of people, are totally missing what happened; and why this happened on Jan 6th.  I am going to try my best to outline the events that day, blast past the commonly held assumptions and get right down to the core corruption.

I will present this as a series of questions and answers.

♦ Q1: How do you prevent congress from delaying the certification of state electoral votes?

A: It requires a crisis. A crisis that creates an “emergency” …An “emergency” that invokes special house rules.

FACTS: Remember carefully, focus please. Just moments, literally 3 minutes before two representatives issued a vote for motions to suspend the certification, the House members were “informed” by capitol police and other “agents” that a protest was about to breach the chambers. It was at this time that key people: Pence, Pelosi, Schumer, Mcconnell can be seen being walked out and escorted from the chamber. This effectively halted the Entire Chamber Process.

♦ Q2: Why was it necessary to halt the chamber process?

A: The crisis was created to eliminate the motion challenges to halt the certification and to begin voting to look into voting irregularities and fraud

FACTS: The two motions were completely legal and constitutional under at least two constitutionally recognized procedures… procedures that would REQUIRE the house to pause the certification and then vote to determine whether the motions of suspend could move forward.

♦ Q3: What was so important to refuse this motion and the subsequent votes to suspend the electoral certification?

A: It was important to remove that process entirely and continue the fraud and certify the fraud with no detractors on record. This effectively gives no standing for a SCOTUS ruling appeal!  Understand this.  If those two motions, even just one had successfully been voted EVEN IF THE MOTIONS were DENIED IN VOTE, this gives those who presented them with STANDING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL ARGUMENT BEFORE SCOTUS. 

♦ Q4: Could this have been done some other way other than creating a crisis/protest?

A: Unlikely. In order to prevent those two motions, requires that speaker of the house, minority leaders, and the president of the congress (vice president of the United States: Pence), to NOT BE PRESENT IN THE CHAMBERS.

Once the capitol police and other “law enforcements agents” informed the speaker and these three other individuals, Pelosi UNILATERALLY UNDER EMERGENCY RULES, suspended the business of the congress. This protest was necessary. The crisis was created because there is no other way to suspend the business of certification UNILATERALLY. By creating a crisis invokes emergency procedures. No other circumstances other than war or mass simultaneous explosive diarrhea can create such unilateral speaker delivered suspension of the certification.

♦ Q5: Why did the motions, once that the speaker RECONVENED congress, move forward back again to the floor for votes? Why were members disallowed to even consider putting forward ANY motions to the floor in when the chamber business was reopened?

A: The Speaker initiated the NEW sessions under special emergency rules. These rules abandon and make it clear that the ONLY purpose of the new session was to EXPEDITE the certification and dismiss all prior regular session procedural rules. This is why those two motions to table votes to consider a debate and pause to the certifications of state vote electors never happened later that evening when the house business was reconvened!

♦ Q6: Other than new rules, emergency rules, what other peculiar things occurred when the speaker reconvened?

A: Members were allowed to “vote” in proxy, remotely, not being present.  You can use your imagination about what conditions were placed on ALL members during this time to prevent anyone from “getting out of line”.

Also clearly, it was at THIS NEW SESSION that VP Pence, President of Congress, would also have no ability to even consider pausing the electoral certification, because there were no motions of disagreements on the matter. So, in a technical legal claim, he is correct that he had no constitutional authority to address any issues of fraud or doubts about electoral irregularities. But this completely dismisses the FACT that congress created rules in this crisis/emergency that never allowed them to be floored!

Understand what happened in Jan 6, 2021.  Don’t get hung up on Viking impostors, stolen Pelosi computers, podium heists, and complicit capitol police. Understand the process and what happened and what WAS NOT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.

This was a coup….it was a very organized and carefully planned coup. VP Pence without a doubt as well as most members of the house were quite aware of how the certification was going to be MANAGED.  It would require new rules to prevent the debate clause from occurring!  New rules that ONLY AN EMERGENCY CRISIS COULD CREATE! So, they created an emergency.

•NOTED: I understand why many people have great interest in debunking the j6 event. I get that. I think it is important to dissect and examine the events of that day but please, step back and understand WHY these things happened. Examine the chain of events in congress.  Why those two motions that would have at least paused the certification THAT WOULD GIVE VP PENCE THE CONSTITUTIONALLY RECOGNIZED POWER TO MOVE TO SUSPEND THE ELECTORAL CERTIFICATION AND THEN EXAMINE THE IRREGULARITIES AND CLAIMS OF FRAUD!

At the very center of this coup stands Mike Pence, the same individual who also spoiled President Trump’s first opportunities in the earlies hours of his Presidency just 4 years prior, when he created and facilitated the removal of Lt General Michael Flynn. I will not spend much time on this thread explaining why Lt Gen Flynn was so important to President Trump and why the IC was so afraid he would have advisory power to the President. That I will leave for another day, another time. But understand this clearly: MIKE PENCE WAS AND IS WORKING FOR THE MOST CORRUPT CRIMINAL TREASONOUS PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT.

•PRO TIP: If you really want to get a true understanding of this matter videos of protesters walking in the capitol is not going to address them. Actual video and timeline records of events and the specific actions taken by the speaker just moments before TWO MAJOR ELECTORAL ALTERING MOTIONS WERE ABOUT TO BE FLOORED.

This crisis was developed just in time with a precise coordination to prevent those two motions to be entered into the chamber record. The two motions do not exist. The emergency powers established in the new session made sure they never could be entered. The emergency powers could never happen without a crisis.

God Bless America!”

[link]

Note from Author: “I started this effort years ago.  To date, no one and I mean no one has replied.  It’s as if everyone that can expose it that has a larger platform is either disinterested or suspiciously withdrawn from the issue.  I made several comments about this over the years right here at CTH, on article threads that are relevant to the topic.

I was watching the certification live that day. I recorded it ALL on every channel. I was doing this because no matter what happened that day, I KNEW IT WOULD BE A PROFOUND AND SIGNIFICANT EVENT TO REMEMBER. I never in my wildest imagination (and I have a pretty vivid imagination, always have), expected to see the unmistakable perfectly timed “coincidences” that occurred.

One member raises a motion (with another in waiting for his turn) those two motions were well known and advertised. These were motions to vote for a pause in the certification to examine electoral vote fraud and irregularities. I can’t speak to the veracity and substance of those motions. They were never allowed to even be floored. it was at that exact moment that the house chambers were suspended and 4 of the key members, Pence, Pelosi, Schumer and McConnell were escorted OUT right after initiating the end of the session.

Effectively, this resulted in that motion never being floored at all.  Then, when reconvened under special emergency rules, inexplicably those two motions (and perhaps more – we will never know – or will we?) were not even attempted to be motioned. That was not just peculiar to me.

It all started to make more sense when I did some study on constitutional law AND THE HISTORY of specific special authorities given to president of the congress, Pence in this case. Not only did he have the authority and power to suspend the certification, but the duty to address the motion in the same sense that it becomes vital to the debate clause. (Read more: Conservative Treehouse/Regitiger, 3/12/2023)  (Archive)

If you are deep in the political research weeds about the weaponization of government, there is a letter from lawyers representing President Trump to the chair of the House Intel Committee that is very interesting [pdf available here].

The letter is written to HPSCI Chair Mike Turner and copied to the other seven members of the gang-of-eight in the Senate and House.  The letter outlines the details of the documents that became the contested issue between the DOJ-National Security Division (‘NSD’, important distinction), specifically a DOJ-NSD official named Jay Bratt, and the attorney for President Trump, Mr. Evan Corcoran.

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse)

The letter is fascinating because it outlines how the process of moving documents from the White House was weaponized by a politically motivated National Archives and Records Administration (“NARA”), and the letter also gives fulsome context to the types of “classified materials” that have been insanely over emphasized by media.

[…] “Tim Parlatore and Jim Trusty, two of the undersigned counsel for President Trump, reviewed all 15 boxes at NARA earlier this year and based on that review, it is clear to us what happened. The boxes contain all manner of documents from the White House, are loosely grouped by date, and include newspapers, magazines, notes, letters, and daily schedules. Following its review of the materials, NARA inserted placeholder pages where it had removed documents with classification markings. That allowed Messrs. Parlatore and Trusty to discern what the documents were, as well as what other materials in the boxes were in the proximity of the marked documents when the White House staff packed them. The vast majority of the placeholder inserts refer to briefings for phone calls with foreign leaders that were located near the schedule for those calls.”  (page 3, pdf link)

Additionally, get this part…  despite the standard process that has been in place for the prior four administrations, the NARA refused to participate in the collection of any documents from the White House during the transition phase following the November 2020 election.

The NARA refused to assist in the collection of the Trump records for national archive holding and review, and then the NARA triggered a sequence of events that led to the DOJ using a reference from the NARA, to weaponize a process they refused to engage in.  The NARA refused to do their specialized bureaucratic job, and then the NARA used what they defined as an incomplete job as a reason to refer the outcome to the DOJ.   The details are quite interesting.

The letter details how the DOJ-NSD then weaponized the process, fought with the FBI investigative and supervisory agents who were saying Trump was doing nothing wrong, and then culminating in a documented lie to the Florida magistrate, in order to get a politically motivated search warrant.

The DOJ will not release the documents they used to convince the judge to obtain the warrant.  Additionally, the DOJ will not release a list of the documents, or even describe the documents, they later claimed are classified.   To this date, the Trump defense team is being told President Trump held classified documents, yet the DOJ will not describe to the lawyers who represent President Trump, what those classified documents are.

I strongly urge anyone interested to read the 10-page letter.  It is a key part of the puzzle being explained and outlined.

(Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 4/27/2023)  (Archive)

Everything that preceded the 2020 federal election was a complex system of control by a network of ideologues, federal agencies, allies in the private sector, financial stakeholders and corrupt interests all working toward a common goal.  There’s no need to go through the background of how the election was manipulated and how the government and private sector, specifically social media, worked to influence the 2020 outcome because you have all seen it.

Whether it was local election officials working to control outcomes, federal agencies working to support them (CISA, FBI, DHS), financial interests working to fund them (Zuckerberg et al), or social media platforms controlling the visible content and discussion (Twitter Files, Google, Facebook etc.), the objective was all the same.  It was a massive one-sided operation against the freewill of the American voter.

In the aftermath of the 2020 election, those same system operators, govt officials, corporate media, private sector groups and social media platforms then circled the wagons to scatter the evidence of their conduct.  If you questioned anything you were a threat.  That’s the context to the dynamic that unfolded.

Lawfare operatives joined forces with Democrat staffers, and allies in social media platforms all worked in concert to target the voices of anyone who would rise in opposition to the corruption that was stunningly clear in the outcome of the election process.  Corporate media then labeled, isolated, ridiculed and marginalized anyone who dared to point out the obvious.

When AG Merrick Garland says this of January 6, 2021: (…) “the Justice Department has conducted one of the largest, most complex, and most resource-intensive investigations in our history. We have worked to analyze massive amounts of physical and digital data. We have recovered devices, decrypted electronic messages, triangulated phones, and pored through tens of thousands of hours of video. We have also benefited from tens of thousands of tips we received from the public. Following these digital and physical footprints, we were able to identify hundreds of people.” {link} The targeting operation needs context.

Do you remember on April 27th when DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz recently said, “more than 3.4 million search queries into the NSA database took place between Dec. 1st, 2020 and Nov. 30th, 2021, by government officials and/or contractors working on behalf of the federal government.”  The result was “more than 1 million searches of private documents and communication of Americans that were illegal and non-compliant,” and over “10,000 federal employees have access to that database.” {OIG Testimony}.

Put the statement from Garland together with the statement from Horowitz, and you get an understanding of what was done.

Hundreds of stakeholders in the Lawfare network joined forces with hundreds of people who became staff researchers for a weaponized Congress.  Hundreds more social media background agents then poured thousands of hours into feeding private information to the DOJ, FBI, J6 Committee and all of their hired staff working on the project.

How do I know?

I was one of their targets.

Before telling the rest of the story, some background is needed.

I am well versed in the ways of the administrative state and the corrupt systems, institutions and silos that make up our weaponized government. I can (a) see them; (b) predict their activity; and (c) know where their traps and operations are located.

Traveling the deep investigative weeds of the administrative state eventually gives you a set of skills.  When people ask how the outlines on this website can seem so far ahead of the sunlight that eventually falls upon the outlined corruption, this is essentially why.  When you take these skills on the road, you learn to be a free-range scout, and after a long while you learn how to track the activity.

When I was outlining how the Fourth Branch of Government works and/or Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop and the DHS system operating inside it, I wasn’t shooting from the hip. However, people will always seek to dismiss the uncomfortable truth.

Sometimes you just have to wait for the evidence you know exists to surface, or for a situation to unfold that is driven by a self-fulfilling prophecy. The bizarre CTH predictions turn out to be the truth of the issue because they are based on the factual evidence of the issue.

That level of how the system works came in very handy when I received this subpoena from Chairman Bennie Thompson and the J6 Committee.  Warning, things are about to get very uncomfortable if you don’t accept the scale of corruption that exists.

Pay attention to the red box on the page shown. This is essentially the probable cause that justifies the subpoena itself.  I have redacted a name in the box for reasons you will see that follow.

I was never in Washington DC on January 6, 2021, nor did I work with or communicate with anyone who was involved in any of the activities that are subject to the J6 committee investigative authority.

I’m going to skip a lot of background noise, irrelevant legal stuff, jurisdictional issues, discoveries from discussions with lawyers and the experience gained in association with this ridiculous subpoena.  I am going to focus on the biggest story within it.

Sticking to the information in the Red Box above, notice how the J6 committee has evidence, “public-source information and documents on file”, showing my participation, communication, and contact with people and technology that are material interests to the committee.

Here’s the kicker…. I had no clue what the hell they were talking about.  There’s not a single aspect of their outline that I had any knowledge or connection of.

I had no idea what Zello was. I had no idea who 1% watchdog might be. I had never heard of “Stop the Steal J6” or associated “channel.”  I had never heard of the person redacted, and I had never communicated with any Oath Keeper, any communication system, or platform, or anyone or anything – nothing – that is outlined in that subpoena.

Those points of evidence outlined in the subpoena had no connection to me at all.

The subpoena might as well have been asking me to appear in Michigan because my Red Ferrari was involved in a hit and run accident, during my trip to Detroit.  I don’t own a Ferrari; I have never been to Michigan; I certainly never had an accident; I wasn’t on a trip and have never visited Detroit.  The entire construct of their probable cause for the subpoena was silly. Complete and utter nonsense.

That said, how could there be “public records” and “documentary” evidence of something that never happened?

At first, I thought this was some silly case of mistaken identity and they just sent a subpoena to the wrong person.  However, the investigators were adamant the evidence existed, and the need for testimony was required.

After taking advice from several smart people, and after discovering the costs associated with just the reply to the committee and/or representation therein; suddenly I realized there might be more value for me in this subpoena than the committee.  After all, how can there be public-records and documents that I own a red Ferrari and went to Michigan when I don’t and never did.

After several back and forths I discovered, through their admissions of their own research, and through documents they extracted as an outcome of their tasks to prove the merit of their claims, that someone *inside* Twitter had created a fictitious identity of me associated with the networks and communications as the investigators described them.

Think about what was discovered here.

Someone inside the Twitter platform, an employee of Twitter, had made a decision to target me. As a result: (a) they had been doing this for a long time with a specific goal in mind; and (b) they created an elaborate trail of background activity and identity that was entirely fabricated.

Eventually, my assigned investigative unit admitted this.

Once, the federal investigators realized what took place they wanted to get rid of me -and my snark filled curiosity- with great urgency.

They also had an ‘oh shit’ moment, when they contemplated everything, including what they had revealed to me from the outset of my contact, now several months prior.

What I discovered in this experience was that DHS, and by extension DOJ/FBI and the January 6 investigators, had direct administrative level backdoors into all social media platforms.

Overlay the Twitter files now, and then expand your thinking….

In their quest to prove that I owned a Red Ferrari, traveled to Michigan and had a hit-and-run accident, these investigators outlined to me how the United States Government, through their DHS authority, has employees, agents and contractors with open portals into all social media platforms.

Yes, the federal government is inside the mechanics of the systems (Twitter, Facebook, Meta, Instagram, Google, YouTube, WhatsApp, Zello, etc) and they have administrative access in real time to monitor, review, extract and evaluate everything, soup-to-nuts.

It was only because the investigators and forensic data knuckleheads have these portals, that they were able to locate the source of the fabricated evidence they were originally attributing to me.  This was an investigative process and research discovery being conducted in the data processing systems of Twitter in real time as they questioned me.

Once they realized what had taken place, and as soon as I started asking how they were making these admissions (now carrying an apologetic certainty), suddenly the investigators wanted no further contact or communication with me.  You’re good, whoopsie daisy, our bad, sorry.

Now, take some time to fully digest and absorb what I have just shared.

The U.S. government is worried about TikTok, because U.S. citizen data might be extracted?

Meanwhile, the U.S. government, at a fully unrestricted administrative level, is inside Twitter, Facebook, Meta, Insta, YouTube etc., running amok and extracting anything – including private messages… and they’re somehow worried about protecting us from TikTok data collection.  Think about it.

(Conservative Treehouse, 5/4/2023)  (Archive)

Christopher Wray (Credit: Andrew Harnik/The Associated Press)

During all of my research and discoveries about the DOJ and FBI, the one constant from everyone with a specific and granular knowledge of how the silo information operations are conducted is that the FBI is comprehensively and institutionally corrupt at every level.

Let us not pretend with each other. As an outcome of President Obama and Eric Holder’s specific actions, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was weaponized (top to bottom) as an enforcement mechanism to protect the interests of the DC democrats.   Top to bottom the FBI is a fully weaponized federal police agency with the primary mission to target political opposition.  In the modern political era, this is the sole purpose of the FBI – nothing more, nothing less.

Congress has specific knowledge of an investigative document inside the FBI known as an FD-1023.  The FD-1023 details the evidence delivered by confidential human sources to investigators.  The specific FD-1023 is a multi-page document outlining the entire bribery scheme used by Joe Biden and his family.  The person who helped detail the FD-1023 documents has informed Congress of its existence.

Because this unclassified FD-1023 outlines the details of how Joe Biden used his office to accept bribes from foreign officials, the FBI is refusing to release it. Instead, the FBI is telling Congress they have no right to see it [LETTER to Congress Here].

The FBI is claiming that reports from Confidential Human Sources (CHSs) cannot be released, regardless of classification status.  Further, what you will note in the claims of the FBI and DOJ is essentially what we have been talking about on these pages for several years.  Information is intentionally put into institutional silos that keep the information hidden and protected.  The silo use is everywhere in Washington DC.

WASHINGTON DC – House Oversight: […] “It’s clear from the FBI’s response that the unclassified record the Oversight Committee subpoenaed exists, but they are refusing to provide it to the Committee. We’ve asked the FBI to not only provide this record, but to also inform us what it did to investigate these allegations. The FBI has failed to do both. The FBI’s position is ‘trust, but you aren’t allowed to verify.’ That is unacceptable. We plan to follow up with the FBI and expect compliance with the subpoena,” said Chairman Comer.

“While the FBI has failed to produce the specific document by the subpoena deadline, their offer to provide an accommodation process in response to our legitimate request indicates the document is real. So the question remains, what did the FBI do to investigate very serious allegations from an apparent trusted FBI source implicating then-Vice President Biden? Today’s letter from the FBI raises additional questions, including whether the FBI has an open investigation based on these allegations. The American people pay the FBI’s salaries, and they’re entitled to a fulsome response,” Senator Grassley said.

Based on whistleblower disclosures, the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation possess an unclassified FD-1023 form that describes an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions. It has been alleged that the document includes a precise description of how the alleged criminal scheme was employed as well as its purpose. (read more)

The only way through this issue is to defund and dismantle the FBI. (Conservative Treehouse, 5/10/2023)  (Archive)

Some House Republicans Call for Holding FBI Director in Contempt of Congress for Failing to Comply With Subpoena

I’m going to go into the deep weeds on this story, because many people are missing a key facet.  The names behind the Trump targeting operation are included, along with citations for independent checks by House congressional investigators.

Inside the recently released report by John Durham [CITATION], the special counsel outlines how former FBI Director James Comey was intimately involved in the creation of the Carter Page FISA application.  Durham notes that Comey kept asking the DOJ National Security Division and FBI counterintelligence investigators, “Where’s the FISA, we need the FISA.”  However, John Durham never interviewed James Comey or Andrew McCabe.  The former FBI Director and Deputy refused to cooperate or give testimony to John Durham.  So, how did John Durham have details about the demands of Comey?

The answer is found in the footnotes.  Durham reviewed transcripts of interviews given by Andrew McCabe to the Office of the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, who previously investigated FBI conduct in the origin of the Carter Page FISA.  Durham pulled quotes from that transcript. [Footnote #1207, page 199 – Durham Report]

♦QUESTION: If Andrew McCabe gave testimony to the OIG about the motives and impetus of FBI Director James Comey in pushing for the Carter Page FISA application, why did the OIG report never outline those transcribed interviews?  Why was the interview transcript never included in the 2019 OIG report?

(NOTE to Congress.  Now that you know a transcribed interview of Andrew McCabe exists in the OIG office, request the transcription and release it to the public.)

Let me answer those questions without the customary pretending from the DC professional political class.  The short version is that OIG Michael Horowitz was trying to protect the DOJ and FBI. The longer version is a coverup that includes Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr and yes, John Durham.  I will share that story below.

“Where’s the FISA?  We need the FISA?” ~ James Comey

The DOJ-NSD and FBI CoIntel needed to find a safe and legal way to spy on the Trump campaign. The 2016 FISA Title 1 surveillance of former FBI employee Carter Page became the fraudulent justification for that intent.

Because “FISA Title I” surveillance authority against a U.S. citizen is so serious (the U.S. government is essentially calling the target a spy), only a few people are authorized to even apply for such surveillance warrants.  One of the four people authorized to make such a Search Warrant request is the Asst. Attorney General as head of the National Security Division of the DOJ.

In September and October of 2016, at the same time the DOJ was putting the finishing touches on the FISA Court application to be used against Carter Page, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin resigned as head of the DOJ-NSD. [CITATION] Did Carlin resign in protest or fear?

Here’s context:

Carter Page was used as a UCE (FBI undercover employee), responsible for the bust of a high-level Russian agent in 2013 – and remained a UCE – throughout the court case of Evgeny Buryakov, a Russian citizen who U.S. prosecutors say posed as a banker while participating in a Cold War-style spy ring. [CITATION]

Carter Page was an FBI undercover source for the FBI UP TO May of 2016.   How was it possible that on October 21st, 2016, Carter Page is put under a FISA Title 1 surveillance warrant as an alleged Russian agent?  Conclusion: Carter Page wasn’t a Russian agent. The DOJ National Security Division and the FBI Counterintelligence Division knew he wasn’t.

In order to manufacture the justification for the Carter Page FISA warrant, the DOJ-NSD and the FBI flat-out lied to the FISA Court.  Remember, IG Horowitz said there was no ‘Woods File’ in the Carter Page FISA application. Instead of the required section substantiating and citing all the claims in the application, the FBI used the Chris Steele Dossier.

However, as to the motive of John Carlin resigning before the application was completed and submitted, we look back to the March 2016 DOJ Press Release of the guilty pleading in the Evgeny Buryakov case as announced from the New York office:

…”Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and John P. Carlin, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, announced”…  (link)

DOJ-NSD head John Carlin obviously could not submit a FISA application against Carter Page, accusing him of being an “agent of a foreign government,” when just a few months earlier he used Carter Page as a witness and FBI UCE source in the case against Buryakov.

As James Comey is demanding that Andrew McCabe and his FBI counterintelligence agents get the FISA warrant, likely an ass covering necessity, the person responsible to get the warrant from the court, John Carlin, quits the DOJ.  Considering all the facets outlined above, this cannot be accidental.

Here’s where it gets SERIOUSLY sketchy.

The next in line person, who can fulfill the DOJ/FBI goal of getting the fraudulent application through the FISA court, is Mary McCord.  Put into the position as Acting Asst. Attorney General for the National Security Division, the job of submitting the FISA application now falls upon Mary McCord.

On October 21, 2016, When the FISA application was finally submitted, signed by DAG Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey, it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant.

At the time the Carter Page application was filed (October 21, 2016), Mary McCord’s chief legal counsel inside the office was a DOJ-NSD lawyer named Michael Atkinson.  In his role as the legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, it was Atkinson’s job to review and audit all FISA applications submitted from inside the DOJ.  Essentially, Atkinson was the DOJ internal compliance officer in charge of making sure all FISA applications were correctly assembled and documented.

Obviously, with the background and context of the entirely fraudulent Carter Page FISA application, a government surveillance warrant using a Clinton-funded political opposition research file known as the Steele Dossier to support the warrant, both Mary McCord and Michael Atkinson would know they were directly involved in an intentional effort to weaponize the mechanisms of the justice department against a political candidate.

While James Comey and Sally Yates’ signatures were on the FISA application falsely vouching for it, the attestations of legal compliance fall upon DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord and her top legal advisor Michael Atkinson.  McCord and Atkinson are doing, in October of 2016, what former DOJ-NSD head John Carlin refused to do.

WATCH WHAT COMES NEXT: Mary McCord then resigns from her position in the DOJ, and Michael Atkinson is left, as lawyer for the DOJ-NSD, to become Inspector General of the Intelligence Community.

♦ The Impeachment Effort – Do you remember how the impeachment effort against President Donald Trump was created?  Do you remember Alexander Vindman, the claims about Ukraine; the statements of hearing from a CIA whistleblower about the content of a phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky?

When the anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint was filed against President Trump for the issues of the Ukraine call with President Zelensky, the Intelligence Community Inspector General had to change the rules for the complaint to allow an anonymous submission.  Prior to this change, all intelligence whistleblowers had to put their name on the complaint.  It was this 2019 IGIC who changed the rules.

Who was the Intelligence Community Inspector General?  Michael Atkinson.

When ICIG Michael Atkinson turned over the newly authorized anonymous whistleblower complaint to the joint House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee (Schiff and Nadler chairs), who did Michael Atkinson give the complaint to?  Mary McCord.

Yes, after she left main justice, Mary McCord took the job of working for Chairman Jerry Nadler and Chairman Adam Schiff as the chief legal advisor inside the investigation that led to the construction of articles of impeachment.   As a consequence, Mary McCord received the newly permitted anonymous whistleblower complaint from her old office colleague Michael Atkinson.

Can you see how Atkinson and McCord are working together, both connected to the fraud behind the false FISA application used in the Trump-Russia narrative in 2016 and 2017, now both working together on a 2019 impeachment effort against President Trump holding an identical motive?  Can you see the stunning conflicts of interest and the coordination?

The weaponized FISA surveillance of the Trump administration doesn’t exist without Mary McCord and Michael Atkinson creating the surveillance mechanism.  The weaponized impeachment origin doesn’t exist without McCord – now in congress working for Nadler/Schiff – and Atkinson changing rules as CIA Inspector General, to create the baseline of a fraudulent whistleblower complaint.   Can you see it? 

But wait…. It gets worse.

♦ Chief Justice John Roberts – As if things could not possibly be more corrupt, now we have the construct of Atkinson and McCord forming the predicate for the impeachment effort.  To wit, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts now becomes the presiding judge over the impeachment trial of President Trump.

Mary McCord is married to a fellow traveler named Sheldon L. Snook.

From 2014 though 2020, not coincidentally the timeline of the Trump targeting and administration in office, Mary McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook, was the special assistant to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s counselor. [CITATION]

As noted by the Washington Post in discussing both McCord and Snook, “The counselor’s office advises the chief justice not only on the management and budget of the Supreme Court but also on his interactions with the executive and legislative branches, along with numerous other public roles in which Roberts serves.” [CITATION]

From 2014 through 2020, Sheldon Snook was responsible for running the office of the lawyer legally advising and counseling John Roberts.

Let me put this another way.  The most important guy in the judicial branch, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, has a lawyer to advise and construct the responsibilities of the SCOTUS chief judge, which includes the construct of the FISA court and appointment of judges therein.

As Chief Justice, John Roberts is in charge of everything to do with the FISA court.  The guy running the office of the lawyer doing the counseling of Roberts, is Mary McCord’s husband.

Mary McCord, knowingly and with specific intent, lied to the FISA court to support the FBI targeting of Trump.  Mary McCord’s husband runs the office which would intercept any communication from the FISA court to the Chief Justice if the FISC had any concerns about the false FBI application.  See the problem?

♦ SUMMARY – Now, we go back to where we came in.

Why did the Office of the Inspector General never publish the interview transcript about Andrew McCabe talking about how desperate FBI Director James Comey was to get a FISA warrant?

Why did John Durham never publish those same interview transcripts, but instead simply referenced the existence of the transcript in a footnote?

Follow these questions to their logical conclusion, and you will discover that all of the participants including Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr, James Baker, Dana Boente, Michael Horowitz and John Durham are trying to protect bureaucrats, who did criminal acts, and preserve institutions from collapse that sunlight would create.

Sunlight…

… The best disinfectant.

(Support CTH HERE)

(Conservative Treehouse, 6/04/2023)  (Archive)

(Part One, understanding how the silos are used to deflect accountability.)  In this Part 2 outline we give specific background examples of how weaponized Trump-Russia fraud worked and calling out names with examples of what they did.

On March 15, 2017, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes held a press conference announcing there was no specific evidence of “wiretaps” at Trump Tower {HERE}.  However, on March 22, 2017, Nunes held another press conference saying information was brought forth to the HPSCI showing the Trump campaign was under Title-1 surveillance by the FBI and former Obama administration {SEE HERE}.  In between those critical six days, something happened that was important.

(Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

With the full backdrop of the Durham report as the baseline, we now know there was zero evidence of any Russian interference effort in the 2016 election.

The Trump-Russia narrative was created by the Clinton campaign, promoted by the FBI and Main justice and advanced in narrative construction by the Obama administration.

On March 17, 2017, Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner asked the FISA court for a copy of the FISA application used against Trump campaign official Carter Page.

This is not in doubt and was evidenced in DC USAO court records related to SSCI security director James Wolfe who was initially indicted for leaking that specific copy of the FISA application.  The FISC stamp is also visible on the copy of the FISA that was eventually released.

QUESTION:  Why did Mark Warner request a copy of the FISA application from the FISA COURT and not from DOJ Main Justice?  The answer to that question falls into how insiders played the silo game against the Trump administration.

Warner didn’t request the FISA application from Main Justice because (1) the DOJ insiders were going to fight the release of any toxic information that proved the Trump campaign was under active Title-1 surveillance; they were going to fight release to Devin Nunes. And (2) the legislative branch was part of the Trump-Russia attack construct and the SSCI membership were active participants with the DOJ and FBI (executive branch).

To weaponize the FISA in the effort to get a special counsel appointed, Mark Warner needed to work around the system that was being discussed in the media.  Warner asked the FISA Court for their copy of the application.  On March 17, 2017, a copy of that application was delivered by FBI agent Brian Dugan from the FISC to the SSCI.  It was classified a ‘read and return’ Top Secret product with NO FOReign National access allowed.

Most people are unaware the declassified public version of the FISA application released by the DOJ was this Mark Warner copy.   We know it was this copy again due to the FISC stamp on the document that eventually became declassified and public.

QUESTION:  If the original FISA copy originated from the FISA Court, read and return, how did it end up in Main Justice as part of the eventual July 21, 2018, public release of the Carter Page FISA application?

Put another way, how did the 2017 physical copy go from the FISC to the SSCI and then end up at Main Justice for a 2018 release?

These are the awkward questions that cut through the use of the silo defense mechanisms.

The March 17, FISC copy ended up at Main Justice because the Washington Field Office case file against the leaker, SSCI Security Director James Wolfe, along with all the other evidence therein (which included text messages from Mark Warner), went back through the Mueller special counsel before Wolfe’s eventual indictment.  This is when the Mueller team had to make a decision about releasing it to the public.

Weissmann freaked out when he saw the Dugan file against James Wolfe, and the looming probability that Senator Mark Warner would be caught as the person who told Wolfe to leak the FISA.

The FISA application was leaked. Mueller, Weissmann and Mark Warner knew that back in 2017, but what they didn’t know until the evidence file came in 2018 was that the FBI had proof the FISA was leaked.

Oh snap!

How to dilute that catastrophic issue?

The Weissmann team released the FISA application to the public on July 21, 2018.

Now…. Remember, both Michael Horowitz and John Durham destroyed the DOJ position on the predicate for the FISA application.  In December 2019, IG Horowitz pointed out the missing ‘Woods File’ and 33 material issues with the application (one of which led to the criminal conviction of Kevin Clinesmith).   Three years later, John Durham completely destroys the justification for the Trump-Russia premise behind it.

Notice how no one in the executive branch DOJ, FBI, ODNI, ever criticized Robert Mueller, yet we know to a demonstrable certainty the Mueller special counsel was likely more corrupt than the originating DOJ/FBI corruption the special counsel was protecting.

The origin of ‘Spygate’ was bad, but the totality of the cover-up effort in the Mueller-Weissmann special counsel was exponentially worse.  More actual laws and policies within the justice department were broken by Robert Mueller than any preceding corrupt official.

♦ Amid a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020 [SEE HERE] there was a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court in July 2018 that pointed out the DC agenda, the “institutional cover-up.” [Link to Letter]

Before getting to the substance of the letter, it’s important to put the release in context. After the FISA Court reviewed the DOJ inspector general report (Dec 2019), the FISC ordered the DOJ-NSD to declassify and release documents related to the Carter Page FISA application.

In the cover letter for this specific release to the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees, the DOJ cited the January 7, 2020, FISA court order:

Keep in mind that prior to this release only the FISA court had seen this letter from the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).

As we walk through the alarming content of this letter, I think you’ll identify the motive behind the FISC order to release it.

First, the letter in question was sent by the DOJ-NSD to the FISA Court on July 12, 2018. It is critical to keep the date of the letter in mind as we review the content. This letter to the FISA Court was sent nine days before the DOJ released the FISA application to the public.

Aside from the date, the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it.

The DOJ is telling the FISA court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains “sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause” to approve the application.

In essence, in July 2018 the DOJ (now with Mueller in place) is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.

However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:

As you can see: Christopher Steele is noted as “Source #1”. Glenn Simpson of Fusion-GPS is noted as “identified U.S. person” or “business associate”, and Perkins Coie is the “U.S-based law firm.”

Now things get very interesting.

On page #8 when discussing Christopher Steele’s sub-source, the DOJ notes the FBI found him to be truthful and cooperative.

This is an incredibly misleading statement from Main Justice to the FISA court, because what the letter doesn’t say is that 18-months earlier the sub-source, also known in the IG report as the “primary sub-source”, informed the FBI that the material attributed to him in the dossier was essentially junk.

Let’s look at how IG Michael Horowitz framed the primary sub-source Igor Danchenko, and specifically notice the FBI contact and questioning took place in January 2017 (we now know that date to be January 12, 2017):

Those interviews with Steele’s primary sub-source, Igor Danchenko, took place in January, March and May of 2017, and clearly the sub-source debunked the content of the dossier itself.  In May of 2017, Weissmann and Mueller were in charge.   This is when the special counsel attempted to pay Danchenko $300k to throw a bag over him.

Those Danchenko interviews were 18-months, 16-months and 14-months ahead of the July 2018 DOJ letter to the FISC. The DOJ-NSD, with the instructions from the Mueller Special Counsel, says the sub-source was “truthful and cooperative” but the DOJ doesn’t tell the court the content of the truthfulness and cooperation. Why?

Keep in mind, this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018. Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG, Christopher Wray was FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy, and Dana Boente is FBI chief-legal-counsel.  Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann were at their apex.

Why would the DOJ-NSD not be forthcoming with the FISA court about the primary sub-source? This level of disingenuous withholding of information speaks to an institutional motive.

As noted by Durham, from the outset the FBI and DOJ knew the Trump-Russia stuff was nonsense.  By July 2018, the DOJ clearly knew the Steele dossier was full of fabrications, yet they withheld that information from the FISA Court and said the predicate was still valid. Why?

It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive.

In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex.

This letter, justifying the application and claiming the current information, would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 DOJ needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant.  The DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller & Weissmann had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority. That’s the silo motive.

In July 2018, if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed, Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation.  In essence, Main Justice in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit.

If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.

That motive clarifies why the FISC would order the 2020 DOJ, now headed by Bill Barr, to release the letter they received from Main Justice.

Remember, in December 2019 the FISC received the IG Horowitz report, and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ told them in July 2018.

The DOJ letter is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report. Hence, the FISC orders the DOJ to release the July ’18 letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.

The NSD silo inside Main Justice wrote this letter to the FISC silo – never intending for it to become public.

The court was misled.  Everyone can clearly see it. However, no one in the legislative or executive branch touched it because the court was misled by Robert Mueller.

The court was misled by the special counsel.  Reflect on this for a moment.

The content of that DOJ-NSD letter, and the subsequent disparity, points to an institutional cover-up; and as a consequence the FISC also ordered the DOJ to begin an immediate sequestration effort to find all the evidence from the fraudulent FISA application – the proverbial fruit from the poisonous tree.  In hindsight, the FISC was covering their own ass.

Two more big misstatements within the July 2018 letter appear on page #9. The first is the DOJ claiming that only after the application was filed did they become aware of Christopher Steele working for Fusion-GPS and knowing his intent was to create opposition research for the Hillary Clinton campaign. See the top of the page.

According to the DOJ-NSD claim, the number four ranking official in the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, never told them he was acting as a conduit for Christopher Steele to the FBI. While that claim is hard to believe, in essence what the DOJ-NSD is saying in that paragraph is that the FBI hoodwinked the DOJ-NSD by not telling them where the information for the FISA application was coming from. The DOJ, via John Demers, is blaming the FBI.

The second statement, equally as incredulous, is at the bottom of page nine where the DOJ claims they had no idea Bruce Ohr was talking to the FBI throughout the entire time any of the FISA applications were being submitted – October 2016 through June 2017.

In essence, the claim there is that Bruce Ohr was working with the FBI and never told anyone in the DOJ throughout 2016 and all the way past June 29th of 2017. That denial seems rather unlikely; however, once again the DOJ-NSD (Weissmann) is putting the FBI in the crosshairs and claiming they, the special counsel, knew nothing about the information pipeline.

Bruce Ohr, whose wife was working for Fusion-GPS and assisting Christopher Steele with information, was interviewed by the FBI over a dozen times as he communicated with Steele and fed his information to the FBI. Yet the DOJ claims they knew nothing about it.

Again, just keep in mind this claim by the DOJ-NSD is being made in July 2018, six months after Bruce Ohr was demoted twice (December 2017 and January 2018). If what the DOJ is saying was true (it wasn’t), well, the FBI was completely off-the-rails and rogue.

The DOJ was claiming in the July 2018 letter the FISA application predication was still valid.  However, if the DOJ-NSD (Mueller team) genuinely didn’t know about the FBI manipulation, they would be informing the court in 2018 the DOJ no longer supported the FISA application due to new information. They did not do that. Instead, in July 2018, they specifically told the court the predicate was valid, yet the DOJ-NSD knew it was not.

The last point about the July 2018 letter is perhaps the most jarring. Again, keep in mind when it was written; Chris Wray is FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy and Dana Boente is FBI chief legal counsel.

Their own FBI reports, by three different INSD and IG investigations, had turned up seriously alarming evidence going back to the early 2017 time-frame; the results of which ultimately led to the DC FBI office losing all of their top officials; and knowing the letter itself was full of misleading and false information about FBI knowledge in/around Christopher Steele – this particular sentence is alarming:

“The FBI has reviewed this letter and confirmed its factual accuracy?”

Really?

As we have just shared, the July 2018 letter itself is filled with factual inaccuracies, misstatements and intentional omissions. So who exactly did the “reviewing”?

This declassification release raised more questions than any other; and yet no one, not a single investigative body, asked questions about it.

Why?…

Because the letter itself was prima-facie evidence of lies directly from the special counsel of Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann.

No one in the executive branch, legislative branch or even judicial branch wanted to highlight the corruption of the special counsel.

Here’s the Full Letter. I strongly suggest everyone read the 14-pages slowly. If you know the background, this letter is infuriating…  AND keep in mind, every single staff member in the House and Senate (those investigating the issue) said they never saw it.  Why, because the DOJ was using silos to hide information.

That’s how badly broken the system of justice, and the system of checks-and-balances in Washington DC, really is.  What we are seeing in the blatant targeting, silencing, and outright in-your-face behavior is a downstream result of the system knowing everyone involved is part of the corrupt operation.

We need to break through these created silo walls by questioning the participants together.

(Conservative Treehouse, 5/22/2023)  (Archive) [Support Conservative Treehouse HERE]

The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election.  This DNC hack claim is the fulcrum issue structurally underpinning the Russian election interference narrative pushed by the Weissmann and Muller Special Counsel.  However, this essential claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, as outlined during a Dana Rohrabacher interview and by Julian Assange’s own on-the-record statements.

Assange was arrested at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London immediately after the Weissmann/Muller report was released to Bill Barr.  Despite investigating the background of the Trump-Russia nonsense, John Durham never touched the DNC hacking claim – the core of the Mueller report.  Why? Because Durham knew the U.S. Government threw a bag over Assange to protect the fraudulent Trump-Russia and Russian interference claims.

Again, this reality speaks to the corruption within the John Durham investigation.  Durham was protecting Weissmann, Mueller and the core of their justification for a 2-year investigation.   Durham knows why Assange was arrested.  Durham stayed away from it, intentionally.

The Russians HAD TO have made efforts to interfere in the election, or else the factual basis for the surveillance operation against candidate Donald Trump is naked to the world.

That’s why so much DOJ, FBI and Mueller special counsel energy was exhausted framing the predicate.

“Seventeen intelligence agencies,” the December 29th Joint Analysis Report, the expulsion of the Russian diplomats which was an outcropping of the JAR, the rushed January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, shoving microphones in everyone’s faces and demanding they answer if they believed Russia interfered – all of it, and I do mean every bit of it, is predicated on an absolute DC need to establish that Russia Attempted to Interfere in the 2016 election.

The “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” (full pdf) is pure nonsense.  It outlines nothing more than vague and disingenuous typical hacking activity that is no more substantive than any other hacking report on any other foreign actor. However, it was needed to help frame the Russian interference narrative.

There were no Russian diplomats involved; there was no Russian election interference; there was no Russian hacking of the DNC; it was all a fraud created by the intelligence community (IC), FBI and Main Justice to support Hillary Clinton’s lies and then cover their own targeting tracks.

On September 26, 2021, Yahoo News published an extensive article about the CIA targeting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in 2017 and the extreme conversations that were taking place at the highest levels of the U.S. government about how to control him.

There is a much bigger story transparently obvious when overlapped with CTH research files on the Mueller investigation and the U.S. intelligence community.  Specifically, the motive intentionally not outlined by Yahoo News.

What I am going to share is a deep dive using the resources and timeline from within that Yahoo article and the specific details we have assembled that paints a clear picture about what interests existed for the Deep State, the Intelligence apparatus and the Mueller-Weissmann special counsel.

This fully cited review is not for the faint of heart. This is a journey that could shock many; it could alarm more and will likely force more than a few to reevaluate just what the purpose was for Mike Pompeo within the Donald Trump administration.

As the Yahoo News article begins, they outline how those within the Trump administration viewed Assange as a risk in 2017.

Here it is critical to accept that many people inside the Trump administration were there to control events, not to facilitate a policy agenda from a political outsider.   In the example of Assange, the information he carried was a risk to those who attempted and failed to stop Trump from winning the 2016 election.

Julian Assange was not a threat to Donald Trump, but he was a threat to those who attempted to stop Donald Trump.  In 2017, the DC system was reacting to a presidency they did not control.  As an outcome, the Office of the President was being managed and influenced by some with ulterior motives.

Yahoo, via Michael Isikoff, puts it this way: “Some senior officials inside the CIA and the Trump administration even discussed killing Assange, going so far as to request “sketches” or “options” for how to assassinate him. Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred “at the highest levels” of the Trump administration, said a former senior counterintelligence official. “There seemed to be no boundaries.”

As we overlay the timeline, it is prudent to pause and remember some hindsight details.  According to reports in November of 2019, U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr were spending time looking carefully at CIA activity in the 2016 presidential election. One quote from a media-voice increasingly sympathetic to a political deep-state noted:

“One British official with knowledge of Barr’s wish list presented to London commented that, “It is like nothing we have come across before, they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services”“. (Link)

It is interesting that quote came from a British intelligence official, as there was extensive pre-2016 election evidence of an FBI/CIA counterintelligence operation that also involved U.K. intelligence services. There was an aspect to the FBI/CIA operation that overlaps with both a U.S. and U.K. need to keep Wikileaks founder Julian Assange under tight control.

To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to FBI/CIA interests, and effectively the Mueller special counsel, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the FBI/CIA were in 2016. It is within this network of foreign and domestic operations where FBI Agent Peter Strzok was clearly working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI operations.

By now, people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor generally identified as a western intelligence operative who was tasked by the FBI/CIA to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}  John Durham ignored him.

Criminal cartel. Center: HILLARY CLINTON and BARACK OBAMA, ringleaders. Counterclockwise from top left: JOSEPH MIFSUD, Maltese professor linked to Russian intelligence and UK intelligence; STEFAN HALPER, academic and CIA operative since 1970s; GLENN SIMPSON, founder of Fusion GPS; CHRISTOPHER STEELE, MI6 agent working undercover as private contractor; BRUCE OHR, then-top-level DOJ executive who conspired with Brennan, Simpson, Steele, and his wife Nellie; NELLIE OHR, CIA asset who covertly passed along fictional dirt on Trump from Simpson, Steele, and her husband Bruce to Brennan; MARC ELIAS, Deep-State lawyer for Obama, Clinton, and the DNC, laundering money from them to Simpson; JAMES COMEY, then-Director of FBI; JOHN BRENNAN, then-Director of CIA; LISA PAGE, FBI counsel and secret lover of Peter Strzok; SENATOR HARRY REID, then-Democratic Leader; PETER STRZOK, CIA/FBI liaison, who secretly worked with Carter Page since at least 2013; GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, Brennan tool planted inside the Trump campaign; CARTER PAGE, admitted operative for the FBI and CIA, and a Brennan plant inside the Trump presidential campaign to manufacture phony “connections” to Russia; BILL PRIESTAP, head of FBI Counterintelligence, also with long-time ties to Carter Page (Credit: Chalet Reports)

In a similar fashion, the FBI tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor, Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent, under the false name Azra Turk, Halper also targeted Papadopoulos.  Again, John Durham ignored it.

The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets legal and much easier.  If Durham went into this intelligence rabbit hole, there would be a paper trail that leads back to Robert Mueller.  Durham didn’t go there.

John Durham and IG Michael Horowitz both outlined how very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and Main Justice, yet that evidence was withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page and/or it was ignored.  The FBI fabricated information in the FISA and removed evidence that Carter Page was previously working for the CIA.  This is what FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was indicted and convicted for doing.

One week after the FBI and DOJ filed the second renewal for the Carter Page FISA [April 7, 2017], Yahoo News notes how Mike Pompeo delivered his first remarks as CIA Director:

[…] On April 13, 2017, wearing a U.S. flag pin on the left lapel of his dark gray suit, Pompeo strode to the podium at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington think tank, to deliver to a standing-room-only crowd his first public remarks as Trump’s CIA director.

Rather than use the platform to give an overview of global challenges or to lay out any bureaucratic changes he was planning to make at the agency, Pompeo devoted much of his speech to the threat posed by WikiLeaks. (link)

Why would CIA Director Mike Pompeo be so concerned about Julian Assange and Wikileaks in April 2017?

In April of 2017 Pompeo’s boss, President Donald Trump, was under assault from the intelligence community writ large, and every deep state actor was leaking to the media in a frenzied effort to continue the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy.

The Trump-Russia effort was so all consuming that FBI Director James Comey was even keeping a diary of engagement with President Trump in order to support an ongoing investigation built on fraud – yet, Mike Pompeo is worried about Julian Assange.

Again, here it is important to put yourself back into the time of reference.  Remember, it’s clear in the text messages between FBI Agent Strzok and Lisa Page that Peter Strzok had a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA.

♦ Former CIA Director John Brennan admitted Peter Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and it was also Peter Strzok who authored the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” from the CIA to the FBI that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane.”  Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief intelligence officials around Australian Ambassador to the U.K. Alexander Downer.

In short, Peter Strzok was a profoundly overzealous James Bond wannabe who acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for 2016’s CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.

Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open-Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015, at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons.  One, if not the primary extractors, has now been identified as Rodney Joffe at Neustar.   “The campaign plot was outlined by Durham in a 27-page indictment charging former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false report to the FBI.  The plot was also outlined in the finished Durham report.  Eight individuals who allegedly conspired with Sussmann but does not identify them by name. The sources familiar with the probe confirmed that the leader of the team of contractors was Rodney L. Joffe.” {Go Deep}

It was also Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskaya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working as a double agent for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S as part of his Trump-Russia creation.

Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting, back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash.

Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against Republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s handler, was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Byrne the instructions on where to send her. {Go Deep}

All of this context outlines the extent to which the FBI/CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit.  A large international operation directed by the FBI/CIA and domestic operations seemingly directed by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]  Durham eviscerated the predicate for all of this in his report, yet stayed away from the part that leads to Robert Mueller in 2017.

Recap: ♦Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA) and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr. (CIA, Fusion GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Trump and Donald Trump Jr (FBI).

Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer hired by Fusion GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. Deripaska refused to participate.

All of this engagement directly controlled by U.S. intelligence, and all of this intended to give a specific Russia impression. This predicate was what John Durham was reviewing in November of 2019, and then released in his final report – while whitewashing the parts that led to the Mueller silo.

The key point of all that contextual background is to see how committed the CIA and FBI were to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ and a multitude of political operatives, put a hell of a lot of work into it.

We know John Durham looked at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talking to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This context is important, because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.This is where the motives of Mike Pompeo in mid/late 2017 come into play.

[…] By the summer of 2017, the CIA’s proposals were setting off alarm bells at the National Security Council. “WikiLeaks was a complete obsession of Pompeo’s,” said a former Trump administration national security official. (link)

On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA). From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

On Tuesday April 15, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.

Why the delay?

What exactly was the DOJ waiting for from March 2018 to April 2019?

This timeframe is the peak of the Robert Mueller/Andrew Weissmann special counsel investigation.

Here’s where it gets interesting….

The Yahoo article outlines, “There was an inappropriate level of attention to Assange“, by the CIA according to a national security council official.  However, if you consider the larger ramifications of what Julian Assange represented to all of those people inside and outside government interests who created the Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy, well, there was actually a serious risk.

Remember, in May 2017 Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann effectively took over the DOJ.  The purpose of the Mueller investigation was to cover up the illegal operation that took place in the preceding year.   The people exposed in the Trump-Russia targeting operation included all of those intelligence operatives previously outlined in the CIA, FBI and DOJ operations.  These are the people John Durham did not indict.

The FBI submission to the Eastern District of Virginia Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

Dana Rohrabacher later published this account of the events:

Knowing how much effort the CIA and FBI put into the Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative; and knowing that Assange could essentially destroy the baseline predicate for the entire Trump-Russia investigation – which included the use of Robert Mueller; it would make sense for corrupt government officials to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange.

That contact between Rohrabacher and Assange explains why those same government officials would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and cover) for a grand jury by December 2017.

Within three months of the grand jury seating (Nov/Dec 2017), the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018.

The EDVA then sat on the Julian Assange indictment while the Mueller/Weissman probe was ongoing.

As soon as the Mueller probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).

As a person who researched this fiasco, including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for cover’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16, and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17, this timing against Assange is not coincidental.

It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange, because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes, and that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.  Again, John Durham stayed away from it!

♦ This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election.

This claim is the fulcrum underpinning the Russia election interference narrative.  However, this core and essential claim is directly disputed by Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange’s on-the-record statements.

The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Shawn Henry (Credit: Chip Somodeville/Getty Images)

The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment (Peter Strzok); and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from another Michael Sussmann partner, Shawn Henry at Crowdstrike, yes another DNC contractor and collaborator with the Clinton campaign.

The CIA held a massive conflict of self-interest problem surrounding the Russian hacking claim as it pertained to their own activity in 2016. The FBI and DOJ always held a massive interest in maintaining the Russian hacking claim.  Robert Mueller and Andrew Weismann did everything they could to support that predicate; and all of those foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also carried a self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.

Julian Assange was/is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange claimed he has evidence it was from an inside DNC leak, not from a DNC hack.

The Russian “hacking” claim was ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K Intelligence apparatus.  Well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be public.  And that is exactly what Main Justice and the U.S. intelligence community did.

This is why John Durham never touched it.

All of them know what happened.

All of them know why Julian Assange was taken from the Embassy in London.  A bag had to be thrown over Assange in order to retain the justification for the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel and the larger Russian election interference claims.  None of them do not know this.  They all know.

Put the panel of Barr, Rosenstein, Horowitz, Mueller, Weissmann, Durham and Wray in front of congress.  Ask each one: “Who is Seth Rich?”

Then start asking the right questions about the timeline of Assange being arrested.  Ask them about the DNC hack and Russian provenance according to Crowdstrike.  Ask them key and specific questions about the FBI working with Crowdstrike and about the DOJ and EDVA case against Assange.  Watch them squirm.

They all know what happened.  SO DO WE!

Ask them questions about it in public.  Watch them squirm.

(Conservative Treehouse, 5/23/2023)  (Archive)

I am going to be outlining some details for those of you who walk the deep weeds of understanding on behalf of our nation.

If you are a “tldr” person, this effort is not for you; feel free to continue sitting on the back bench and complaining about stuff. However, if you are a person who absorbs information so that you can confront our ‘representatives‘, then these articles and points are arrows in your quiver.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board is finally starting to get it.  They wrote an article this weekend recognizing how the Durham report totally eviscerates the foundation of the Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann special counsel investigation [SEE HERE].  The conclusion they reach is accurate:

… “All of this suggests that the Mueller probe was as much a cover-up as an attempt to find evidence of collusion.” (link)

Welcome to the party WSJ, nice of you to join us.  But it’s worse.  Much worse.

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse)

Keep in mind that John Durham has laid the Mueller/Weissmann probe naked to their enemies. Unfortunately, Weissmann and Mueller don’t have any enemies in Washington DC amid any party {Go Deep to 2021}. Our representatives are not representing. The true DC enemy is ‘We The People‘ – and I choose to fight them.

How entrenched is the defense mechanism? Well, consider a few things:

♦ First, John Durham clearly shows in his 306-page report with a 48-page classified appendix, that Russia did nothing to interfere in the 2016 election. The entire Russian Interference operation was a Clinton fabrication, later enhanced by a Federal Bureau of Investigation who used the fabrication as a cover-up justification to hide their surveillance of the Trump campaign.

♦ Second, accepting the empirical, factual, and inherently true reality of the first point – consider that President Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats to retain the Clinton fabrication and FBI lies. Think about this one carefully, the Obama administration expelled Russian diplomats in order to retain a domestic political ruse! President Obama did this *after* CIA Director John Brennan briefed him about the Clinton fabrication.

There were no Russian diplomats involved; there was no Russian election interference; there was no Russian hacking of the DNC; it was all a fraud created by the intelligence community (IC), FBI and Main Justice to support Hillary Clinton’s lies and then cover their own targeting tracks.

♦ Third, Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, with the full support of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, indicted 14 Russian entities under completely bogus pretenses. All of that effort was done to assist the Clinton narrative, cover for Obama and then use the special counsel to cover up the Trump targeting operation. The totally bogus construct explains why the fabricated indictments were sealed in the DOJ National Security Division in perpetuity, thereby keeping the fraudulent construct hidden from public review forever.

♦ Fourth, the only Russian entity who choose to push back against the Mueller/Weissmann fraud was the Russian Concord catering company – literally a ham sandwich operation. The outcome of that Russian confrontation was Weissmann/Mueller telling the DC judge they had to drop the case because any effort to prosecute the nonsense would create a risk to “national security.” Nice escape hatch from righteous sunlight on a case that was founded in nonsense.

Why do I bring these four points up? Because not a single person in Washington DC will mention it, and it’s the reality of the thing. I am committed to fighting this crap, and if the Wall Street editorial page is going to finally join the fight, that’s good. Let’s keep pushing.

The next post is going to showcase another very granular example of the silo system in operation. However, the prior discussion about silos carries forward as the baseline to understand, so here’s that reminder once again.

CURRENT STATUS – Let me uncomplicate the complex, and more importantly, let me propose the outline of a solution.

Michael Horowitz (Credit: public domain)

♦ SILO #1 – Inspector General Michael Horowitz was given instructions by outgoing President Barack Obama to review the internal decision-making inside the FBI, Main Justice and DOJ-NSD as it pertained to the Hillary Clinton classified document scandal.

In early January 2017, IG Horowitz was tasked to review the FBI decisions during the Clinton exoneration and deliver a report on his findings.

First, it is important to remember the DOJ inspector general can only review internal government conduct. The IG does not review or investigate outside involvement and has no authority to compel investigative compliance from outside parties. The Office of Inspector General is an internal review agency.

Second, it is important to remember the DOJ inspector general was not authorized to conduct any oversight of the Dept of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. During the Obama era, when the DOJ-NSD was created by Attorney General Eric Holder, through the entirety of the Obama era, there was no inspector general oversight into any operations conducted by the DOJ-NSD – that included the FISA process. It was not until later in 2017 when the Trump administration granted the OIG authority to conduct oversight into the DOJ National Security Division.

Think of IG Michael Horowitz as an investigative silo. You will see why this matters.

♦ SILO #2 – Robert Mueller (truthfully Andrew Weissmann) was appointed in May of 2017 by Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, as Special Counsel to investigate Trump-Russia and the reports of prior Russian influence in the 2016 election.  Robert Mueller was a figurehead – a person in name only to give credibility to the purpose and intent of the group who assembled under his shingle.  Andrew Weissmann was the actual manager of the investigation, events and details of the Mueller probe.

On the outward face, in the aftermath of FBI Director James Comey being fired, the Mueller investigation was created to look at Russian interference in the 2016 election – against the background that Comey’s firing by President Trump was related to an intent to impede the ongoing Crossfire Hurricane investigation.  However, on the internal dynamic, inside the mechanics of how DC silos are created, the Mueller probe existed to hide the DOJ and FBI weaponization of government that was deployed under the justification of the FBI Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Sometime around June of 2017, while conducting his review of the FBI conduct in the Clinton investigation, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered troubling internal communications between FBI agent Peter Strzok and DOJ-NSD assigned lawyer to the FBI, Lisa Page.  Silo #1 now intersects Silo #2.

Lisa Page was the DOJ lawyer advising FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.  Peter Strzok was the lead FBI counterintelligence agent working on the Clinton email investigation.  Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe were the core of the Clinton investigation and intrinsically linked to the Clinton exoneration as announced by FBI Director James Comey.

IG Horowitz knew of the Clinton investigation and was investigating the details therein.  Horowitz did not initially know about the Crossfire Hurricane investigation which, by June of 2017, had subsequently morphed into the Special Counsel Mueller investigation.

Horowitz’s 2017 task only pertained to the Clinton classified documents and decision-making. However, it was the exact same FBI and DOJ people who investigated then exonerated Hillary Clinton, who then opened an investigation of Trump, who then transferred into an expanded Robert Mueller probe.

Horowitz (Silo 1) was bound by requirements of his office to inform Robert Mueller that individuals inside his investigation (Silo 2) were under investigation.

This presented a problem for Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann who were conducting a coverup and targeting operation.

Essentially, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were a threat, as they were bringing an IG review into the security of the Mueller silo.  Almost immediately, Strzok and Page were removed by Mueller/Weissmann to purge the problematic window they represented.

Mueller and Weismann then continued their operation, absorbing any Main Justice information that had anything to do with Trump-Russia.  Simultaneous to their unilateral empowerment, Weissmann and Mueller continued to fabricate a false premise of Russian interference in the 2016 election.  This ‘Russia narrative’ was supported as the justification for their continued operation throughout 2017, 2018 and into 2019.

It is important to remember that Mueller/Weissmann had full control over everything that had anything to do with the Russian interference narrative or the Trump-Russia narrative.  Any ancillary investigation from any government office that touched on these issues was subsequently absorbed by Weissmann and team.

As an example, this Weissmann/Mueller absorption and control included the FBI case against SSCI Security Director James Wolfe, the man who leaked the Title-1 surveillance warrant (FISA application) deployed by the Crossfire Hurricane team against Carter Page.  The Wolfe investigation (April ’17 through January ’18) was conducted by FBI Washington Field Office agent Brian Dugan. James Wolfe was indicted by USAO Jessie Liu for leaking the FISA application to journalist Ali Watkins.  However, the evidence file was reviewed by the special counsel, and after threats by the defense team to subpoena Senate Intelligence Committee members, the specific charge of leaking the FISA was dropped from the criminal case.

Because Weissmann/Mueller controlled everything that touched the Trump-Russia issues, in June of 2018 when the Carter Page FISA application was made public, it came from the Weissmann/Mueller team release.  This was one of the lesser discussed revelations from the Rod Rosenstein June 2020 testimony about the Mueller probe.

♦ SILO #3 – After taking office in February of 2019, Attorney General Bill Barr received the Mueller report in March, and a debate with Mueller/Weissmann about the content and report release began.  In May 2019, AG Barr appointed Special Counsel John Durham to review the FBI operations that initiated the Trump-Russia probe.

It is important to note that John Durham was appointed *after* Bill Barr received the Mueller report from Andrew Weissmann. It is also important to note that despite the originating mandate of Weissmann/Mueller being predicated on their obligation to look into the accusations of Trump-Russia, the Clinton campaign organization of the Trump-Russia narrative does not appear in the Mueller report.

There is nothing about Clinton’s work with the Perkins Coie law firm and lawyer Michael Sussmann to work as a cut-out for the Clinton campaign contacts with Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele, Glenn Simpson, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr or any other substantively manufactured system that was used to create the illusion of the Trump-Russia connections.  The absence of that information inside the Mueller report begged the obvious question:

How could Mueller investigate Trump-Russia for two years and never find the origin of Trump-Russia?

After realizing the Mueller report contained none of this information, in May of 2019 Bill Barr appointed John Durham and Silo #3 was created.

Each of the silos, purposefully created by those who operate within the DC systems of political power, were created to have specific usefulness and function.  This is how the system operates.

We hear things like “ongoing investigation” as sunlight blocks, or “potential interfering with an investigation” as another technique.  Each time a silo is created, the purpose of the silo is to control information and isolate the larger system from scrutiny.

When Robert Mueller (silo 2) appeared before a congressional committee in June 2019 to answer questions about his report, he was asked about the origination of Trump-Russia.  Mueller’s jaw-dropping response was, “That was not in my purview.”

Wait, how can your existence be predicated on investigating Trump-Russia, and yet the origin of Trump-Russia is not in your “purview”?  See the problem.

Unfortunately, and not accidentally, Robert Mueller was able to avoid scrutiny of never having investigated the origin of Trump-Russia because there was another silo, John Durham (silo 3), to take the heat off him.  Each silo is sequentially created to deflect and distract from questioning that surrounds the originating corruption. Attorney General Bill Barr created Silo #3 (Durham), for exactly this reason.  Bill Barr was the Bondo, John Durham the spray paint.

John Durham finishes up Silo-3 operations, delivers a report, and now we have a Silo #4 in operation via the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith.

As you can see, each silo creates an internal defense system which also allows media to deflect, ignore and distract.  However, in the Trump-Russia story you will note there is a flow to how the silos are sequenced.  The silos are designed to absorb information, deflect sunlight and keep accountability away.  The silos are constructs, preservation systems, for the DC administrative state.

Ultimately, each silo is created to stop seeing the larger picture – the unlawful targeting of a presidential candidate, and then a subsequent coup against that candidate after the election.   The evidence of the weaponized government is in the full story that resides, compartmented, inside purposefully constructed containment silos; each intended to block sunlight upon specific components of the evidence.

♦ SOLUTION – There is a way to bring the sunlight and destroy the silo system.  The method is to use the inertia of the construct against itself.

Obviously, I hope you can understand why it would be imprudent to go too deep into this right now.  However, suffice to say – here are the broad strokes.

In front of you sits a panel of SEVEN people:

Barr, Rosenstein, Horowitz, Mueller, Weissmann, Durham and Wray.

You do not deconstruct the silos by questioning them separately. Each silo will avoid sunlight by deflecting inquiry to the mechanism of the other.

Instead, you rain sunlight down upon the silos by questioning each of the participants individually while located together.

All prior guidelines remain valid.

You use very granular and specific questions that pertain to the flow-through details that each silo was created to hide.

The usefulness of the silo process is dependent on its ability to stand alone.

When you put direct questions to the assembly of silos, there is nowhere to deflect.

Two days. Eight hours each day. Five rounds of questions. No one reading statements – only questions.

Very, very specific questions.

The goal is sunlight. Rip the Band-Aid off, call the baby ugly, and start the process to fix this crap by exposing it. Restore the First and Fourth Amendments and heal the injury. What we need is a full, uncensored, brutally honest expose’ of how bad things have become and how that system can be dismantled.  The existing constitution is the protection; just remove the stuff that is violating it.

(Conservative Treehouse, 5/22/2023)  (Archive)

[Support CTH Here]

(…) The indictment accuses President Trump of withholding documents containing “classified markings,” a very specifically deployed obtuse wording intended to create the implication of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists.  It is entirely possible for a person, any person, especially a person who follows the news, to possess documents containing “classified markings.”

(SOURCE page 41)

There is a big difference between a classified document and a document containing classified markings.  As an example, anyone who has looked at the Carter Page FISA application made public in July 2018, has reviewed a document containing “classified markings.”  When a document is declassified, they do not remove the markings.

You might think this is a one-off use of the “documents with classification markings” lingo, but it’s not.  This language is the underpinning of the entire DOJ/FBI framework that predicated the raid on Mar-a-Lago.   Specifically, neither NARA nor the DOJ-NSD requested President Trump or his team to return Classified Documents.  The DOJ demanded the return of any documents that contained “classified markings.” [SEE BELOW]

(Indictment Source, page 4 )

Because the verbiage is so intentionally obtuse (ie. Lawfare), a fulsome production in compliance with this DOJ demand would include any newspaper or magazine articles that had a picture of the Carter Page FISA application, or any printed online article that might contain the same or similar elements.  There is a big difference between asking for a classified document return, and asking for a return of documents that contain “classified markings.” [Example from CTH, below]

As a result, it is entirely possible, I would say almost certain, that President Trump -and his legal team- returned every document that contained classified information but may have omitted documents that retained “classified markings”.  There’s the spirit of compliance, and the letter of absolute compliance when contrasted against a very granular interpretation of the request.

It is obvious from the demand, the DOJ/FBI was casting a wide net on the compliance side, knowing that amid hundreds of thousands of presidential documents and records, there would be obscure documents with classified markings that had nothing to do with national security.  Thus, the “classified markings” establishes a Lawfare compliance tactic.

It will be interesting to see how this nonsense progresses.  It becomes easier to call it nonsense, when you simply accept the approach being used.  If the DOJ-NSD, FBI, Special Counsel or NARA were genuinely interested in ‘national security issues’, they would not be playing obtuse word games in order to structure court filings simply for media narrative engineering and propaganda purposes.

Again, all of these insufferable pretending elements simply create more avenues for smart legal minds to highlight to the court.  The judges can see through this nonsense, and their action or lack thereof becomes part of showcasing their own agenda.  Fortunately, Judge Cannon has a very solid background on the Mar-a-Lago documents case.  She wouldn’t need to have this stuff pointed out to her; she has already experienced it. (Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 6/10/2023)  (Archive)

CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman and CBS News investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge join “Face the Nation” to discuss what’s in the indictment — and what it means for Trump. [Transcript Here]

Before getting to the video, it’s valuable to see Rikki Klieman representing the interpretation of the media outlook toward the indictment handed down by Special Counsel Jack Smith.  It is also valuable to see CBS’s Catherine Herridge represent the defenders of the institutions, from the outside vulgarian personage of Trump.

Klieman buys the Lawfare narrative completely, including the framework of classified documents as opposed to documents containing classified markings.  She sells the Lawfare outline as gospel and makes all assertions from that position.  Herridge looks at how the bureaucracy responds to Trump, including how the institutions hold power of determination higher than a President of the United States.

Bill Barr said emphatically earlier today, “The documents do not belong to Trump,” continuing with “The documents belong to the government who created them, not the man for whom they were created.”  So sayeth the defender of the omnipotent Dept of Justice.  This is where a sharp intellectual knife to cut through the chaff and countermeasures is needed, and notice no one brings up the visible and practical deconstruction point.

If the documents did not belong to President Donald J. Trump, then why did the government dump them in the parking lot of the White House and tell him to deal with them?

If the documents belonged to the government, and not to the man for whom they were created, then why did that same government give them to him and force him to take them to a location of his choosing?   Can you see the obtuse argument fall apart when simple pragmatic questions are raised?

The institutions are presented, by the sellers of the Lawfare narrative, as higher than the authority of the President of the United States.  This is how ridiculous our government has become.

Institutions are not omnipotent entities; they are buildings and networks full of people who facilitate processes that are an outcome of policy.  Those buildings and offices are not the government. The elected politicians who we send to Washington DC are not subservient to the processes, norms and morays they determine within the bureaucracy that the politicians are in charge of.

The argument(s) against Donald Trump are akin to a business saying that all work product created during the tenure of employment belongs to the enterprise of the business and not to the employee.  If you want to hold that line of thought, fine.  However, you then need to reconcile that the business enterprise intentionally gave all the work product to the employee, dumped it in their lap, told them to take it and leave, and then comes back at a later date and says – we now need to review the stuff we forced you to take because some of it might not actually belong to you.

Does this happen anywhere else?  Of course not.

The fact that the National Archives and Record Administration refused to take custody of the documents upon the end of the White House tenure, combined with the fact the NARA dumped those documents in the parking lot of the White House for Trump to deal with, is a direct statement the bureaucracy was telling President Trump these are your records.  His records – not their records on loan to him.

The Presidential Records Act is the overriding legislative guidance for the flow of work product post-term in office.  These are essentially document arguments.  The fact that NARA together with the Biden administration would weaponize the disposition of documents, they intentionally forced Trump to take ownership of, speaks to an intent within the bureaucracy that is transparently obvious.

Bill Barr’s entire mindset is based on a belief the institutions are of a higher power than the individuals we elect to control them.  In essence, the President of the United States is subservient to the bureaucracy.  This is nonsense.  This is also why former AG Bill Barr was more concerned about preserving the institutions than stopping the weaponizing activity that flows from them.

President Trump could store his “presidential records” anywhere he wants to; they are his records.

Now, watch Klieman obscure the difference between classified documents and documents containing classified markings.  Despite her pontifications to the contrary, the indictment is not based around any classified documents.  The classification of the documents is technically and factually moot to the ridiculous point the special counsel is making.

(Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 6/11/2023) (Archive)

Things are getting spicy in/around Main Justice in DC.  On Friday, Attorney General Merrick Garland and Deputy AG Lisa Monaco denied any involvement interfering with the decisions made by USAO David Weiss regarding the investigation of the Hunter and ¹Joe Biden bribery and tax fraud scheme. However, in response, the IRS whistleblower is now naming additional witnesses to Weiss’s statements.

Through his attorneys, whistleblower Gary Shapley is now naming additional witnesses to the statements of USAO Weiss:

“In an October 7, 2022, meeting at the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s Office, U.S. Attorney David Weiss told six witnesses he did not have authority to charge in other districts and had thus requested special counsel status. Those six witnesses include Baltimore FBI Special Agent in Charge Tom Sobocinski and Assistant Special Agent in Charge Ryeshia Holley, IRS Assistant Special Agent in Charge Gary Shapley and Special Agent in Charge Darrell Waldon, who also independently and contemporaneously corroborated Mr. Shapley’s account in an email, now public as Exhibit 10, following p. 148 of his testimony transcript.

Mr. Shapley would have no insight into why Mr. Weiss would make these statements at the October 7, 2022 meeting if they were false.  That Mr. Weiss made these statements is easily corroborated, and it is up to him and the Justice Department to reconcile the evidence of his October 7, 2022 statements with contrary statements by Mr. Weiss and the Attorney General to Congress.”  (source)

Someone is lying, and the whistleblower appears to have all his information well documented and cited.  Mr. Weiss, Mr. Garland and Mrs. Monaco have some explaining to do.

(Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 6/25/2023)  (Archive)

White House Coordinator for National Security Council Strategic Communications, John Kirby, walks out of the press briefing room after being asked about Hunter Biden’s WhatsApp messages with China implicating President Biden

THE MESSAGE: “I am sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment made was not fulfilled. Tell the director I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And Zhi, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang or the Chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows, and my ability to forever hold a grudge, that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

John Kirby uncomfortably said he would not comment on the text message and refused to answer any questions. WATCH: (Conservative Treehouse, 6/24/2023)  (Archive)

By now everyone is aware how the corruption in Washington DC is fraught with internecine relationships; however, this one takes the proverbial cake.  The prosecutor who organized and signed the plea deal for Hunter Biden worked for Hunter Biden’s business partner.

Senator Ron Johnson is calling attention to Title 28, Section 45.2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which says: ‘no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation if he has a personal or political relationship with […] any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation.’

As if this entire episode wasn’t sketchy enough, Assistant United States Attorney Derek Hines (top left) was one of the prosecutors to sign off on Hunter Biden’s charges and plea deal. Hines previously worked under ex-FBI director Louis Freeh (bottom left), who was a business partner of Hunter Biden.  Hines worked for Freeh Group International Solutions which was specifically involved in the foreign company influence issue at the heart of the Hunter Biden case, and Freeh is a close friend of the entire Biden family.

This is nuts.

(Via Daily Mail) – A prosecutor who signed off on the documents charging Hunter Biden with tax and gun crimes previously worked with one of the First Son’s business partners, DailyMail.com can reveal.

Delaware US Attorney David Weiss officially filed charges against the president’s son last Tuesday after a near five-year probe into his alleged tax crimes and foreign financial dealings.

Weiss’s deputy, Assistant United States Attorney Derek Hines, signed off on the charging documents alongside his boss and two other assistant US attorneys – indicating he has a central role in Hunter’s criminal prosecution.

Freeh worked with Hunter on a $3million job consulting for a Romanian criminal, a deal that is allegedly now part of his federal criminal investigation and is being investigated by Congress.

Republican Senator Ron Johnson told DailyMail.com the link between the prosecutor and Hunter’s business associate ‘calls into question the integrity of their entire investigation’ – after GOP lawmakers slammed the relatively minor charges filed by the Delaware prosecutor this week as a mere ‘slap on the wrist’.

DailyMail.com has previously revealed that Freeh and his firm worked closely with Hunter Biden trying to get the US State Department to help limit the prosecution of Romanian real estate tycoon Gabriel Popoviciu, who was on the brink of a bribery conviction in 2015. (read more)

The same DOJ who cut this Hunter Biden deal, are going after Donald Trump in part simply because of letters exchanged with Kim Jong-Un.

This entire corrupt DC system is beyond repair. (Conservative Treehouse, 7/03/2023)  (Archive)

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley released the FBI witness statement known as the FD-1023 [Document pdf Here] that lies at the heart of the Biden bribery and corruption scandal.

BACKGROUND: Initially, the FBI refused to hand over the unclassified FD-1023 stating there is an ongoing investigation using the confidential human source who made allegations outlined in the document. Remember, the allegations and the statement record were created in July of 2020, over three years ago. The FBI refused to say the 6-page unclassified document existed. After House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer told FBI Director Chris Wray, he had already seen the unclassified document via a whistleblower, then Wray admitted the FBI indeed had it. On June 1st, the FBI refused to release the document, stating it was captive as part of an “ongoing investigation.” Today, Chuck Grassley released it.

Grassley – “For the better part of a year, I’ve been pushing the Justice Department and FBI to provide details on its handling of very significant allegations from a trusted FBI informant implicating then-Vice President Biden in a criminal bribery scheme. While the FBI sought to obfuscate and redact, the American people can now read this document for themselves, without the filter of politicians or bureaucrats, thanks to brave and heroic whistleblowers. What did the Justice Department and FBI do with the detailed information in the document? And why have they tried to conceal it from Congress and the American people for so long? The Justice Department and FBI have failed to come clean, but Chairman Comer and I intend to find out,” Grassley said.

“The FBI’s Biden Bribery Record tracks closely with the evidence uncovered by the Oversight Committee’s Biden family influence-peddling investigation. In the FBI’s record, the Burisma executive claims that he didn’t pay the ‘big guy’ directly but that he used several bank accounts to conceal the money. That sounds an awful lot like how the Bidens conduct business: using multiple bank accounts to hide the source and total amount of the money,” House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer said. 

“At our hearing with IRS whistleblowers, they testified that they had never seen or heard of this record during the Biden criminal investigation, despite having potentially corroborating evidence. Given the misconduct and politicization at the Department of Justice, the American people must be able to read this record for themselves. I thank Senator Grassley for providing much needed transparency to the American people. We must hold the Department of Justice accountable for seeking to bury this record to protect the Bidens.”

Grassley first disclosed the FBI’s possession of significant and voluminous evidence of potential criminality involving the Biden family last year. He has since worked to unearth the FBI record, eventually partnering with Comer on a subpoena to compel its public disclosure. After delays, the FBI provided a highly redacted version of the document to select members of the House of Representatives, but it remained shielded from the public and omitted key details, including references to recordings. Following the FBI’s failure to fully comply with the congressional subpoena, Grassley received the legally protected disclosure with limited redactions to protect a trusted FBI source, handling agents, department whistleblowers and identifiers related to other ongoing investigations. (more)

(Conservative Treehouse, 7/20/2023)  (Archive)

Senator Grassley acquired the record, an FD-1023, via legally protected disclosures by Justice Department whistleblowers. Read his press release 👇https://t.co/D6UVKhWiP0

— Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) July 20, 2023

John Solomon and Amanda Head break down the top 7 Biden-Burisma bombshells from the FBI source document:

1. In 2014, Burisma Holdings hired Hunter Biden to influence his father, VP Joe Biden, in handling Ukraine’s chief prosecutor investigating the company for corruption. Joe… pic.twitter.com/V0eBe693DI

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) July 21, 2023

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence [ODNI] has released a 117-page April 2023 order/opinion by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] about the compliance audit conducted by internal review as the U.S. intelligence agencies seek reauthorization.   Everything FISC happens in secret, and the report is heavily redacted; however, some interesting information can be obtained if you read the report carefully.

Here’s an example.  The FISC is now agreeing with the NSA and FBI that all search logs and audit trails should be erased after 10 years from query.  That means every audit trail from the period up to August 2013 is about to be erased.  That means almost all of the Obama era search queries will disappear before the next administration takes office.

They are not erasing our data; they are erasing the logs of their search inquiries into our data.  FU!

[Source, page 27 – FISC opinion, 2023]

The DOJ and FBI should go to the ordinary federal courts for search warrants.  The CIA and National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) both have foreign service missions, so they do not need access to American citizen metadata (702 acquired).  Why would the CIA and NCTC need to snoop into the private data of American citizens when their legislative authority forbids them from conducting domestic surveillance?    Additionally, the NSA should not contain a lifetime repository for all electronic records of American citizens.  That’s my opinion.

(Conservative Treehouse, 7/21/2023)  (Archive)

U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika (Credit: Wikipedia)

Things are awful sketchy in Delaware, as the Hunter Biden case is about to enter court for Judge Maryellen Noreika to review a sweetheart plea deal between corrupt DOJ officials and Hunter Biden lawyers.

As the situation unfolded, Congress filed an amicus brief opposing the plea deal and outlining new evidence discovered by the House Oversight Committee so the judge would have additional background on the deal.  The amicus filing was done by GOP lawyer Mr. Theodore Kittila, from the committee.

Someone from the defense team, a lawyer later identified as Jessica Bengels from the law firm of Latham and Watkins, then contacted the clerk of the court -falsely claimed to be working with Theodore Kittila- and asked the clerk to remove the amicus filing.  The clerk removed the filing.

GOP lawyer Kittila found out and contacted the clerk to understand what was going on.  Mr. Kittila then confronted the lawyers for Hunter Biden, and Judge Noreika is a little angry about the Biden team manipulation. [COURT ORDER]

Jessica Bengels (Credit: Latham and Watkins, LLC)

(New York Post) – […]  In an evening order, Noreika gave Hunter’s attorneys until 9 p.m. to “show cause as to why sanctions should not be considered for misrepresentations to the Court.” — while noting they had not formally filed any request to seal evidence in the matter.

However, she also ordered the filing sealed until close of business Wednesday.

“We filed what was already public (voted out by Congress) as something for the judge to be aware of,” Ways and Means Committee spokesperson JP Freire told The Post. “They then misrepresented themselves to get it taken down.”

Shortly before 9 p.m., Bengels submitted an affidavit in which she blamed a miscommunication among the clerks for the removal of the Ways and Means filing.

“I am completely confident that I never indicated that I was calling from Mr. Kittila’s firm or that I worked with him in any way,” she said. “The only mention of his name was when [the clerk] had asked me if the filings had been entered by Mr. Kittila’s firm and I answered that I believed that to be the case.” (read more)

(Conservative Treehouse, 7/25/2023)  (Archive)

July 25, 2023 (evening):

(…) In a letter obtained by Fox News, Biden’s legal team told the judge that the lawyer who called the clerk had accurately represented her affiliation with her law firm.

“The matter under consideration appears to stem from an unfortunate and unintentional miscommunication between a staff member at our firm and employees of the Court,” the lawyers’ defense read. “We have no idea how the misunderstanding occurred, but our understanding is there was no misrepresentation.”

Tucker Carlson sat down with Hunter Biden business partner Devon Archer following Mr. Archer’s testimony to a House Oversight Committee. {Direct Rumble Link}.  The first part of that interview was broadcast by Tucker Carlson via Twitter.

Within this part of the interview Tucker Carlson asks Devon Archer about the overall business model Archer and Biden formed in Burisma and what was the specific set of skills that Hunter brought to the enterprise.  As noted by Mr. Archer, the relationship and purpose of Hunter Biden was entirely about access to government systems that could benefit the businesses who hired their firm.  They were selling influence as a business model and Joe Biden was part of the process.  WATCH:

There are many people rightly demanding Joe Biden be impeached for selling his office and influence, as exhibited in the examples of Hunter Biden. However, I would temper any expectations in that direction by noting this “influence selling” is the currency of the entire system. Democrats and Republicans both have family members and businesses based on this system.

Additionally, as we have written in these pages for many years, the entire purpose of the House and Senate Foreign Relations Committee is to sell political policy influence to foreign governments. Seats on committees are assigned to politicians based on their status within the hierarchy. The example of Hunter Biden and Devon Archer via Burisma is one of hundreds of similarly constructed mechanisms.

Joe Biden will never be impeached for selling his office to foreign governments. It will never happen. Senator Joe Biden was Chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee for exactly this reason. (Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 8/02/2023) (Archive)

Tucker Carlson/Devon Archer – Part 2

Ep. 13 Part 2. Devon Archer pic.twitter.com/R1sxSuPrKq

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) August 4, 2023

(Credit: Center for Public Policy Innovation (CCPI)  -Government , Industry, and Congressional Leaders Discuss the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Homeland and National Security – AI Symposium, February 2021)

You might ask, why is the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) in the business of conducting widescale surveillance, monitoring and tracking of American citizens.

Unfortunately, if you are asking that question, then you likely don’t know the first, fourth and fifth amendment to the U.S. constitution were usurped by the 2001 Patriot Act.

George W Bush and Dick Cheney created the domestic surveillance system under the auspices of DHS and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.  Barack Obama and Joe Biden then took that DHS surveillance system and modified the dials (Justice Dept., FBI) so the surveillance only applied to their ideological enemies.

If you have followed my outlines on this issue [Category Here], you will note exactly where this latest development falls on the continuum.   The 2024 election is right around the corner. Previously I stated the artificial intelligence (AI) component to the internet surveilllance system was going to launch toward the end of this year.  Well, DHS has just announced exactly that [SEE HERE].

I find it very interesting the DHS memo was issued on August 8th, but only published for the general public yesterday.  July and August were when I first identified AI spider crawls were already underway.  Pay very, very close attention to the two underlined words in the following paragraph:

[SOURCE pdf, Page 3]

Stop and reread that last sentence as much as needed.  Inasmuch as this DHS guidance is telling us the rules for Homeland Security (DHS) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) as they use AI, they are also outlining what current processes of surveillance would be enhanced by it.

DHS’ AI task force is coordinating with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency on how the department can partner with critical infrastructure organizations “on safeguarding their uses of AI and strengthening their cybersecurity practices writ large to defend against evolving threats.”

What are those critical infrastructure organizations?  They include voting systems.  Who or what are those evolving threats?  You!

Federal News Network – […] The report also recommends DHS encourage pursing off-the-shelf commercial solutions instead of “building everything in-house.”

Mayorkas emphasized the need for DHS to adopt AI quickly, regardless of whether it’s commercially acquired or internally developed technology.

“We have got to change the procurement capabilities of a government agency to actually move quickly and nimbly, so that when we’re dealing in a very dynamic environment, we can actually move with dynamism,” Mayorkas said. “I’m not suggesting moving to a sole source model, but we just have to be quick.”

He also stressed the need for DHS to prioritize where it will use AI, rather than attempting to adopt it across every mission and use case. The report points to combatting both fentanyl and human trafficking as use cases that could be “accelerated and championed” across DHS. But it also suggests DHS “integrate AI/ML into as many areas of the DHS mission as possible.”

“We’re going to need to prioritize what aspect of our mission should we really double down on to harness AI because I worry about diluting our focus too much,” Mayorkas said. “And I really do want to demonstrate, as quickly as is responsible, how this could really be a game changer for us in advancing our mission . . . we have to pick our spots here, in my view, somewhat surgically.” (more)

Notice the emphasis on speed.  Get this AI system launched into DHS surveillance, tracking and monitoring systems as quickly as possible.

Now do you see my point about how radical and fast everything is going to change?  It’s the 2024 election targeting.

Remember, the Dept of Defense (DoD) will now conduct online monitoring operations, using enhanced AI to protect the U.S. internet from “disinformation” under the auspices of national security. {link}

I share this information with you so that you understand what is being constructed and what is about to be deployed on a large scale throughout the U.S. internet operating system.  The U.S. internet will be different.  The social media restrictions became more prevalent and noticeable in the past several years; now it is time for DHS to expand that process to the entire U.S. internet. (Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 9/15/2023)  (Archive)

Appearing with Sebastian Gorka, Kash Patel puts some excellent context on the issue of Dircuit Court Judge Chutkan presiding over the special counsel case against President Trump.  {Direct Rumble Link Here}

I was unaware of the detail where Judge Chutkan originally presided over the case when Fusion GPS tried to block Devin Nunes and Kash Patel from revealing the source of the payments for the Chris Steele dossier.  This is a big datapoint. WATCH:

TRANSCRIPT – Kash Patel:

“Judge Chutkan, for those who don’t know, represented Burisma, Hunter Biden’s fraudulent consulting firm, she was a lawyer at the same law firm with Hunter Biden. But Seb, let’s put that aside. What other matters are there for her recusal? In 2017 when Devin Nunes and I were running the Russiagate investigation, we figured out who paid for the Steele dossier. Fusion GPS, the DNC, and the Hillary Clinton campaign paid Christopher Steele millions of dollars and they laundered it through the FBI and the FISA court to unlawfully surveil Donald Trump. That’s big-time stuff.

On the eve of us winning that disclosure, before the world knew, Fusion GPS took us to federal court and that case landed in JUDGE CHUTKAN’S COURT ROOM. … After a month of heavy litigation where Judge Chutkan knew the ins and outs of Fusion GPS, our proceedings, all possible witnesses, etc., when she could not prevent us from prevailing, she recused -on her own- from that case. Why?”

“We found out her law firm, Boies Schiller, represented Fusion GPS. The very client that was in front of her in federal court was one of her former clients. That is rule #1 for disqualification.”

GORKA: “Boies Schiller Flexner is the same company where Chutkan and Hunter Biden worked!”

PATEL: “You gotta ask yourself, Seb, how come it took Chutkan a month [to recuse herself]? … She wanted to block the bank records.

Imagine if we never found out who paid for the dossier. … She set the precedent. She cannot neutrally and arbitrarily preside over Donald Trump’s criminal trial when she recused herself from the very representation of the Democratic entrenchment: the DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, Fusion GPS, because she was so biased because of her prior representation from Boies Schiller.

How could she possibly be allowed to stay on this case? And it wasn’t us, Seb. We got her off because of her own history. That precedent is what Donald Trump’s lawyers must apply this week.”

Perhaps this recusal issue is why four other district court judges including Boasberg sat in the back of the courtroom for President Trump’s appearance last week. Perhaps the judges were proactively contemplating who would meet the DC recusal threshold. (Conservative Treehouse, 8/12/2023)  (Archive)

That’s BILLION, with a “B”.   According to recently revealed court transcripts, in the US Virgin Islands lawsuit against JPMorgan, in the aftermath of Epstein’s death the massive bank reported over $1 billion in suspicious activity reports to the U.S. Treasury.

Attorney for USVA, Mimi Liu, outlined details to Judge Jed Rakoff in U.S. District Court in Manhattan last Thursday.  According to the astonishing revelations, the entire financial relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and JPMorgan was centered around payments for sex trafficking.  There was no other business between the two entities in the 16 years of Epstein’s use of the bank.  All of the Epstein account transactions were based around his sex trafficking operation.

Additionally, in the aftermath of Epstein’s death, JPMorgan then reported at least $1 billion worth of transactions under the auspices of “suspicious activity.”  This certainly looks like what lawyer Mimi Liu called in court, “covering their ass.”

[VIA CNBC] – JPMorgan Chase notified the Treasury Department of more than $1 billion in transactions related to “human trafficking” by Jeffrey Epstein dating back 16 years after the notorious sex predator killed himself in 2019, a lawyer for the U.S. Virgin Islands told a federal judge at a hearing.

“Epstein’s entire business with JPMorgan and JPMorgan’s entire business with Epstein was human trafficking,” Mimi Liu, an attorney for the Virgin Islands, told Judge Jed Rakoff in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Thursday, according to a transcript reviewed by CNBC.

Liu cited the bank’s notification to the Treasury Department as she argued that Rakoff should issue a summary judgment against JPMorgan.

The huge bank is being sued by the Virgin Islands government for allegedly facilitating sex trafficking by Epstein of young women when he was a JPMorgan customer from 1998 through 2013. (read more)

This certainly puts some semblance of scale to the issues around Epstein and his exploitation of the sex industry to his high profile and powerful clients.   The full scale is obviously unknown; however, if JPMorgan is reporting $1 billion in transactions that might be considered risk for them, we can only guess at the amount of the total transaction through the bank.

Keep in mind, JPMorgan already agreed to pay the Epstein Victims $290 million {GO DEEP} to make the victim issues go away.   What the hell is the scale of the full banking network if this amount of money is being used to throw a bag over it?

Pulling back to the 30,000-foot view, how the bank was operating certainly does start to make the shadows in the background become more visible.  After all, the U.S. government relied on JPMorgan to stabilize the banking sector recently.  And, when you overlay the influence of the BIG BANKS on domestic politics, and contrast in parallel with their assistance for corrupt activity like Epstein, suddenly the catchphrase “too big to fail” takes on an entirely new meaning.

Many of us have always said the top of the corrupt pyramid is banks, global financial institutions and multinationals.  The activity of the political industry takes place below the power structure of the financial system.  The banks control the politicians.  The banks control almost everything, and are the benefactors for the DNC, RNC, RGA, etc. etc.

This is the apex circle of influence, where Jeffrey Epstein operated in concert with the banks – who then facilitated his operations and were regulated by Epstein’s clients.

(Conservative Treehouse, 9/04/2023)  (Archive)

Ray Epps whispers in Ryan Samsel’s ear who then carries out a breach of the police barricades on January 6, 2021. (Credit: public domain)

The man who was seen on multiple video tapes urging the January 6th crowd to storm the Capitol building, the previously well-known agent provocateur Ray Epps, has been charged by the DOJ with one misdemeanor count of “Disorderly or Disruptive Conduct.”

Worse still, the announcement from Main Justice comes via the format of an “information” {SEE HERE} which implies a plea deal was already reached as the charge was made public.  Now the DOJ can say they ‘arrested‘ the guy, and simultaneously flip the narrative as evidence he wasn’t a confidential human source.

This velvet glove arrangement bears striking similarity to the DOJ approach when Senate Intelligence Committee head of security, James Wolfe, leaked the Top-Secret Carter Page FISA application, and was only charged with one count of lying to the FBI about it. {Go Deep} But wait… it gets better.  The pre-selected DC judge is none other than, James Boasberg. {Go Deep}  You just can’t make this stuff up folks.

WASHINGTON — Ray Epps, a Jan. 6 participant whose removal from the FBI’s Capitol Violence webpage sparked conspiracy theories that he was a federal informant, was charged in connection with the Capitol attack on Tuesday.

Epps is charged with one misdemeanor count, disorderly or disruptive conduct on restricted grounds. He was charged by information, suggesting that he plans to enter a plea deal. Not long after he was charged, a virtual plea agreement hearing was set for Wednesday, Sept. 20 before Chief Judge James Boasberg. (read more)

He doesn’t even have to show up in court for the DOJ to have Judge Boasberg rubber stamp the issue.

(Conservative Treehouse, 9/19/2023) (Archive)

If you put the individual names within this group in the search bar, you will discover their connection.  Most of them were the primary background operatives who pushed the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy in ’16, ’17, ’18 and ’19.

With names like James Clapper (DNI), John Brennan (CIA), Tashina Guahar (DOJ-NSD), David Kris (DOJ-NSD, FISA), Paul Kolbe (CIA) and Benjamin Wittes (Lawfare), what you will find is that this specific group are functionaries of the corrupt intelligence apparatus that framed the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense.  This is the team now that will define for DHS how to focus their future targeting efforts.

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) Ken Wainstein, and Counterterrorism Coordinator Nicholas Rasmussen announced the establishment of the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group (Experts Group). The group is comprised of private sector experts who will provide their unique perspectives on the federal government’s intelligence enterprise to DHS’s I&A and the Office of the Counterterrorism Coordinator.

“The security of the American people depends on our capacity to collect, generate, and disseminate actionable intelligence to our federal, state, local, territorial, tribal, campus, and private sector partners,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas. “I express my deep gratitude to these distinguished individuals for dedicating their exceptional expertise, experience, and vision to our critical mission.”

“The Homeland Intelligence Experts Group is being formed at a time of unprecedented challenge, with the U.S. intelligence enterprise facing threats from a range of malign actors, to include foreign nation-state adversaries, domestic violent extremists, cyber criminals, drug-trafficking cartels and other transnational criminal organizations,” said Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis Ken Wainstein. “The Experts Group will be an invaluable asset as we navigate through this evolving threat and operating environment and continue to strengthen our efforts to protect the Homeland.”

“The homeland threat environment is more diverse, dynamic, and challenging than at any point in our post 9/11 history, with threats tied to an array of different terrorist and violent extremist ideologies and narratives,” said Counterterrorism Coordinator Nicholas Rasmussen. “The experience, expertise, and perspective offered by Experts Group members will undoubtedly put the Department in a strong position to confront this threat landscape, and we are grateful for the willingness of the Experts Group members to serve in this important capacity.”

The Experts Group will provide DHS with a wide range of views and perspectives, with a membership that includes former senior intelligence officials, journalists, and prominent human rights and civil liberties advocates. (read more)

Keep in mind, the organization of this group follows the announcement that DHS will be launching online “Enhanced AI” to assist the government in combating  information they deem dangerous to national security.   Put the two together, and I think we can see who will be doing the “defining” of what constitutes “dangerous”.

You will notice I use the term “definition” quite often.  That is because the root of every control mechanism is grounded upon defining things.  When you accept the terms ‘disinformation’, ‘misinformation’, and/or ‘malinformation’, you are buying into the process that permits definitions to determine your travel. Those who define both you and your destination, ultimately control your online experience.

Pay very, very close attention to the two underlined words in the following paragraph:

(SOURCE pdf, Page 3)

Take out the word “improper” and the admission is, DHS uses AI to profile, target and discriminate.  In the second sentence, DHS currently participates in systemic, indiscriminate and/or large-scale monitoring, surveillance, or tracking of individuals.  The only thing those sentences in the paragraph say, is that DHS will not allow AI to create improper outcomes within a system that already exists.

The assembly of a Homeland Intelligence Experts Group gives us the names of those who will be organizing the definitions.

Do not get alarmed, get informed. (Conservative Treehouse, 9/19/2023)  (Archive)

RESOURCES:

Using AI for Content Moderation

Facebook / META / Tech joining with DHS

Zoom will allow Content Scraping by AI 

AI going into The Cloud

U.S. Govt Going into The Cloud With AI

Pentagon activates 175 Million IP’s **ahem**

Big Names to Attend Political AI Forum

DoD to use AI to monitor U.S. Internet for Disinformation

DHS Announces Guidelines for Using AI to monitor Americans.

DHS Announces “Expert Group”

Too many people continue falling for this Lawfare nonsense. CTH has been outlining what Lawfare operations are all about since we deconstructed the Trayvon Martin narrative. Perhaps a reminder is useful.

Lawfare, in its most obvious construct, is not a legal approach per se’, it is the intentional manipulation of the legal system to create the optics around information that is intended to be used by media to influence public opinion. {link}

That’s what Lawfare is all about, manipulating public opinion through leaks to the media.  The leaks do not need to be truthful, accurate or directly in line with the prosecution of the case; they are intended exclusively to manipulate public opinion.

Remember, on August 21st, in another ridiculous Lawfare operation, Special Counsel Jack Smith told ABC that Mark Meadows testified that President Trump never attempted to declassify any information {Go Deep}.   That report was transparently false, yet the media ran with it and multiple alternative media promoted it.  Pure nonsense.

In this latest Lawfare effort, again from Special Counsel Jack Smith, again to ABC news, again about former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, the claim is the Special Counsel granted Meadows immunity (that’s the hook), and that Meadows told President Trump the 2020 election was not rigged or stolen.

Now remember, Mark Meadows wrote about the rigged and stolen 2020 election in his book, so why would he undermine his own story by saying something completely the opposite to Jack Smith that is only coming out now?   The Occam’s razor answer is, he didn’t.  This lawfare story is all made up, fictitious, anonymous sources, manufactured to create a public impression.

Bolstering the likelihood that Meadows gave no such testimony, Meadows lawyers, when contacted by media, said the story is fake news.   Yet again, everyone falls for it.  This is how Lawfare succeeds, and this is how Trayvon Martin’s fake and fabricated ear-witness girlfriend becomes the key witness and embarrasses the prosecution on the stand.

(Via ABC) – Former President Donald Trump’s final chief of staff in the White House, Mark Meadows, has spoken with special counsel Jack Smith’s team at least three times this year, including once before a federal grand jury, which came only after Smith granted Meadows immunity to testify under oath, according to sources familiar with the matter.

The sources said Meadows informed Smith’s team that he repeatedly told Trump in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election that the allegations of significant voting fraud coming to them were baseless, a striking break from Trump’s prolific rhetoric regarding the election.

According to the sources, Meadows also told the federal investigators Trump was being “dishonest” with the public when he first claimed to have won the election only hours after polls closed on Nov. 3, 2020, before final results were in.

“Obviously we didn’t win,” a source quoted Meadows as telling Smith’s team in hindsight. (read more)

NEW: “I told ABC that their story was largely inaccurate. People will have to judge for themselves the decision to run it anyway.” George Terwilliger, Mark Meadows lawyer, to CBS News, responding to new reporting “Ex-Chief of Staff granted immunity, tells special counsel he…

— Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) October 24, 2023

(Conservative Treehouse, 10/24/2023) (Archive)

(Illustration on examining the FISA court by Alexander Hunter/The Washington Times)

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Mike Turner is celebrating the passage of HR 6611, the 2023 FISA reauthorization bill.

Chairman Turner would have granted a clean FISA renewal, he’s that kind of Republican; however, several Republicans demanded changes to the FISA-702 authorities that capture the data of American citizens without a warrant.  Thus, the HPSCI modified the authorities within HR 6611, but they made it worse.

(Via CDT) – Tucked away near the end of the bill the House Intelligence Committee reported on December 7 (H.R. 6611, the “HPSCI bill”) is a provision that would dramatically expand surveillance under the controversial Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA 702”), which sunsets on December 31 unless reauthorized. Section 504 of the bill, innocuously captioned “Definition of Electronic Communications Service Provider,” would expand the types of entities that can be compelled to disclose internet communications whether in storage or in transit.

FISA 702 permits the U.S. government to compel communication service providers to disclose for foreign intelligence purposes the communications of persons reasonably believed to be non-U.S. persons abroad. No warrant is required; a belief that the communications relate to U.S. foreign affairs or national security is sufficient.  Under current FISA 702, only entities that provide communication services like email, calls, and text messaging can be compelled to disclose these communications. 

As FISA Court amicus and longtime practitioner Marc Zwilligener and his colleague Steve Lane have already noted, the HPSCI bill would upend the current system, enabling the government to compel anyone with mere access to the equipment on which such communications are stored or transmitted to disclose those communications.  That could include personnel at coffee shops that offer WiFi to their customers, a town library that offers public computer internet services, hotels, shared workspaces, landlords and even AirBNB hosts that offer WiFi to the people who stay there, cloud storage services that host but do not access data, and large data centers that rent out computer server space to their clients.

The provision is intended to reverse a rare decision of the FISA Court of Review (FISCR), which had rejected the government’s claim that a service that a company provided fit within the scope of Section 702. In its effort to override the FISCR ruling, the HPSCI bill has opened Pandora’s Box.  

Because FISA 702 does not merely give the government power to compel production of communications but rather to require that businesses “provide the Government with all information, facilities, or assistance necessary to accomplish the acquisition,” [emphasis supplied] the government could use this new section to compel changes to the infrastructure and operations of some of the business entities listed above. For example, a provider of computer co-location services whose business model is to rent out and to service space on which its clients place their computer servers could be compelled to engineer its service to facilitate such access. In addition, because the HPSCI bill’s expansion is designed to pull in entities that do not currently even have access to communications, the extent of this forced restructure could be severe.

Such a shift not only affects American businesses, it is also likely to spur on overcollection and improperly sweep in Americans’ communications. The expansion would likely facilitate compelled  “Upstream” collection from these entities, a technique in which the government demands access to the entire stream of communications data, rather than obtaining only the communications to and from surveillance targets. It may be difficult for businesses that have access to equipment on which communications are stored and transmitted, but have never had to access the communications themselves, to ensure that only the data of Section 702 targets is turned over to the government.

Instead, they may be compelled to turn over entire communication streams or permit the copying and dragnet scanning of all the data on a server they host. Upstream collection performed by sophisticated giant telcos who operate the Internet backbone already has a fraught history of overcollection, including sweeping in wholly domestic communications (such as through multi communication transaction and “Abouts” collection). Forcing businesses that do not by practice even access communications to comply with FISA 702 orders—including Upstream orders—is reckless, and very likely to cause domestic communications to be improperly collected. (read more)

Here’s the core problem.  The DATA COLLECTION is not going away, meaning the wholesale gathering of the metadata on all electronic communication is the baseline.  As long as that baseline exists, the debate is about how the metadata can be accessed and what queries into that data can take place without a search warrant.

If FISA-702 was completely removed, the executive branch (DOJ-NSD) would be on the honor system, which essentially- they are now.

As long as the capability to retrieve and store the data exists, it will be exploited.   The data collection horse left the barn long ago.  That reality only leaves the ability to limit access as a solution to the abuses and warrantless surveillance.

Having looked extensively at this issue for years, and accepting the data collection is never going to be stopped, the only pathway to try and ensure rules and regulations are compliant with the 4th amendment, would be an oversight panel from the legislative branch put inside the process.

The only time the legislative branch has any power in the FISA process, is when they reauthorize its use.  Only at these specific moments is the legislative branch currently involved.  At all other times, it is the executive branch (DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI) involved, along with the FISA Court which represents the judicial branch.   The absence of the legislative branch in the process could be considered the oversight problem.

FISA, as it applies to American citizens caught up in the “incidental collection,” is clearly weaponized.  The underlying database, the storage system for all data, is the other problem.  As long as thousands of people in the executive branch have access to search this database, that access will be abused.

[CTH] – Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified, April 27, 2023, that more than 3.4 million search queries into the NSA database took place between Dec. 1st, 2020 and Nov. 30th, 2021, by government officials and/or contractors working on behalf of the federal government. These search queries were based on authorizations related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Approximately 30% of those 3.4 million search queries were outside the rules and regulations that govern warrantless searches – what the politically correct government calls “non-compliant searches.”  That means during the year 2021, more than 1 million searches of private documents and communication of Americans were illegal and outside the rules.

Additionally, IG Horowitz admitted that somewhere north of 10,000 federal employees have access to conduct these searches of the NSA database; a database which contains the electronic data of every single American, including emails, text messages, social media posts, instant messages, direct messages, phone calls, geolocation identifiers, purchases by electronic funds, banking records and any keystroke any American person puts into any electronic device for any reason. (more)

In my opinion, instead of trying to put the FISA genie back into the bottle, Congress needs to work on the accountability piece.  The punishment for abusing the database needs to be defined – perhaps 5 years imprisonment for each search violation.

The only thing I can think of that will improve the “702” issue, is a legislatively created oversight panel forced within the process (that puts the legislative branch inside the DOJ/FISC relationship) that has full access to see and monitor everything that is being done by the DOJ/FBI.

I don’t know if that would work, but it’s better than what they are doing now.

The Committee on Rules will meet on Monday, December 11, 2023 at 4:00 PM ET in H-313, The Capitol on the following measures:

H.R. 357 – Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act
H.R. 1147 – Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2023
H.R. 6570 – Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act
H.R. 6611 – FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023  (link)

The current FISA-702 authority will likely be extended to April 19th.

Hopefully the Senate will block the modified House bill, HR 6611, which expands the current authority.

FUBAR

(Conservative Treehouse, 12/9/2023)  (Archive)

(…) If there is one corrupt DC player who has escaped scrutiny for her corrupt endeavors, it would be Mary McCord.  More than any other Lawfare operative within Main Justice, Mary McCord sits at the center of every table in the manufacturing of cases against Donald Trump. {GO DEEP} Mary McCord’s husband is Sheldon Snook; he was the right hand to the legal counsel of Chief Justice John Roberts.

(Credit: Safe and Effective podcast/Jeff Melody)

When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous ‘Woods File’).  That’s why the Steele Dossier ultimately became important.  It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump.

When the application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin.  Carlin quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016 just before the final application was submitted (October 21,2016).  John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.

♦ When the FISA application was finally submitted (approved by Sally Yates and James Comey), it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant.

A few months later, February 2017, with Donald Trump now in office as President, it was Mary McCord who went with Deputy AG Sally Yates to the White House to confront White House legal counsel Don McGahn over the Michael Flynn interview with FBI agents.  The surveillance of Flynn’s calls was presumably done under the auspices and legal authority of the FISA application Mary McCord previously was in charge of submitting.

♦ At the time the Carter Page application was filed (October 21, 2016), Mary McCord’s chief legal counsel inside the office was a DOJ-NSD lawyer named Michael Atkinson.  In his role as the legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, it was Atkinson’s job to review and audit all FISA applications submitted from inside the DOJ.  Essentially, Atkinson was the DOJ internal compliance officer in charge of making sure all FISA applications were correctly assembled and documented.

♦ When the anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint was filed against President Trump for the issues of the Ukraine call with President Zelensky, the Intelligence Community Inspector General had to change the rules for the complaint to allow an anonymous submission.  Prior to this change, all intelligence whistleblowers had to put their name on the complaint.  It was this 2019 IGIC who changed the rules.  Who was the Intelligence Community Inspector General?  Michael Atkinson.

When ICIG Michael Atkinson turned over the newly authorized anonymous whistleblower complaint to the joint House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee (Schiff and Nadler chairs), who did Michael Atkinson give the complaint to?  Mary McCord.

Yes, after she left main justice, Mary McCord took the job of working for Chairman Jerry Nadler and Chairman Adam Schiff as the chief legal advisor inside the investigation that led to the construction of articles of impeachment.   As a consequence, Mary McCord received the newly permitted anonymous whistleblower complaint from her old office colleague Michael Atkinson.

♦ During his investigation of the Carter Page application, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered an intentional lie inside the Carter Page FISA application (directly related to the ‘Woods File’), which his team eventually tracked to FBI counterintelligence division lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith.  Eventually Clinesmith was criminally charged with fabricating evidence (changed wording on an email) in order to intentionally falsify the underlying evidence in the FISA submission.

When John Durham took the Clinesmith indictment to court, the judge in the case was James Boasberg.

♦ In addition to being a DC criminal judge, James Boasberg is also a FISA court judge who signed-off on one of the renewals for the FISA application that was submitted using fraudulent evidence fabricated by Kevin Clinesmith.  In essence, now the presiding judge over the FISA court, Boasberg was the FISC judge who was tricked by Clinesmith, and now the criminal court judge in charge of determining Clinesmith’s legal outcome.  Judge Boasberg eventually sentenced Clinesmith to 6 months probation.

As an outcome of continued FISA application fraud and wrongdoing by the FBI, in their exploitation of searches of the NSA database, Presiding FISC Judge James Boasberg appointed an amici curiae advisor to the court who would monitor the DOJ-NSD submissions and ongoing FBI activities.

Who did James Boasberg select as a FISA court amicus?  Mary McCord.

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse)

♦ SUMMARY:  Mary McCord submitted the original false FISA application to the court using the demonstrably false Dossier.  Mary McCord participated in the framing of Michael Flynn.  Mary McCord worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to create a fraudulent whistleblower complaint against President Trump; and Mary McCord used that manipulated complaint to assemble articles of impeachment on behalf of the joint House Intel and Judiciary Committee.  Mary McCord then took up a defensive position inside the FISA court to protect the DOJ and FBI from sunlight upon all the aforementioned corrupt activity.

You can clearly see how Mary McCord would be a person of interest if anyone was going to start digging into corruption internally within the FBI, DOJ or DOJ-NSD.

What happened next….

November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)

That’s the context; now I want to go back a little.

First, when did Mary McCord become “amicus” to the FISA court?  ANSWER: When the court (Boasberg) discovered IG Michael Horowitz was investigating the fraudulent FISA application.  In essence, the FISA Court appointed the person who submitted the fraudulent filing, to advise on any ramifications from the fraudulent filing.  See how that works?

Now, let’s go deeper….

When Mary McCord went to the White House with Sally Yates to talk to white house counsel Don McGhan about the Flynn call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, and the subsequent CBS interview with VP Pence, where Pence’s denial of any wrongdoing took place, the background narrative in the attack against Flynn was the Logan Act.

The construct of the Logan Act narrative was pure Lawfare, and DAG Sally Yates with Acting NSD AAG Mary McCord were the architects.

Why was the DOJ National Security Division concerned with a conflict between what Pence said on CBS and what Flynn said about his conversations with Kislyak?

This is where a big mental reset is needed.  Flynn did nothing wrong. The incoming National Security Advisor can say anything he wants with the Russian ambassador, short of giving away classified details of any national security issue.  In December of 2016, if Michael Flynn wanted to say Obama was an a**hole, and the Trump administration disagreed with everything he ever did, the incoming NSA was free to do so.  There was simply nothing wrong with that conversation – regardless of content.

So, why were McCord and Yates so determined to make an issue in media and in confrontation with the White House?  Why did the DOJ-NSD even care?  This is the part that people overlooked when the media narrative was driving the news cycle.  People got too stuck in the weeds and didn’t ask the right questions.

Some entity, we discover later was the FBI counterintelligence division, was monitoring Flynn’s calls.  They transcribed a copy of the call between Flynn and Kislyak, and that became known as the “Flynn Cuts” as described within internal documents, and later statements.

After the Flynn/Kislyak conversation was leaked to the media, Obama asked ODNI Clapper how that call got leaked.  Clapper went to the FBI on 1/4/17 and asked FBI Director James Comey.  Comey gave Clapper a copy of the Flynn Cuts which Clapper then took back to the White House to explain to Obama.

Obama’s White House counsel went bananas, because Clapper had just walked directly into the Oval Office with proof the Obama administration was monitoring the incoming National Security Advisor.  Obama’s plausible deniability of the surveillance was lost as soon as Clapper walked in with the written transcript.

That was the motive for the 1/5/17 Susan Rice memo, and the reason for Obama to emphasize “buy the book” three times.

It wasn’t that Obama didn’t know already; it was that a document trail now existed (likely a CYA from Comey) that took away Obama’s plausible deniability of knowledge.  The entire January 5th meeting was organized to mitigate this issue.

Knowing the Flynn Cuts were created simultaneously with the phone call, and knowing how it was quickly decided to use the Logan Act as a narrative against Flynn and Trump, we can be very sure both McCord and Yates had read that transcript before they went to the White House.  [Again, this is the entire purpose of them going to the White House to confront McGhan with their manufactured concerns.]

So, when it comes to ‘who leaked’ the reality of the Flynn/Kislyak call to the media, the entire predicate for the Logan Act violation – in hindsight – I would bet a donut it was Mary McCord.

But wait, there’s more…. 

Sheldon Snook (Credit: X)

Now we go back to McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook.

Sheldon was working for the counsel to John Roberts.  The counsel to the Chief Justice has one job, to review the legal implications of issues before the court and advise Justice John Roberts.  The counsel to the Chief Justice knows everything happening in the court and is the sounding board for any legal issues impacting the Supreme Court.

In his position as the right hand of the counsel to the chief justice, Sheldon Snook would know everything happening inside the court.

At the time, there was nothing bigger inside the court than the Alito opinion known as the Dobb’s Decision – the returning of abortion law to the states.  Without any doubt, the counsel to Chief Justice Roberts would have that decision at the forefront of his advice and counsel.  By extension, this puts the actual written Alito opinion in the orbit of Sheldon Snook.

After the Supreme Court launched a heavily publicized internal investigation into the leaking of the Dobbs decision (Alito opinion), something interesting happened.  Sheldon Snook left his position.   If you look at the timing of the leak, the investigation and the Sheldon Snook exit, the circumstantial evidence looms large.

Of course, given the extremely high stakes, the institutional crisis with the public discovering the office of the legal counsel to the Chief Justice likely leaked the decision, such an outcome would be catastrophic for the institutional credibility.  In essence, it would be Robert’s office who leaked the opinion to the media.

If you were Chief Justice John Roberts and desperately needed to protect the integrity of the court, making sure such a thermonuclear discovery was never identified would be paramount.  Under the auspices of motive, Sheldon Snook would exit quietly.  Which is exactly what happened.

The timeline holds the key.

Last point….  Remember the stories of the J6 investigative staff all going to work for Jack Smith on the investigation of Donald Trump?   Well, Mary McCord was a member of that team [citation]; all indications are that her background efforts continue today as a quiet member of the Special Counsel team that is still attacking Donald Trump.  (Conservative Treehouse, 12/19/2023)  (Archive)

Interesting move and office location in yet another election year.  In 2022, Joe Biden appointed John Podesta as the “Clean Energy Czar,” essentially giving him control over doling out the $326 billion in Green New Deal, aka “Inflation Reduction Act,” money provided by Congress.  At least that was the pretense of the purpose.

The actual agenda for Podesta, in 2022, appeared to be using the $316 billion GND money fund leftist support networks of the Biden administration in the midterm election cycle.  Now we enter another election year, and Podesta is being given a new title to assume the role of John Kerry as Biden’s latest “Climate Diplomat” as soon as Kerry exits this spring.

In an interesting datapoint that highlights both the domestic (election ’24) and foreign policy political motivations, John Podesta will work out of the White House and not the State Dept where Kerry’s current office is located.  John “Skippy” Podesta had no experience in “climate policy” prior to being tapped as the climate czar in 2022.  Then again, none was needed considering the non-pretending version of his responsibility.

It will be interesting to see how expanded this effort will be as the replacement to Kerry.  In my opinion, the move is about a change in title only, as the “inflation” part of the Green New Deal payment system doesn’t poll well with the American people.  Continued rampant inflation, despite the ‘inflation reduction act’ is a hot button issue.  Changing the title allows the process to continue albeit under a different guise.

WASHINGTON – White House adviser John Podesta has been tapped to be the Biden administration’s top climate diplomat once John Kerry steps down from his post this spring, a person familiar with the move told POLITICO.

Podesta is currently overseeing the implementation of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the Democrats’ signature climate law. The Washington Post first reported Podesta’s new role.

Podesta will reportedly operate out of the White House rather than the State Department, where Kerry, a former Secretary of State, maintains an office. Podesta will also maintain his role overseeing the IRA rollout.

The veteran Democratic strategist has a long history in climate politics, including on the international stage. Podesta will be the U.S. face at the COP29 negotiations later this year in Baku, Azerbaijan.

But those international talks will come after the November U.S. election. That leaves U.S. positioning uncertain if President Joe Biden should lose to Republican frontrunner former President Donald Trump, who pulled the nation out of the 2015 Paris climate agreement when he was in the White House. (read more)

(Conservative Treehouse, 2/01/2024)  (Archive)

I’m not sure what provoked Tucker Carlson to actually follow through on this plan; I know he was deeply worried about being arrested in Russia.  However, Carlson did something every U.S. journalist should do, even though they are forbidden by the State Dept from doing it.

The reason the U.S. Government doesn’t want people traveling into Russia, is specifically because people will tell the experience of their time in Russia, and that will run completely counter to the acceptable narrative.  Tucker Carlson took the chance, and the intelligence apparatus is likely going bananas.  WATCH:

If we lived in a world governed by grown-ups, this interview would not be even slightly controversial.  Unfortunately, we live in a world choreographed by the U.S. intelligence apparatus to provide us only one skewed version of global reality.  When it comes to Russia, nothing… not a single thing…. is in alignment with what Western media proclaim is the reality. (Conservative Treehouse, 2/06/2024)  (Archive)

The interview:

The media scaremongering ensues:

Tucker is about to flip the script on years’ worth of pro-Ukraine propaganda and the Fake News is already throwing a tantrum.

Their control of the Narrative is being slowly, painfully, eroded away from them and it’s beautiful to watch 😍 pic.twitter.com/YSdAxr4RWh

— Patri0tsareinContr0l (@Patri0tContr0l) February 7, 2024

The Queen of Uranium One and Russiagate offers her opinion of Tucker Carlson going to Russia:

“[Tucker Carlson] is what’s called a ‘useful idiot’… he’s like a puppy dog.”

Hillary Clinton reacts to Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin in an exclusive sit-down with @WagnerTonight tonight at 9pm ET on MSNBC. pic.twitter.com/xB4c02puet

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) February 7, 2024

More signs of panic appear before Tucker’s interview is even published:

He is a traitor. https://t.co/F4yK56vSun

— Adam Kinzinger (Slava Ukraini) 🇺🇸🇺🇦🇮🇱 (@AdamKinzinger) February 4, 2024

Tucker @TuckerCarlson is aiding and abetting the enemy. The same enemy that threatens us with nuclear weapons, interferes in our elections, and allies with Iran, North Korea, and Hamas. This is who Tucker courts. https://t.co/9qAIlDm9aA

— Alexander S. Vindman ❎ (@AVindman) February 3, 2024

There are idiots. And useful idiots. And really really useful idiots.

And Tucker Carlson. https://t.co/xmfvp84ncY

— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) February 7, 2024

Judge Napolitano discusses the interview with  Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern.

Major Hat Tip to FoiaFan for staying on top of this. 

In August of 2020 I sent this tweet to the general public after a lengthy discussion with John Durham’s lead investigator:

This tweet created major controversy amid those who were deep in the research weeds on the entire Spygate/Russiagate fiasco. Few would believe that in the effort to preserve the institutions at all costs, AG Bill Barr was the Bondo application and Special Prosecutor John Durham was the spray paint.   It was all a coverup operation to hide the rot in the DOJ and beyond.

Essentially Durham and Bill Aldenberg admitted to me that nothing the Robert Mueller team did in the preceding two years was subject to their review.

Yes, that is correct, Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann were specifically appointed in May 2017 by Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to help coverup and hide the IC targeting of Donald Trump in the preceding two years.   Emphasize this point, the intelligence community was targeting candidate Donald Trump, because they had the power as a result of the new surveillance state.

Mueller was to hide that IC targeting operation.  Mueller had the full support of all Democrat and Republican leadership.

When Mueller was finished with his segment (2017-2019), newly installed AG Bill Barr appointed John Durham as the safety mechanism to continue the coverup operation (2019 through 2021).   This became crystal clear during my phone contacts when the special counsel admitted they would not review anything the Mueller team touched.

John Durham would not, likely because he ‘could not’, touch any of the participants in the Trump targeting operation that were inside the government.  His only accountability review was looking at those who were outside government within the Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie, etc.

The majority of the 2015/2016 operation against Trump was conducted by inside government actors who were assisting the Clinton campaign effort.  With John Durham admitting he would not look at those govt participants, essentially the Durham investigation was a farse, a joke, a total snow job.  Hence… my tweet.

Today FOIAFan is noting the budget request from the office of John Durham provides receipts for exactly what I was saying HERE – {Go Deep}.   The budget memo was recently released as part of a demanded FOIA request:

[SOURCE]

October 2022 – A jury found Igor Danchenko not guilty on four counts of lying to the FBI, on four occasions.  (1) Danchenko told FBI agents he received a phone call in late July 2016 Sergei Millian. However, Danchenko knew he had never received a call from Millian. (2) Danchenko gave a false statement to FBI agents that he “was under the impression” that the late July 2016 call was from Millian. (3) Danchenko falsely stated to FBI agents that he believed he spoke to Millian on the phone on more than one occasion. And (4) Danchenko lied that he “believed he has spoken to [Millian] on the telephone,” when Danchenko well knew he had never spoken to Millian.

The FBI didn’t care about the details of the lies that were told to them; the lies served a purpose.  The FBI purpose was to use the Steele Dossier as the foundation for a fraudulent all-encompassing search warrant against the Trump campaign and presidency, using Carter Page.  That construct was always the motive of the DOJ/FBI use of Danchenko, Chris Steele and the infamous dossier that gave the DOJ the patina they needed for the FISA application.

The trial itself showed how corrupt the FBI and DOJ were in this scheme by: A) offering Chris Steele $1 million for proof of the dossier content.  B) By making Danchenko a confidential human source for two years to shield him, “sources and methods”, from investigative inquiry. C) By paying Danchenko $200,000 for his time as a useful tool and confidential human source.

This is where we must stop pretending.  The Durham premise of a “duped FBI” is laughable on its face. No one in the FBI or DOJ-NSD was “duped” by false information from Igor Danchenko.

The lies, as they were with Clinton lawyer Michael Sussman, were well known to be false, yet materially beneficial to the unspoken intention of the DOJ/FBI, which was to target Donald Trump.   The corrupt intent of the DOJ and FBI is the basic rot John Durham was appointed to cover over.

Follow the timeline:

Danchenko interviewed by FBI in January 2017. Tells FBI dossier is junk.

FBI hires Danchenko in March 2017 paying him $200,000, just before renewing the FISA they now know is based on junk.

May 2017 Robert Mueller appointed to cover up all of the DOJ/FBI corruption that existed in the Trump targeting.

June 2017 Mueller interviews Danchenko, then renews the FISA.

February 2019, Bill Barr enters as Attorney General.

April 2019 Robert Mueller completes investigation.

May 2019, Bill Barr appoints Durham just to look into things.  Immediately then begs Trump not to declassify any documents.  Trump writes executive order giving Bill Barr ability to review and declassify documents.

October 2020, Bill Barr officially (and quietly), makes John Durham a special counsel.  We don’t find out until December (after the Nov election).  Which is why in…. October 2020, FBI drops Igor Danchenko as paid informant.

Put it all together and you see the continuum.

(1) Donald Trump was being targeted by a corrupt DOJ and FBI.  (2) Robert Mueller was installed in May 2017 to cover up the targeting.  (3) When Mueller is nearing his completion, Bill Barr steps in to mitigate institutional damage from 1 and 2. (4) Barr maintains damage control and installs Durham. (5) Durham takes over the coverup operation from October 2020 (Danchenko safe to exit with Durham appointment official).

Main Justice kept a bag over Danchenko until they needed a scapegoat, created by Durham, to sell a narrative that Main Justice was duped. John Durham charged Danchenko (working outside govt) with lying to the FBI while simultaneously avoiding drawing attention to the FBI/DOJ officials (inside govt) who knew Danchenko was lying and were willfully blind to it in order to continue attacking and investigating President Donald Trump.

James Comey, Robert Mueller, Bill Barr, John Durham, the Mar-a-Lago raid, the appointment of Jack Smith…  it’s all one long continuum of the same targeting and coverup operation.

Bill Barr was the Bondo application and John Durham was the spray paint.

The entire system is corrupt.

(Conservative Treehouse, 2/27/2024)  (Archive)

(Republished with permission)

Judge James Boasberg (Credit: public domain)

If you ever needed a good point to highlight the nature of political Lawfare, this is a great example.

Julie Kelly essentially notes that Special Prosecutor Jack Smith is asking DC Judge James Boasberg to decide what evidence should be given to Florida Judge Aileen Cannon.

Julie Kelly (Via Twitter) – “It appears that records related to the grand jury proceedings in DC on the classified docs case remain under seal and have not been transmitted to Judge Cannon or defense.

Recall that almost the entire investigation into the classified docs matter took place in Washington DC–not southern FLA even though it is the controlling jurisdiction since the alleged “crime” of retaining classified records/national defense info happened at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach.

DOJ then Jack Smith kept the case in Trump-hating DC courthouse so they could get favorable rulings from then-chief judge Beryl Howell–which they did. For example, Howell cited the crime fraud exception to justify piercing atty-client privilege between Trump and his lawyer, Evan Corcoran, to force Corcoran to turn over his records to DOJ.

Highly unlikely that would have happened in FLA especially before Judge Cannon. But right before indictment, Jack Smith moved the case to Florida. Reports at the time indicated DOJ read summaries of its grand jury evidence to a FLA grand jury in order to secure the indictment.

So, how is it almost nine months post-indictment that trove of evidence remains under seal? When the issue was raised, David Harbach said DOJ was “in the process” of asking the current DC chief judge James Boasberg to review the file, add redactions if needed, and transmit to FLA court. (link)

There is a certain level of cognitive disassociation needed by the media to ignore how the DOJ is using a DC court system to prosecute a Florida case against Trump.   Go Deep on Boasberg HERE

Boasberg, an ally of SSCI Chairman Mark Warner, has intercepted several cases that brought sunlight upon the corrupt DC system.  In each case Boasberg ruled in favor of maintaining the corruption, including his willfully blind support of the FBI searching NSA databases to conduct illegal surveillance of Americans, and including Boasberg’s personal appointment of Mary McCord to run defense on behalf of the corrupt DOJ main office.

(Conservative Treehouse, 3/01/2024)  (Archive)

Julie Kelly:

Before I get to summary of afternoon proceedings in FLA classified docs hearing, I want to isolate this.

It appears that records related to the grand jury proceedings in DC on the classified docs case remain under seal and have not been transmitted to Judge Cannon or defense.

Recall that almost the entire investigation into the classified docs matter took place in Washington DC–not southern FLA even though it is the controlling jurisdiction since the alleged “crime” of retaining classified records/national defense info happened at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach.

DOJ then Jack Smith kept the case in Trump-hating DC courthouse so they could get favorable rulings from then-chief judge Beryl Howell–which they did.

For example, Howell cited the crime fraud exception to justify piercing atty-client privilege between Trump and his lawyer, Evan Corcoran, to force Corcoran to turn over his records to DOJ.

Highly unlikely that would have happened in FLA especially before Judge Cannon.

But right before indictment, Jack Smith moved the case to Florida. Reports at the time indicated DOJ read summaries of its grand jury evidence to a FLA grand jury in order to secure the indictment.

So, how is it almost nine months post-indictment that trove of evidence remains under seal?

When the issue was raised, David Harbach said DOJ was “in the process” of asking the current DC chief judge James Boasberg to review the file, add redactions if needed, and transmit to FLA court.

Suuuuure.

Before I get to summary of afternoon proceedings in FLA classified docs hearing, I want to isolate this.

It appears that records related to the grand jury proceedings in DC on the classified docs case remain under seal and have not been transmitted to Judge Cannon or defense.…

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) March 1, 2024

The Daily Mail has an article detailing dozens of violent crimes perpetrated by Joe Biden’s illegal alien border invasion [SEE HERE]. The subject theme is “the grim toll of a migrant crime wave sweeping across the United States.”  The article details the graphic and horrific nature of multiple violent criminals who came into the country illegally and murdered, raped, assaulted and organized into groups for the purpose of robbery and theft.

Additionally, in Polk County Florida, Sheriff Grady Judd outlines a sting operation called “March Sadness” where 228 people were arrested and 13 victims of human trafficking were rescued by the police unit.  The details shared by Sherriff Judd are sobering as he outlines exactly what was taking place and how the illegal alien trafficking system is creating victims from many of the female migrants. [ARTICLE HERE] – WATCH (prompted):

The details of these articles and press conferences are likely not a surprise to CTH readers as we have discussed exactly these scenarios in our SAF (slowly at first) ground reports.  Unfortunately, the outcomes described by the Daily Mail accounting and the sting operation by Sherriff Judd are likely only the tip of the iceberg.

What Judd outlines about the federal government giving the illegal aliens free airline tickets is infuriating.  Watch that video above for details.

Sherriff Grady Judd

(Conservative Treehouse, 3/07/2024) (Archive)

Victoria Nuland (Credit: public domain)

Victoria Nuland, the third-highest ranking U.S. diplomat and one of the principal agents responsible for attempted color revolutions, (ie. Russia and Ukraine), will retire and leave her post this month, according to The State Department today.

This is a good indicator that things are not going according to the Obama/Biden agenda. GOOD!

Anthony Blinken – Victoria Nuland has let me know that she intends to step down in the coming weeks as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs – a role in which she has personified President Biden’s commitment to put diplomacy back at the center of our foreign policy and revitalize America’s global leadership at a crucial time for our nation and the world.

Toria’s tenure caps three and a half decades of remarkable public service under six Presidents and ten Secretaries of State. Starting with her very first posting as a consular officer in Guangzhou, China, Toria’s had most of the jobs in this Department. Political officer and economic officer. Spokesperson and chief of staff. Deputy Assistant Secretary and Assistant Secretary. Special Envoy and Ambassador.

These experiences have armed Toria with an encyclopedic knowledge of a wide range of issues and regions, and an unmatched capacity to wield the full toolkit of American diplomacy to advance our interests and values.

What makes Toria truly exceptional is the fierce passion she brings to fighting for what she believes in most: freedom, democracy, human rights, and America’s enduring capacity to inspire and promote those values around the world. (read more)

If you believe that last paragraph, start writing reviews on the culinary nuances of Gas Station sushi.

Slava Ukraini, comrades!  /s

(Conservative Treehouse, 3/05/2024)  (Archive)

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse)

Retired Colonel Douglas MacGregor (Credit: YouTube clipping)

Retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor delivers a surprisingly accurate response to the situation created by Joe Biden as espoused in the 2024 State of the Union address.  I cannot emphasize the value of these remarks strongly enough, in part because my own independent research – and that of a global team I have been working with- is in direct alignment with this outline.

Two years ago, I accepted the reality that Western sanctions against Russia were profoundly different from all other sanctions and completely ridiculous in the bigger picture of how the global economy operates.  A sanction regime is familiar and has been used against Cuba, North Korea, Iran and even Venezuela before.  Few were paying attention, but for the first time the U.S sanctions against Russia were not created to target Russia and punish any violator, they were created to remove the tools which would allow violations.  The actual dollar as a trade currency was being weaponized.

What followed was not a surprise.  Given the nature of the relationships in the geopolitical world, it only took a few months for Russia and their allies to create new tools which would render the Western economic sanctions irrelevant.  That’s exactly what happened, and the Russian economy has thrived, while their relationship with two-thirds of the global world has strengthened.

Feeling like the only person who could see through the opaque nature of a narrative that surrounded the Russian sanctions, I quietly set out on a mission to understand what this was all about.  None of it made sense. More on that journey will follow. However, what Macgregor is describing is precisely the outcome that was predictable two years ago.

There is an information war against what Macgregor describes in the beginning of these remarks, and people I know personally have become targets as a result. It might surprise many to discover the nature of this information war does not originate with government or politicians. Our focus has been misplaced and our emphasis has been on the wrong syllable. WATCH:

The targets within this information war are not people who are criticizing politicians. The core targets within this information war are those who are talking about the entities who are controlling and directing the politicians and government.  The voices who are considered a threat are not, repeat NOT, voices who are critical of government.  The voices who are considered a threat are those who understand the government actors are controlled and intentionally presented as the false source of the problem.

Just as Jack Smith is not the controlling entity organizing the targeting of Donald Trump, so too is Joe Biden (and the administration) not the originating entity who organized the Western sanction regime against Russia.  Jack Smith and Joe Biden are essentially actors, vessels following a design that has been created by outside government entities for the purpose of targeting Donald Trump and/or Russia respectively.  The bigger motives and intents of targeting both are essentially the same.  There are trillions at stake.

Outside government actors like Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann and crew are the organizers behind Jack Smith’s effort.  They are the characters who coordinate with Fani Willis (GA) and Letishia James (NY).  Those individuals are funded by outside government institutions.  Ultimately, Jack Smith is the vessel.

Within the Western finance system, Blackrock, Vanguard, the WEF and a host of similarly aligned massive financial interests are the organizers behind the Russian sanction regime.  The USA government is the vessel.

FOLLOW THE MONEY…. This is one of the reasons why the entire political establishment is behind support for Ukraine. Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street and a host of massive financial interests are the funding mechanism for U.S. politicians.

The various Western governments and politicians are the vessels, not the originating sources of these policies.

Macgregor doesn’t go deep in the weeds on this, but what he describes as the economic and financial outcome is entirely accurate. (Conservative Treehouse, 3/08/2024)  (Archive)

House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Mike Turner (Credit: public domain)

The Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Mike Turner, may be a Republican – but he is no friend of the American freedom movement who do not like the surveillance state.

Factually, Mike Turner is a part of the deep swamp and has advocated for reforms that make the unconstitutional FISA-702 exploits even worse.  As a result, this meeting with the people who control the surveillance mechanism makes sense.

WASHINGTON DC – The House Intelligence Committee is slated to hear from a series of top national security officials for a public hearing Tuesday, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. That list includes:

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines
CIA Director Bill Burns
FBI Director Chris Wray
U.S. Cyber Command Director Gen. Timothy Haugh
Defense Intelligence Agency Director Jeffrey Kruse
(LINK)

The FISA-702 surveillance authority is scheduled to expire on April 19th, “Patriots Day.”

Everyone agrees the version of the House authorization by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) is the worst possible outcome; it expands 702 abuse by expanding the surveillance authority.  That reality is factually accurate and correct.

So, reconcile this:

Wait, what?

If the 702-reauthorization bill that passed the HPSCI committee vote is as bad as Kash Patel and everyone says it is (which it is); and if the bill completely ignores the reforms that were suggested and advocated for by Patel and Nunes (which it does); then how does Kash Patel reconcile his boss Devin Nunes supporting the bill per Mike Turner?

The reconciliation is found inside the issue I have recently written about.

Mike Turner is lying about the support from John Ratcliffe and Devin Nunes for the HPSCI FISA-702 reauthorization bill. Ratcliffe and Nunes do not support the Turner construct.

But wait, if that is true (which it is), then why are Ratcliffe, Nunes, and by extension Patel, silent about Turner’s false support claims?

The answer…. Institutional preservation of the HPSCI compartment, and a desire for access therein.

Yes, that is correct. They will rage against the outcome of the institutional endeavor, but only so far as the value of the institution itself must be maintained. Ratcliffe, Nunes and yes, Kash Patel are functionaries of the system. Their sense of identity is dependent on the system.

To remind….

The CIA director, NSA director, ODNI, FBI Director, etc are not in charge of the compartments they represent. They are simply functionaries -middle men- who operate in the space between where the compass points are directed, where the data originates, and oversight of that data that is ultimately filtered and delivered to the functionaries, who then brief the representatives…. who then create policy… albeit flawed policy…. based on a very specific, controlled, compartmented and skewed information flow. (more)

April 19, 1775

(Conservative Treehouse, 3/09/2024)  (Archive)

Alright, alright, alright. All the right people are pearl clutching as the new MAGA RNC leadership starts eliminating positions, reprioritizing the Republican National Committee on the functions that matter, and canceling professionally republican vendor contracts.

Essentially, the business end of the professionally republican RNC is being taken apart and retooled as a more election centric operation.

WASHINGTON – Donald Trump’s newly installed leadership team at the Republican National Committee on Monday began the process of pushing out dozens of officials, according to two people close to the Trump campaign and the RNC.

All told, the expectation is that more than 60 RNC staffers who work across the political, communications and data departments will be let go. Those being asked to resign include five members of the senior staff, though the names were not made public. Additionally, some vendor contracts are expected to be cut.

In a letter to some political and data staff, Sean Cairncross, the RNC’s new chief operating officer, said that the new committee leadership was “in the process of evaluating the organization and staff to ensure the building is aligned” with its vision. “During this process, certain staff are being asked to resign and reapply for a position on the team.”

The overhaul is aimed at cutting, what one of the people described as, “bureaucracy” at the RNC. But the move also underscores the swiftness with which Trump’s operation is moving to take over the Republican Party’s operations after the former president all but clinched the party’s presidential nomination last week.

Trump’s campaign took over operational control of the RNC on Monday. On Friday, former North Carolina GOP Chair Michael Whatley was elected the RNC’s new chair, and Trump daughter-in-law Lara Trump was elected as co-chair. Both had Trump’s endorsement. Additionally, Trump senior campaign adviser Chris LaCivita was named as the RNC’s new chief of staff. (read more)

Oh dear, vendor contracts are being cut. (Conservative Treehouse, 3/12/2024)  (Archive)

Rosa Brooks (Credit: Georgetown Law)

Chairman Pete Sessions (TX-CD17) appears to have taken the first step in what could be a very lengthy process of sunlight.  Chairman Sessions has sent a preservation letter to Georgetown University School of Law, identifying a couple of people at the root of the problem, Rosa Brooks and Mary McCord. {SEE HERE}

RED STATE – […] Sessions specifically singled out Professor Mary B. McCord for Brooks’ attention. McCord is now the executive director of the Georgetown University School of Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protections, or ICAP. 

Just as Brooks is no utility player, neither is McCord.

Before McCord joined Brooks’ team at Georgetown, she was a holdover from President Barack Obama, serving in the early months of the Trump administration.

As the acting assistant attorney general for the National Security Division, McCord worked with another Obama holdover, acting Attorney General Sally Q. Yates, worked together to kneecap National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn.

Mary McCord

The subcommittee chairman quoted McCord in the letter from an interview she gave to NBC News, in its Jan. 14 web article, “Fears grow that Trump will use the military in ‘dictatorial ways’ if he returns to the White House.” 

McCord told NBC: “We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to.”

The congressman then made a request:

Please define if Professor McCord and her colleagues are conducting this hyperpartisan activity under the auspices of ICAP—an entity which is described as a ‘non-partisan institute within Georgetown University Law Center.

(continue reading). 

While both Brooks and McCord are key players within a corrupt network, it is Mary McCord who can be directly traced to the origin of every attack against President Donald Trump and his administration.

There is not a single element of the Lawfare construct targeting Donald Trump that does not trace in origination back to Mary McCord.

To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key functionary, consider what we can document.

♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign (2016).

♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House (2017).

♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on their impeachment teams (2018).

♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson. [Atkinson was McCord’s general counsel when she was acting head of the DOJ-National Security Division.] That 2019 coordination, with her former colleague, created the baseline for the false claims of National Security Council member Alexander Vindman and the Ukraine-narrative impeachment effort.

♦ McCord led and organized the House joint committee impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create (2019).

♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz’s newly gained NSD oversight and his review of the Title-1 surveillance warrant – the FISA that targeted Carter Page.  A FISA warrant McCord originally constructed and submitted to the FISA court a few years earlier (2019).

♦ McCord then joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the Lawfare angles they deployed (2021).

November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)

♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia (2022).

January 10, 2024 –  Georgia prosecutors probing Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election got an early boost in the spring of 2022. It came from another set of investigators who were way ahead of them: the House Jan. 6 select committee.

Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered. (read more)

♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump (2023 through today).

In short, Mary McCord is the Lawfare string that winds through every legal ‘stop Trump’ effort; yet, until now no one has ever called her out!  (Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 3/24/2024)  (Archive)

It needs to be said, and it needs to be said loudly, the FBI is the 2024 equivalent of the 1984 Soviet-era KGB, now FSB.

The modern FBI is the police agency of a weaponized U.S government, with a direct and purposeful mandate to keep the American people under control through strict surveillance and a violent police state.

Understand and accept this with great seriousness, there are no honorable “rank and file” inside this organization.

Every member of the FBI is a participant in the weaponization of power and government. The members are jackboots recruited from ideological college campuses for exactly the purpose of supporting a Stasi-like police state.

Representative Mike Garcia (R-CA) is straight forward, pretenses are slowly starting to be dropped, but even Garcia still too kind in his wording.   WATCH:

Through the past several years, we have discovered how the FBI worked inside Twitter, Facebook and social media to control information, remove content and manipulate opinion on behalf of the U.S. government – all activity political.

We have also learned the FBI took active measures to suppress information about the Hunter Biden laptop and control any negative consequences for the Biden regime – again, political.  These are not disputed realities.

The U.S. Dept of Justice and FBI are now political institutions that have abandoned their originating mission in order to become the domestic equivalent of the Soviet-era FSB. Their joint targeting mechanisms have been redesigned to support the interests of corrupt DC politicians, specifically the interests of democrats.

It was in June 2022, when Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter [pdf HERE] to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, notifying them of whistleblower allegations from within the FBI that senior leadership in both Main Justice and FBI are involved in a coordinated effort to cover up criminal activity related to Hunter Biden.

The whistleblower allegations, in combination with the documented history of DOJ and FBI misconduct, culminate in Senator Grassley stating:

“If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are – and have been – institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law. Attorney General Garland and Director Wray, simply put, based on the allegations that I’ve received from numerous whistleblowers, you have systemic and existential problems within your agencies.” (LINK)

Grassley was admitting what has been visible for years.

Senator Grassley is telling the corrupt DOJ-FBI leadership that people in the organizations are outlining the detailed behavior of their corrupt leadership.  However, with zero oversight involved, and with Democrats in charge of all committees that would be responsible for such oversight, and with institutional media in alignment and agreement with the corrupt institutional intents of the DOJ/FBI, the frustrating question becomes, “and“?

I mean, who are we kidding?…  If Republicans were in charge of the Senate Judiciary, Reform/Oversight, or Intelligence committees, do we really believe that anything would be different?   Before responding to that cynicism remind yourself, they were for four years, January 2015 through January 2019, Republicans were in charge of oversight.

It was exactly when Republicans were in charge of Main Justice and FBI oversight that Main Justice and FBI were targeting political candidate Donald Trump.

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse graphic)

In July 2021, the DOJ OIG produced an absolutely damning Inspector General investigation of FBI conduct in the rape and sexual assault of U.S. Gymnasts, revealing how FBI agents facilitated Nassar’s sex crimes by taking no action despite numerous witness statements to them.

Worse yet, the FBI never reported the sexual assaults to local law enforcement… and to top it off, the rank and vile FBI agents lied during the investigation of their conduct, and the DOJ under AG Bill Barr, and now under AG Merrick Garland, refused to prosecute the FBI liars.

The entire IG report [Must Read pdf Here] reveals layer-upon-layer of FBI wrongdoing, misconduct and false statements in an effort to cover up their activity when the internal investigation of their conduct began.  This report is a total condemnation of the FBI rank and file.  It really is quite stunning.

BACKGROUND on FBI –  As we discovered in January of 2023, the FBI was fully aware of the terrorist who was planning to shoot the synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, and yet they did nothing.

The FBI knowledge of the shooter, Malik Faisal Akram, who was known as Faisal Akram, was confirmed by The Daily Mail. Akram ranted, prior to his travel to the U.S, that he wished he had died in the 9/11 terror attacks. He was a regular visitor to Pakistan, and reportedly a member of the Tablighi Jamaat group set up to ‘purify’ Islam. To say the U.S. intelligence system knew Faisal Akram would be an understatement.

The FBI was also fully aware of the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, before they executed their plot.  The FBI took no action.  The Russian police twice warned the FBI that the Tsarnaev brothers were going to carry out a domestic terrorist attack on the USA, the FBI did nothing.

The FBI knew about the San Bernardino terrorists, specifically Tashfeen Malik, and were monitoring her phone calls and communications before her and Syed Farook executed their attack killing 14 people and leaving 22 others seriously injured.  The FBI took no action.

The FBI knew Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad Alissa before he executed his attack.  The FBI took no action.

The FBI knew in advance of the Pulse Nightclub shooter (Omar Mateen) and were tipped off by the local sheriff. The FBI knew in advance of the San Bernardino Terrorists (Tashfeen Malik). The FBI knew in advance of the Boston Marathon Bombers (the Tsarnaev brothers) tipped off by Russians.  The FBI knew in advance of the Parkland High School shooter (Nikolas Cruz). The FBI knew in advance of the Fort Hood shooter (Nidal Hasan), and the FBI knew in advance of Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad al-Aliwi Alissa.  The FBI took no action.

The case of the first recorded ISIS attack on U.S. soil was in Garland, Texas in 2015.

The FBI not only knew the shooters (Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi) in advance, BUT the FBI ALSO took the shooters to the venue and were standing only a few yards away when Simpson and Soofi opened fire.  Yes, you read that correctly – the FBI took the terrorists to the event and then watched it unfold.  “An FBI trainer suggested in an interview with “60 Minutes” that, had the attack been bigger, the agency’s numerous ties to the shooter would have led to a congressional investigation.”

(Credit: Conservative Treehouse graphic)

Remember, shortly before the 2018 mid-term election, when Ceasar Syoc – a man living in his van – was caught sending “energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction”, or what FBI Director Christopher Wray called “not hoax devices”?

Remember how sketchy everything about that was, including the child-like perpetrator telling a judge later that he was trying to walk back his guilty plea, because he was tricked into signing a confession for a crime he did not create.

Or more recently, the goofball plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer that involved 18 suspects, twelve of them actually working for the FBI as the plot was hatched?  And we cannot forget the January 6th. DC protest turned insurrection effort, which is clearly looking like an FBI inspired and coordinated effort; and unlike Syoc, despite the numerous CCTV cameras and resources in the area, they cannot find who placed the pipe-bombs?

Have we forgotten the Atlanta “Olympic Park Bombing”, and the FBI intentionally setting up transparently innocent, Richard Jewel?

What about the FBI failing to investigate the assassination of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi.  Did we forget when Robert Mueller’s FBI waited 19 days after the Benghazi attack before showing up at the compound?….  Journalists from the USA were walking around the compound after 48 hours, but it took the FBI another two weeks before the first investigator arrived…. All evidence long destroyed.

Then, there’s the entirety of the FBI conduct in “Spygate”, the demonstrably evident FBI operation to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump using their investigative authorities; and the downstream consequences of a massive institutional effort to cover up one of the biggest justice department scandals in the history of our nation.   The original effort against Donald Trump used massive resources from the DOJ and FBI.  Heck, the coverup operation using the Mueller/Weissmann special counsel used more than 50 investigative FBI agents alone.

And of course, the FBI still had 13 extra agents available to rush to a NASCAR racetrack to investigate a garage door pull-down rope that might have been perceived as a noose; but the serial rape of hundreds of teenage girls, eh, not-so-much effort – even when they are standing in front of the FBI begging for help.

(At this point, I am increasingly convinced by evidence there are elements within the FBI that are enablers involved in sex trafficking, human smuggling, abduction, counterfeiting and money laundering as part of their operational mission.)

The FBI didn’t make a mistake or drop the proverbial ball in the Olympic gymnast case, they intentionally and specifically maintained the sexual exploitation of teenage girls by doing absolutely nothing with the complaints they received.   This is not misconduct, this is purposeful.

Then, as if to apply salt to the open wound of severe FBI politicization…. what did the FBI do with the Hunter Biden laptop?

More recently, the FBI executed a search warrant on the home and office of Project Veritas and the founder James O’Keefe.  While the raid was taking place, a New York Times reporter called O’Keefe to ask him about his thoughts on getting raided. The same New York Times journalist, a few days later, then begins writing about the confidential attorney-client privileged information illegally retrieved then leaked by the FBI during their raid.

♦My point is this…

What the Federal Security Service (FSB) is to the internal security of the Russian state; so too is the FBI in performing the same function for the U.S. federal government.

The FBI is a U.S. version of the Russian “State Police”; and the FBI is deployed -almost exclusively- to attack domestic enemies of those who control government, while they protect the interests of the U.S. Fourth Branch of Government.  That is the clear and accurate domestic prism to contextualize their perceived mission: “domestic violent extremists pose the greatest threat” to their objective.

Put another way, “We The People”, who fight against government abuse and usurpation, are the FBI’s actual and literal enemy.

Let me be very clear with another brutally obvious example.  Antifa could not exist as an organization, capable to organize and carry out violent attacks against their targets, without the full support of the FBI.   If the FBI wanted to arrest members of Antifa, who are actually conducting violence, they could do it easily – with little effort.

It is the absence of any action by the FBI toward Antifa, that tells us the FBI is enabling that violent extremist behavior to continue.  Once you accept that transparent point of truth, then you realize the FBI definition of domestic violent extremism is something else entirely.

The FBI is not a law enforcement or investigative division of the U.S. Department of Justice.  The FBI is a political weapon of a larger institution that is now focused almost entirely toward supporting a radical communist agenda to destroy civil society in the United States.

The FBI set up the operation in Michigan to give the illusion that domestic threats were attempting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, everything about the events were an FBI construct.   The same thing with the January 6th events in Washington DC and the pipe bombs.  These are domestic FBI operations.  Think about the precarious nature of what this type of activity indicates.

The current mission of the FBI appears to be preserving and protecting institutional power by protecting the administration of Joe Biden.

Anyone who continues to push this insufferable and fraudulent “honorable FBI rank and file talking point”, is, at this point in history, willfully and purposefully operating to deceive the American people on behalf of government interests who are intent on destroying us.

It is not a difference of opinion any longer.  Personally, I have lost the ability to sit comfortably or intellectually with anyone who pushes or accepts the ‘mistakes are made’ nonsense.  The FBI is not making mistakes, they are doing well what is important to them.

To me, it comes down to a simple matter of accepting what is continually staring us in the face.

Additionally, as we watched the outcome of the Michael Sussmann trial, we should never lose sight of the fact that 40 FBI agents were involved in the Mueller-Weissmann probe to investigate the fraudulent construct created by Hillary Clinton and crew.  40 agents? And, according to the outcome of the Sussmann trial, the FBI knew it was all a ruse.

This is why and how the Fourth Branch of U.S. Government is now the superseding apparatus above all other branches.  {GO DEEP} This is why and how Barack Obama, John Brennan and Eric Holder created it, cemented it, and made it impervious to any effort to remove it.

Remember when Henry Cuellar was critical of the Biden administration open border policies that were hurting his Texas district?  Less than a month after going public with his criticisms, the FBI raids on his home and office began.  The same FBI that raided the home of James O’Keefe while coordinating their search with the New York Times.

The Fourth Branch of Government is corrupt; heck, the J6 committee was defending the corrupt FBI, participating with the corrupt FBI, selling a joint J6 operation that involved the FBI.  The corrupt media have aligned with the corrupt FBI, and the justice institutions in/around this legal framework are self-aware and fully autonomous.

As the Twitter files show, the DOJ and FBI through the authority of DHS now have the ability to monitor every single aspect of every life that might seek to challenge or destroy the corrupt system.

In essence, Skynet -the ultimate end game of political surveillance and targeting outlined by Edward Snowden- has been activated.  We the People are the enemy of the state.

Jackboots are very real, and they are wearing FBI logos on their shirts.

(Conservative Treehouse, 4/16/2024)  (Archive)

(Republished with permission)

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution says:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Late last night, early this morning (after midnight), the United States Senate passed a FISA reauthorization bill that directly and specifically violates every tenant of the 4th Amendment.

The Senate voted to authorize warrantless federal government searches of every American’s private papers, effects, emails, electronic data records, cell phone calls, contact lists, text messages, buying habits, purchases, banking records, social media posts, direct messages, private communications and every keystroke of every electronic device in your life.  All of it continues to be subject to the capture, review and surveillance of an unelected opaque law enforcement mechanism, and Congress supports it.

The issue is magnified, because the Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of the FISA-702 data collection system, because the Supreme Court also says no American has standing to challenge the federal government violation of their 4th Amendment right to privacy.  It’s all infuriating…  It’s all FUBAR!

Oh, and if you are reading this… you’re likely on the list.

Last night, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) teamed up with Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) and added an amendment that would have required the government to get a warrant before reviewing any communications incidentally collected from Americans.  The amendment was the last effort priority for a smidgen of hope; the IC railed against it, saying it would stop them from acting on critical “national security” information in real time. It failed by a vote of 42 to 50.

Another Democrat Senator, Ron Wyden (Oregon), a senior member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, vowed and pledged that FISA-702 would never be renewed by any measure that required his signature.  “I’ll do everything in my power to stop it,” he previously said.  “Searches have gone after American protesters, political campaign donors, even people who simply reported crimes to the FBI. The abuses have been extensive and well documented,” Wyden argued to colleagues. Wyden’s effort to strike the language failed by a vote of 34 to 58.

“Egregious Fourth Amendment violations against U.S. citizens will increase dramatically if this bill is passed into law,” Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee warned.  Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) offered an amendment to block DHS, FBI, DOJ, IRS, and various ancillary intelligence, law enforcement, national parks and government agencies from buying Americans’ electronic NSA data from third parties and federal contractors.  Paul’s amendment failed by a vote of 31 to 61.

The House and Senate bill does include provisions that would force the Intelligence Community to notify political leadership in Congress about 702 database searches involving lawmakers, but you, Comrade Citizen, are not allowed to know about the searches done on you.  You, comrade prole, must improve your elite status if you wish to participate in any benefit from the shredded and reconfigured 4th Amendment, now reserved for the entitled class.

As noted by The Hill, “Senator Mike Lee offered an amendment to require the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to appoint an outside lawyer to argue for the rights of a U.S. person the government wants to surveil secretly. It would have also required government employees appearing before the FISA court to disclose factual evidence that might call into question the accuracy of their statements. It also failed even though it had previously passed the Senate with 77 votes in 2020.”

Go figure!

Hey, stop me when you start to notice something that looks like history rhyming.

There’s an inversion afoot. (More: Conservative Treehouse, 4/20/2024)  (Archive)