First, the context… On Thursday night Carl Bernstein said: William Barr is preparing to deliver “evidence of a deep state conspiracy.”  Bernstein’s statement followed on the heels of Chairman Jerry Nadler proclaiming: “The President dragged the Attorney General into this mess,” [Nadler wrote on Twitter after the transcript was released]. “At a minimum, AG Barr must recuse himself until we get to the bottom of this matter.”

Then on Friday during an interview on MSNBC Morning Joe, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said AG William Barr had “gone rogue” in his efforts to protect President Trump.

Amid the newly visible sense of urgency toward a Trump impeachment effort by all of the aforementioned soft-coup participants (and more), it certainly does seem like AG Bill Barr is at the forefront of their current concern.  Then there’s this…

Also on Friday, George Papadopoulos shared via his twitter account: “AG Barr has been on official travel in Italy for the past two days.” Referencing a possibility the Attorney General was in Italy for an interview with the mysterious Maltese professor/Western intelligence asset at the center of 2016’s ‘spygate’, Joseph Mifsud.  

Sound interesting?….  Well, if AG Bill Barr is indeed in Italy, and it certainly seems he is, then perhaps it’s worth re-visiting an explosive story from August that was overlooked amid a whirlwind of fast-moving political events.

According to an interview on August 18th, John Solomon reported the lawyer for Joseph Mifsud admitted his client was a western intelligence asset who was part of a CIA intelligence “operation” against candidate Donald Trump in March 2016.

Not only was the attorney admitting Mifsud was a western asset used by the CIA against Trump, but the lawyer also told Solomon about an audio-taped deposition that Joseph Mifsud gave prior to going into hiding after Trump won the 2016 Presidential election.

From the description it sounds like Mifsud anticipated his assisted suicide and he recorded a deposition as leverage against his unwanted demise. WATCH:

.

What Solomon describes in that interview would certainly explain why AG Bill Barr would want to personally interview Joseph Mifsud.  It would be difficult to think of a more serious allegation, an allegation that would clearly show evidence of a concerted plot against a presidential candidate, than the one described in that interview.

If all of these allegations are accurate, AG Barr would certainly be justified in personally taking action on this issue.

Additionally, in general alignment with the timing and serious issue therein, a few weeks prior to the Solomon claim there was a rather odd article that surfaced in the Washington Post about Joseph Mifsud.  The article had all the earmarks of a purposeful CIA leak, June 30th, 2019 .

In the synergy between the U.S. intelligence apparatus and their media agents, the CIA, DOJ and State Department have specific outlets assigned to public relations.

A long-tracked pattern reflects the DOJ and FBI leak their PR needs to the New York Times. The preferred outlet for the U.S. State Department is CNN; and the Washington Post generally comes out first with leaks in defense of the CIA agenda.  This pattern has been remarkably consistent for years.

So here we are in late June 2019, AG Barr has tasked U.S. Attorney John Durham with the responsibility of reviewing the origins of “Crossfire Hurricane”, and suddenly The Washington Post, seemingly out of nowhere, pushes an article intended to diffuse the issues around western intelligence asset Joseph Mifsud.

As we noted in July, we can reasonably assume something was happening in the background that had officials in the CIA worried about exposure and their image. From the WaPo introduction we can see what part of “spygate” the CIA is concerned about:

(Wa Po) […] The Maltese-born academic has not surfaced publicly since that October 2017 interview, days after Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about details of their interactions. Among them, Papadopoulos told investigators, was an April 2016 meeting in which Mifsud alerted him that the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.”

The conversation between Mifsud and Papadopoulos, eventually relayed by an Australian diplomat to U.S. government officials, was cited by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III as the event that set in motion the FBI probe into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

With Attorney General William P. Barr’s review of the counterintelligence investigation underway,the origins of the inquiry itself are now in the spotlight — and with them, the role of Mifsud, a little-known figure. (more)

The entire WaPo article is fraught with highly manipulated narrative engineering intended to cloud the fact that clear evidence exists that Professor Mifsud’s engagement with George Papadopoulos was directed by some entity other than Mr. Mifsud.

If he walks like a counterintelligence agent; acts like a counterintelligence agent; sounds like a counterintelligence agent; hangs out with other counterintelligence agents; has admitted to engagements on behalf of intelligence agencies; trained U.S. FBI agents in conducting counterintelligence operations and generally has a history of counterintelligence agent behavior, well, he ain’t just a Maltese professor.

Why was the Washington Post trying to get out-front of Joseph Mifsud all of a sudden?

Perhaps it is because someone in the background (Barr via Durham) was peeking at the connective tissue between John Brennan’s instructions in 2015 and 2016; and John Brennan’s “electronic communication” (EC) to the FBI in July 2016 that kicked off the counterintelligence operation against candidate Trump known as Crossfire Hurricane.

Additionally, there is clearly some recording of Papadopoulos and/or transcript of Papadopoulos engaging with CIA and FBI assets (spies) that Trey Gowdy has claimed to be “very exculpatory” toward any claim that Papadopoulos was doing anything wrong. Those transcripts may be another part of the intelligence evidence covered by AG Barr’s declassification authority.

Remember also, back in May, 2019, Devin Nunes told AG Barr something was going on:

(Via Fox News) “He is the first person that we know of on earth that supposedly knows something about the Russians having Hillary’s emails,” Nunes, R-Calif., said on “Fox News @ Night.”

“He has since denied that but (Special Counsel Robert) Mueller in his report claimed that Mifsud – or insinuated that Mifsud – was some sort of Russian asset. We know that this is not the case. In fact, we know that he was in the U.S. Capitol… just steps away from an intelligence committee.”

[…] Nunes, a ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox News that the has sent letters this month to the CIA, FBI, NSA and the State Department asking for documents tied to Mifsud. He said all of the agencies except one – the FBI – have cooperated with his request.

He then made the leap, “The FBI is not cooperating, per usual, which means they’ve got something to hide.”

“It is impossible that Mifsud is a Russian asset,” Nunes added. “He is a former diplomat with the Malta government. He lived in Italy. He worked and taught FBI, trained FBI officials, and worked with FBI officials.” (read more – w/ video)

Is getting to the bottom of this possibly why AG Bill Barr is in Italy?

Carl Bernstein is an insufferable propagandist for the political left; but sometimes you can get a sense of where things stand by listening to his partisan protestations.  Additionally, Bernstein was at the center of the media effort to engineer the Russia narrative by pushing disinformation from the intelligence apparatus in January 2017.

(L-R) Jake Tapper, Jim Sciutto, Evan Perez and Carl Bernstein.

Bernstein was one of the key media figures constructing and pushing the vast Russian election interference narrative.  He also worked closely with Jake Tapper, Jim Sciutto, and Evan Perez to promote the Steele Dossier as a valid intelligence product. In essence Bernstein is a part of the ‘resistance’ agenda writ large; he travels DC circles accordingly.

In a recent CNN interview, highlighted by the Washington Examiner, Bernstein outlined how his sources are telling him Attorney General William Barr is preparing to deliver “evidence of a deep state conspiracy.”   Accepting the general premise, and culling the accompanying political spin from it, the comments by Bernstein would seem to indicate Bill Barr is indeed investigating the background of the ‘soft-coup’.

Obviously Bernstein is a creature of the DC cocktail circuit; as a result perhaps those who operate in/around the same circles of the administrative state are recognizing their activity in 2016 and 2017 is about to be exposed.  Perhaps this explains the apoplectic responses and sense of urgency from the far-left political class over the past week.

Back in December 2018 CTH noted the significant House rule changes constructed by Nancy Pelosi for the 116th congress seemed specifically geared toward impeachment. {Go Deep} With the House going into a scheduled calendar recess, those rules are now being used to subvert historic processes and construct the articles of impeachment.

A formal vote to initiate an “impeachment inquiry” is not technically required; however, there has always been a full house vote until now.  The reason not to have a House vote is simple: if the formal process was followed the minority (republicans) would have enforceable rights within it.  Without a vote to initiate, the articles of impeachment can be drawn up without any participation by the minority; and without any input from the executive.  This was always the plan that was visible in Pelosi’s changed House rules.

Speaker Pelosi and Douglas Letter

Keep in mind Speaker Pelosi selected former insider DOJ official Douglas Letter to be the Chief Legal Counsel for the House.  That becomes important when we get to the part about the official full house impeachment vote. The Lawfare group and DNC far-left activists were ecstatic at the selection.  Doug Letter was a deep political operative within the institution of the DOJ who worked diligently to promote the weaponized political values of former democrat administrations.

Speaker Pelosi has authorized the House committees to work together under the umbrella of an “official impeachment inquiry.”  The House Intelligence (Schiff) and Judiciary Committees (Nadler) are currently working together leading this process.

From recent events we can see the framework of Schiff compiling Trump-Ukraine articles and Nadler compiling Trump-Russia articles.  Trump-Ukraine via Schiff will likely focus on a corruption angle; Trump-Russia via Nadler will likely focus on an obstruction angle.

How many articles of impeachment are finally assembled is unknown, but it is possible to see the background construct as described above.  Unlike historic examples of committee impeachment assembly, and in combination with the lack of an initiation vote, Pelosi’s earlier House Rule changes now appear intentionally designed to block republicans during the article assembly process.  The minority will have no voice.  This is quite a design.

(Pelosi rule permitting depositions without minority notification)

Once the articles are drawn up, Schiff and Nadler will vote to approve them out of committee.  Democrats control the majority so the articles will easily pass out of committee.  Then the articles must come before a full house vote.  The current two-week recess is the period where Pelosi has instructed her team to return to their districts and sell the reasoning and purpose for the upcoming vote.  Speaker Pelosi will hold that vote.

It is more than likely the vote will pass through the House on party lines.  Once Pelosi achieves a vote of passage on any single article President Trump is considered impeached.

Back to this two-week break.  While the technical reason for the recess is to celebrate the Jewish holidays of Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah, it is now obvious the sequence of events has been constructed specifically toward these impeachment efforts.

There are 31 House districts currently held by Democrats which President Trump won in 2016; Pelosi is giving those members an opportunity to make their impeachment case to their constituents now, but failure to support the effort is likely not optional for all except a few of the most tenuously vulnerable.  House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip James Clyburn will assemble enough votes for impeachment.

While those house members are explaining to their constituents, back in DC the committee work on the articles will collate.  On Friday afternoon, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, and Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, issued a subpoena demanding a slew of Ukraine-related documents from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by Oct. 4th. The committees also scheduled depositions with five State Department officials between Oct. 2 and Oct. 10.

(Source Link)

Notice that with the rule changes the minority will not be participating in these depositions.  The republicans will likely have no idea what is happening therein.

As Chad Pergram notes:

“The subpoenas are part of a two-pronged strategy by Democrats. Get the information to help tailor the articles of impeachment, or convert a refusal to comply into an impeachment article itself.” (more)

Chairman Nadler (Judiciary) almost certainly already has his Obstruction articles assembled using prior testimony, depositions and relying heavily on the Mueller report.

However, Chairmen Schiff, Cummings and Engel will be more urgently assembling the Corruption articles based on the purposefully constructed Trump-Ukraine whistleblower leak and subsequent document production.  Hence, the depositions during the break.

The Democrats are going to act fast.  Remember, by design Speaker Pelosi has this set up so that Republicans don’t even participate in the impeachment process.  There are no republicans participating in the assembly of the articles of impeachment.  Stunningly, and as an outcome of those earlier rule changes, there is no minority voice in this process.

When the 116th congress returns from their break on October 15th, 2019, the Articles of Impeachment will have already been assembled: [House Calendar Link]

Speaker Pelosi has to give the media some reference point to say the republicans were included in the process, so she will likely have mid to late October destined for the committee chairs to have committee debate on their pre-assembled articles.  This will give the impression of minority participation, but it will be for optics only.

Democrats are keen optical strategists and narrative engineers; and as you know they coordinate all endeavors with their media allies.  The narrative assembly and usefulness by media to drive a tactical national political message will hit heavily in this mid/late October time-frame.  This will allow the executive suites (media) to capture/stir-up maximum public interest and make the most money therein.

There will likely be more articles other than just “obstruction of justice” (Muh Rusia) and “corruption of office” (Muh Ukraine), but those two are easily visible.  Emoluments may also play a role.

The articles of impeachment will then be voted out of each committee; and after a significant dramatic pause for maximum political value, Speaker Pelosi will present days of House debate on them.

The media will construct television sets to broadcast the house impeachment debates, and the Democrat candidates will use this time to spotlight their angelic policies and anti-corruption agenda.   Big Dollar Democrats will bring in their activist groups from around the nation to celebrate the impeachment of President Trump.

Then, once Pelosi is certain the maximum political benefit has been achieved, she will announce the date for the Full House Vote on Articles of Impeachment.  We can be certain the date will be filled with maximum drama and made-for-tv effect complete with Speaker Pelosi bringing back the big gavel for a grand presentation and a full house vote.

[Chad Pergram] As always, it’s about math. The current House breakdown is 235 Democrats, 199 Republicans, and one independent: Rep. Justin Amash, I-Mich. To pass anything in the House, 218 yeas are needed.

That means Democrats can only lose 17 votes from their side and still have enough to pass an article of impeachment. Amash has endorsed impeachment, so let’s say the magic number is actually 16. If the president is to be impeached, that means Democrats could have 15 of their own voting for articles of impeachment while representing a district which Trump carried in 2016.

A House floor vote to impeach the President is kind of like an indictment, codified in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the House votes to impeach, Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution sends the article(s) to the Senate for a trial presided over by Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts. (Note Roberts’ proper title. This is one of the reasons the Chief Justice is “of the United States,” and not just the “Supreme Court.”)  (more from Chad Pergram)

The same people who will stand jaw-agape as this House Impeachment process is happening are the same people who denied it was likely when CTH originally showed the rule changes, road-map, and impeachment schedule in January.

Now…. having said all that, perhaps… just perhaps…. Bill Barr is well aware of the Machiavellian scheme constructed and executed by Nancy Pelosi.

Perhaps, just perhaps, that is why the IG Horowitz report has been delayed….  As in, hold it back until Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and Cummings fire their impeachment cannons.

Maybe…

It seems awful Trusty plan-like for me; but it’s possible.

Perhaps the ultimate counter to protect and defend the office of the presidency from this pre-planned, Lawfare assisted, impeachment effort… is to wait until the Democrats are going to launch their tactical impeachment nukes,… and then fire for effect with the declassification documents etc.!

Hey, I’m trying to provide an optimistic ending here.

*SPEAKERS ON LOUD*