Posted originally on the CTH on April 19, 2023 | Sundance
Some insider threats are more equal than others; so goes the position of the nation’s biggest leaker of classified documents in modern history, and it’s not Jack Teixeira.
This story shows the importance of what was hidden by the combined efforts of the national security apparatus in 2018.
Readers here are familiar, but most Americans are not, with how Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner leaked a top-secret classified Title-1 FISA application in March of 2017.
Then the Vice-Chair of the SSCI, Senator Warner instructed Senate Security Director James Wolfe to leak the 82-page FISA application assembled against Carter Page. On the afternoon of March 17, 2017, Wolfe took 82 pictures of the “Read and Return” document that was delivered to the SSCI basement SCIF by FBI Supervisory Special Agent Brian Dugan from the Washington Field Office.
Later that evening, Wolfe sent the images to journalist Ali Watkins using an encrypted messaging app. Ms. Watkins then shared the FISA content with her peers and used the information to leverage a top-tier job at the New York Times. The media were off to the races talking about FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign and using the leaked FISA as evidence of the ongoing investigation, later known as Crossfire Hurricane. Three days later, March 20, 2017, after coordinating the intent of the narrative creation with Mark Warner, FBI Director James Comey publicly admitted the Trump-Russia investigation for the first time.
After James Wolfe was arrested for the FISA application leak, his defense lawyers threatened to expose the role of the Senate Intelligence Committee in the leak and subpoena the members as witnesses. The Mueller/Weissmann team, then in charge of all DOJ operations that touched on Trump-Russia, took apart the evidence of Wolfe’s conduct, and DC Attorney Jessie Liu dropped most of the charges against Wolfe. Mueller then ran cover for Mark Warner, and eventually – out of an abundance of caution to maintain the need for the coverup operation – the Mueller/Weissmann team then made the FISA application public. The rest is history.
Keep in mind, I could be civilly sued if anything written above as an asserted truth was false. I’m not, because the truth is the defense. All of this happened.
At the time of the Mark Warner TSCI leak, no one outside the DOJ-FBI and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) had ever seen a FISA application. Heck, in 2017 through early 2018, it was considered a classified intelligence breech to even discuss the FISA process, the procedures or the court itself. People forget that.
The 2017 leaking of the FISA application was the biggest national security breach in years, perhaps seconded only to the 2017 leaking of the TSCI transcript from National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s call with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, given to the Washington Post by the FBI a month earlier.
So, it’s somewhat hypocritical and ironic to see SSCI Chairman Mark Warner now railing against the Pentagon and Director of National Intelligence over not being provided the details of documents leaked by a low-level military servicemember in the Massachusetts Air National Guard.
WASHINGTON DC – The Senate Intelligence Committee is demanding the Pentagon hand over copies of all the classified documents leaked by Massachusetts Air National Guardsman Jack Teixeira.
The 21-year-old serviceman was accused by the Department of Defense of leaking “sensitive and highly-classified material” into a chat on the encrypted communications platform Discord. It then made its way onto other social media platforms. He was charged on Friday.
In a letter addressed to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., and ranking member Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said the leak prompted concerns about “serious deficiencies” in the government’s security protocols.
“According to public reporting, A1C Teixeira began sharing classified information and classified documents within a social media platform as early as December 2022—nearly four months before the government’s discovery,” the letter, obtained by Fox News Digital, read. “These disclosures indicate serious deficiencies in the government’s insider threat and security vetting protocols.” (read more)
The Washington Postrevealed that the person leaking information from the Pentagon is not a high-level official. There was no collective effort to access the classified information, and the motive of the leak may surprise you. The leak was first posted on a Discord channel called Thug Shaker Central, led by a man in his 20s who allegedly lives on a military base. A user called Wow_mao spoke with the Post through Discord to say he used his platform for humor and began creating videos as a teen. “I can sort of understand how sharing big private military secrets could be a funny thing to do among your internet friends, but come on. Take care of yourself and stay away from doing stuff like this,” the anonymous user posted on YouTube.
A group of teens and young adults were able to access sensitive information—for fun. They did not need skilled hackers or top intel to access military records, showing how inept our national security has become. Discord is a social media platform that is largely unregulated. It is one of the last platforms where users can speak freely without censorship.
The Post discussed how a few users on social media were able to make the files a global sensation and cause international turmoil. Snowden reached out to countless reporters to reveal his message. WikiLeaks also put forth a campaign to draw attention to thousands of classified documents relating to America’s involvement in Iraq. This time around it only took a few kids on a social platform that is not regulated by the government. I expect Congress to now go after Discord as they did with TikTok. “It’s just a bunch of guys from the internet. How would they know about understanding military war documents?” Wow_mao said. “Many people were like: ‘That’s hilarious. Why are they here?’ And then they moved on with their lives.”
Posted originally on the CTH on April 9, 2023 | Sundance
The classification statement of NOFORN (meaning “no foreign nationals “) is applied to any information that may not be released to any non-U.S. citizen.
The classified documents, as released in the recent NYT/White House/Pentagon storyline, carried the NOFORN designation. That means the source documents describing U.S. geopolitical and intelligence strategies were contained inside U.S. compartmented intelligence silos, prior to their surfacing in the social media platforms as discussed. Keep this in mind. WATCH:
First, the story surfaces from the New York Times. What does that tell us? It tells us the stakeholders in a background narrative surrounding the issue as constructed are domestic intelligence interests. If there was a State Dept stakeholder interest, the story would have been presented by CNN. If there was a U.S. foreign intelligence operation stakeholder interest, the story would have surfaced in the Washington Post.
The story surfaces in the New York Times indicating a U.S. domestic intelligence interest, and the story is sourced directly to the White House via “senior Biden administration officials.” What does that mean? It means the narrative that flows from the story has a direction to shape opinion from the perspective of U.S. government domestic public relations. It means the narrative is intended to sway a domestic audience with a motive toward something else.
Secondly, and in full alignment with the first point, the centerpiece of the story is focused on a leak that surfaces in “social media.” This fits perfectly with the domestic intelligence stakeholders (DHS, National Security Council, etc). We know domestic intelligence operates in the backbone of social media platforms. An example is DHS and domestic Intelligence Community (IC) work as outlined in the Twitter files.
Put them together; a domestic IC product surfaced (being called leaked) into social media platforms containing portals controlled by domestic IC.
The domestic IC then report on the leaks to the outlet used by the domestic IC. See how these fit?
If you follow the bouncing ball, what you immediately suspect is the domestic IC planted the ‘classified information’ in the platforms they can access, then turn around and report on the leak of the classified information to media they use for domestic narrative engineering.
♦ Motive – But why would the IC plant classified information, then turn around and report on the classified information they planted? This is where we remind ourselves how the motives work, against a bigger picture.
The leak (planted information) and then the telling of the leak (NYT story) creates an opportunity for the domestic IC to frame a Russian dis/mis/mal-information narrative.
But why would the IC want to immediately stir up a misinformation or disinformation narrative against Russia?
♦ Answer: Just before the leak/story construct. Two Russian gremlins, perhaps state sponsored, or perhaps just state aligned, tricked former French President Francois Hollande into admitting the U.S. government and western alliance were behind all of the events in Ukraine after 2014, with the expressed intention to construct a proxy war against Russia using Ukraine.
Russian Pranksters Vovan and Lexus, posing as former Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko, got French ex-President Francois Hollande to admit the Minsk Accords were a NATO ruse to militarize Ukraine, and Western nations overthrew Ukraine’s democratically-elected government in 2014. (Full YouTube Conversation)
Must see: Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus forced Francois #Hollande to tell the truth. Another conspiracy theory proven to be a conspiracy prediction.
Pretending to be the former President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, the pranksters Vovan and Lexus contacted the ex-President… pic.twitter.com/Xwvt4f5A7a
As noted by Gonzalo Lira, “François Hollande, former President of France, confirms that the 2014 coup d’etat in Ukraine was part of a long-term plan to have Ukraine fight a proxy war against Russia. The Americans have been preparing this war since the Obama administration—it is now confirmed beyond doubt.”
The admission by Hollande aligns with every element of the U.S. effort to use Russia as a bad guy, including the use of Russia against Donald J. Trump. A proxy war against Russia was in the works going all the way back to the Euromaidan efforts, the color revolution in Ukraine, as constructed by the U.S. State Department, and facilitated by U.S. allies in Europe.
This is the most explosive dose of geopolitical sunlight in years, and obviously these statements by Hollande were a serious issue for the White House and U.S. Intelligence Community. Hollande was tricked by two Russian pranksters into spilling the real story about Ukraine and U.S. involvement therein.
Now do you see the need? The Hollande admission is an urgent problem.
Less than one news cycle later, the IC dropped the Ukraine counteroffensive strategy in the platforms the IC has access to (a purposeful leak). Then the IC tells the story of the classified strategy leak to the New York Times and begins framing a Russian mis/disinformation campaign. All issues, including the Hollande story, now fall under the same claims of Russian mis/disinformation.
As the narrative is pushed by the compliant media, all of the geopolitical stories are now filtered through the prism of Russian mis/disinformation. Ergo, all of the potentially damaging information, even if accurate and true, is attributed to Russian misinformation operations and subsequently disregarded.
The leak of classified intelligence, and the attribution to Russian misinformation, is like a brushback pitch toward the heads of the media on the explosive Francois Hollande story. It works.
That’s how the control agents operate. Deflection and adverse information removal is what IC operations are intended to control. This ‘leak’ looks like a successful IC operation.
Once you see the strings on the DC marionettes, you can never return to that moment in the performance when you did not see them.
Posted originally on the CTH on April 8, 2023 | Sundance
By now people are familiar with a New York Times (original source) story of a leak of sensitive classified information regarding U.S. operations in Ukraine and other geopolitical efforts. The New York Times was the first with the story, as shared with them by “senior Biden administration officials.”
WASHINGTON — Classified war documents detailing secret American and NATO plans for building up the Ukrainian military ahead of a planned offensive against Russian troops were posted this week on social media channels, senior Biden administration officials said. (more)
Now, let’s use this opportunity to expand our knowledge base, overlay the known frameworks that operate within our government, and simultaneously give a perspective that will not surface anywhere else.
First, the story surfaces from the New York Times. What does that tell us? It tells us the stakeholders in a background narrative surrounding the issue as constructed are domestic intelligence interests. If there was a State Dept stakeholder interest, the story would have been presented by CNN. If there was a U.S. foreign intelligence operation stakeholder interest, the story would have surfaced in the Washington Post.
The story surfaces in the New York Times, indicating a U.S. domestic intelligence interest; and the story is sourced directly to the White House via “senior Biden administration officials.” What does that mean? It means the narrative that flows from the story has a direction to shape opinion from the perspective of U.S. government domestic public relations. It means the narrative is intended to sway a domestic audience with a motive toward something else.
Secondly, and in full alignment with the first point, the centerpiece of the story is focused on a leak that surfaces in “social media.” This fits perfectly with the domestic intelligence stakeholders (DHS, National Security Council, etc). We know domestic intelligence operates in the backbone of social media platforms. An example is DHS and domestic Intelligence Community (IC) work as outlined in the Twitter files.
Put them together, a domestic IC product surfaced (being called leaked) into social media platforms containing portals controlled by domestic IC.
The domestic IC then report on the leaks to the outlet used by the domestic IC. See how these fit?
If you follow the bouncing ball, what you immediately suspect is the domestic IC planted the ‘classified information’ in the platforms they can access, then turn around and report on the leak of the classified information to media they use for domestic narrative engineering.
♦ Motive – But why would the IC plant classified information, then turn around and report on the classified information they planted? This is where you need to learn how the motives work, against a bigger picture.
The leak (planted information) and then the telling of the leak (NYT story) creates an opportunity for the domestic IC to frame a Russian dis/mis/mal-information narrative.
But why would the IC want to immediately stir up a misinformation or disinformation narrative against Russia?
♦ Answer: 18 hours before the leak/story construct. Two Russian gremlins, perhaps state sponsored, or perhaps just state aligned, tricked former French President Francios Hollande into admitting the U.S. government and western alliance were behind all of the events in Ukraine after 2014, with the expressed intention to construct a proxy war against Russia using Ukraine.
Russian Pranksters Vovan and Lexus, posing as former Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko, got French ex-President Francois Hollande to admit the Minsk Accords were a NATO ruse to militarize Ukraine, and Western nations overthrew Ukraine’s democratically-elected government in 2014. (Full YouTube Conversation)
Must see: Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus forced Francois #Hollande to tell the truth. Another conspiracy theory proven to be a conspiracy prediction.
Pretending to be the former President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, the pranksters Vovan and Lexus contacted the ex-President… pic.twitter.com/Xwvt4f5A7a
As noted by Gonzalo Lira, “François Hollande, former president of France, confirms that the 2014 coup d’etat in Ukraine was part of a long-term plan to have Ukraine fight a proxy war against Russia. The Americans have been preparing this war since the Obama administration—it is now confirmed beyond doubt.”
The admission by Hollande aligns with every element of the U.S. effort to use Russia as a bad guy, including the use of Russia against Donald J Trump. A proxy war against Russia was in the works going all the way back to the Euromaidan efforts, the color revolution in Ukraine, as constructed by the U.S. State Department, and facilitated by U.S. allies in Europe.
This is the most explosive dose of geopolitical sunlight in years, and obviously these statements by Hollande were a serious issue for the White House and U.S. Intelligence Community. Hollande was tricked by two Russian pranksters into spilling the real story about Ukraine and U.S. involvement therein.
Now do you see the need? The Hollande admission is an urgent problem.
Less than one news cycle later, the IC has dropped the Ukraine counteroffensive strategy in the platforms the IC has access to (a purposeful leak). Then the IC tells the story of the classified strategy leak to the New York Times and begins framing a Russian mis/disinformation campaign. The intent is to mitigate any issues with the Hollande story, fall under the same claims of Russian mis/disinformation.
The leak of classified intelligence, and the attribution to Russian misinformation, is like a brushback pitch toward the heads of the media on the explosive Francios Hollande story. It worked. Have you seen the admissions by Francios Hollande in any MSM? Unified UniParty interests at play.
That’s how the control agents operate. Deflection and adverse information removal is what IC narrative engineering is intended to control. This was a successful IC operation.
Once you see the strings on the DC marionettes, you can never return to that moment in the performance when you did not see them.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 23, 2022 | Sundance |
Lee Smith makes an important point in this brief podcast excerpt. {Direct Rumble Link Here} We have outlined his point on these pages for several years.
Essentially, the point Lee Smith drives home is how the U.S. Corporate Media, and the Big Tech monopolies, are the front force of the new national security and intelligence state. It is a relationship that extends far beyond the customary leanings of media, and now covers a full synergistic relationship. WATCH:
“We’re all familiar with the fact that the press has historically leaned to the left. That’s not what we’re looking at now. We’re looking at something very, very different. We’re looking at the press as being a part of the intelligence community. They are the ones who is putting these operations out there.”
.
The New York Times and Politico are the public relations firms for Main Justice, the DOJ and FBI. The Washington Post handles the needs of the Intelligence Community (IC) and the Central Intelligence Agency. Meanwhile CNN is managed by the needs of the U.S. State Dept. These direct relationships have been discussed here for several years.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 21, 2022 | Sundance
Yesterday, Politico noted President Trump had enlisted the law firm of Harmeet Dhillon as a proactive measure against a J6 subpoena. “Former President Donald Trump has hired a firm to engage with the Jan. 6 select committee on its forthcoming subpoena of him, POLITICO has learned.” {link} Less than a day later the J6 committee issues the formal subpoena.
Once again, the corrupt DC institutional system, and specific media participation, are identified by the leaks and recipients. The injustice system, DOJ/FBI always use the New York Times and Politico as their advanced public relations firms. The insufferable J6 subpoena details can be FOUND HERE.
WASHINGTON DC, J6 Committee – “Pursuant to a unanimous vote of the Select Committee, Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-WY) today announced that the Select Committee has issued a subpoena to former President Donald Trump for testimony under oath and records relevant to the Select Committee’s investigation into the attack on the January 6th on the United States Capitol and its causes.
In a letter to Mr. Trump, Chairman Thompson and Vice Chair Cheney underscored his central role in a deliberate, orchestrated effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and block the transfer of presidential power, a matter central to the committee’s investigation as it reviews the facts and considers recommendations to prevent a recurrence of the violence of January 6th.” {link}
The committee is giving President Trump until November 4th to comply with the document request, with a demand for testimony by November 16th.
No president (executive branch) has ever been forced to give testimony to a legislative committee (legislative branch) because the very foundation of the demand violates the separation of powers as established in the constitution. This legal argument will take some time to work itself out, and the (un)likelihood of the subpoena being successful speaks to the political nature of the theatrics in advance of the 2022 midterm election.
That said, having been the recipient of two J6 subpoenas, successfully defeated – in part thanks to your support, I can provide some insight into why President Trump enlisted the Dhillon Law Firm.
At least from my experience, there are only a handful of potential lawyers or law firms who will even take the case of a fight against a J6 committee subpoena because: (1) it is just so fraught with politics, and (2) the entire enterprise is a litigious and financial black hole.
The weaponized J6 committee has a bottomless budget, the J6 targets do not. Ultimately, the financial cost is the root cause of why Lawfare succeeds. It’s just too damned expensive to fight them off, even with great lawyers. I can only imagine how much Steve Bannon has spent, and how much President Trump will have to spend.
Even a simple responsive letter to the committee, depending on scale and scope, starts around $10,000 and goes up from there; that’s just for the initial response. If the initial response isn’t successful, the fight retainer starts around six figures for the next round… and that’s just a single and simple case. The more complex legal arguments are exponentially more costly for the targets. Justice system? Yeah, good luck with that.
Now, given the J6 subpoena against President Trump is likely to fail on constitutional grounds, let’s talk about the motive for why they would do this.
The J6 Committee has a timeline that is now extended beyond the midterm election. This is not accidental. The midterm election is likely to result in the House flipping from Democrat control to Republican control. Keep in mind both Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are lame ducks right now. Additionally, the people inside the J6 committee machinery are Lawfare agents like Mary McCord.
The committee is timing their political effort to extend beyond the midterms in order to shield itself from Republican scrutiny. The oft familiar “ongoing investigation” shield becomes a purposeful technique to protect themselves, a transparent motive surfaces for their timeline.
Post-election, the committee will lean heavily on the media to avoid any/all discoveries of their malicious targeting conduct if the midterm elections remove the Democrats from power. This is the way these conniving and corrupt political lawfare agents work.
Unfortunately, the Republican wing is not an opposing force against the Democrat wing. They are both wings of the same DC UniParty vulture. So, we should not anticipate any full combat in the post-election House by an angered GOP against Democrats. Everything will be optics; nothing will be substantive.
Bottom line, the J6 subpoena against Trump should fail, but that’s not the real motive for the J6 to push the subpoena against Trump. They are using this Trump subpoena, and the long battle that will ensue over it, as a shield against scrutiny by a flipped power structure in the House of Representatives.
If Republicans win the House, Nancy Pelosi will retire. Bookmark it. There is no scenario where Nancy Pelosi will remain in congress after all of the political manipulation, she has done in the past four years. Adam Schiff will likely be minority leader.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 11, 2022 | Sundance
Now you are going to see why it was necessary to write the previous article about the Trump -v- Clinton lawsuit.
We must stop pretending. Everyone, including everyone who reads here and specifically SSCI Chairman Mark Warner, already knows what is in those documents from Mar-a-Lago. Those documents contain the evidence of the collective government effort to target candidate Trump and then effectively remove President Trump. THAT effort included the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Stop pretending.
Senator Mark Warner was at the heart of the legislative branch effort in the aftermath of the failed attempt to stop candidate Trump from winning the 2016 election. Senator Warner specifically instructed Senate Security Director James Wolfe to leak the Carter Page FISA application, with an intent to further the effort to install a special counsel to help cover-up the pre-election activity. Warner is enmeshed in the corruption created by the false Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy nonsense.
With Warner’s instructions to Wolfe in mind, there is a specific statement in this ridiculous effort at narrative construction called an interview, that is just exponentially hubris, [@6:16] “The record of our intelligence committee of keeping secrets secret, that’s why the Intelligence Committee shares information with us,” Warner claims.
No, the direct ideological alignment between the corrupt intelligence apparatus and the SSCI that is why the Intelligence Committee coordinates with the Senate. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: For a closer look now at the evolving threats to the homeland, we begin this morning with the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mark Warner of Virginia. Good morning to you, Senator.
SEN. MARK WARNER: Good morning, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You know, 9/11 introduced to many Americans for the very first time, this sense of vulnerability at home, and it launched the global war on terror. I wonder how vulnerable you think America is now, are we paying enough attention to the Middle East and to Afghanistan?
SEN. WARNER: Well, Margaret, I remember, as most Americans do, where they were on 9/11. I was in the middle of a political campaign and suddenly, the differences with my opponent seem very small in comparison and our country came together. And in many ways, we defeated the terrorists because of the resilience of the American public because of our intelligence community, and we are safer, better prepared. The stunning thing to me is here we are 20 years later, and the attack on the symbol of our democracy was not coming from terrorists, but it came from literally insurgents attacking the Capitol on January 6th. So I believe we are stronger. I believe our intelligence community has performed remarkably. I think the threat of terror has diminished. I think we still have new challenges in terms of nation-state challenges, Russia in longer-term, a technology competition with China. But I do worry about some of the activity in this country where the election deniers, the insurgency that took place on January 6th, that is something I hope we could see that same kind of unity of spirit.
MARGARET BRENNAN: As you’re pointing out, America came together after 9/11, and we are incredibly divided right now. One thing that is potentially quite explosive is this ongoing investigation of the justice- by the Justice Department of the former president and his handling of classified information. You’ve asked for a briefing from the intelligence community. Given how sensitive this is, why should anything be shared with Congress, given that this is an ongoing investigation?
SEN. WARNER: Because as the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and I’m very proud of our committee, or the last functioning, bipartisan committee. I believe in- in the whole Congress. The Vice Chairman and I have asked for a briefing of the damages that could have arisen from mishandling of this information, and I believe it’s our congressional duty to have that oversight. Remember, what’s at stake here is the fact that if some of these documents involve human intelligence, and that information got out, people’s- will die–
MARGARET BRENNAN: We don’t know that yet.
SEN. WARNER: If there were penetration of signals intelligence, literally years of work could be destroyed. We talk about the enormous advances our intelligence community has made helping our Ukrainian friends, that comes about because we share intelligence. If there’s intelligence that has been shared with us by allies, and that is mishandled, all of that could be in jeopardy. Now, we don’t know what’s in those documents. But I think it is incumbent, as soon as we get approval, let me be clear, soon as we get approval, my understanding is there is some question because of the Special Master appointment by the judge in- in Florida, whether they can brief at this point, we need clarification on that from that judge as quickly as possible, because it is essential that the intelligence committee leadership at least gets a briefing of the damage assessment.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The damage assessment, it has been paused, as has the classification review, and it will take some time. So, A, I am assuming in your answer there, you’re saying there have been no promises of a briefing to be scheduled. Is that right?
SEN. WARNER: I believe we will get a briefing as soon as there is clarification whether this can be performed or not–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But why should that–
SEN. WARNER: In light of the- of the judge in Florida.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Why should that happen? Because I- I want to get to something you said which was the ‘last bipartisan committee,’ you and Marco Rubio, your partner in- in this request for a briefing put forth this letter, asking for the damage assessment. But lately, your colleague’s been making some comments that don’t sound quite as bipartisan. He’s compared the Justice Department to corrupt regimes in Latin America when it comes to this investigation. He’s accused DOJ of leaking sensitive details, and he said the only reason to leak it is to create a narrative for political purpose. When information gets shared with Congress, as you know, the accusation is it will get leaked. So, A, it looks like you’re losing that bipartisan- bipartisanship. And B, if you brief Congress, isn’t it going to leak further and worse than–
SEN. WARNER: The record of our intelligence committee of keeping secrets secret, that’s why the Intelligence Committee shares information with us. Remember this was the committee, bipartisan, that did the Russia investigation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because you know that your oversight capability, many would argue, including former heads of counterintelligence, FBI, that the line is drawn when it’s an active investigation. They don’t owe you a briefing.
SEN. WARNER: We- we don’t- I do not want any kind of insight into an active investigation by the Justice Department. I do want the damage assessment of what would happen to our ability to protect the nation. And here we are 21 years after 9/11, if classified secrets, top secret secrets are somehow mishandled, I pointed out earlier, people could die, sources of intelligence could disappear. The willingness of our allies to share intelligence could be undermined. And I think we need that assessment to make sure if on–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Which you will get–
SEN. WARNER: I think we need it sooner rather than later.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But to that point, because it’s so sensitive, because the country is so divided, because you already have in many ways a target being put on the back of law enforcement, isn’t it more important to get it right, to be deliberate and not to be fast here? I want the details just as much as you do.
SEN. WARNER: I do not think we should have as- as the Intelligence Committee, a briefing on the ongoing investigation. What our responsibility is, is to assess whether there has been damage done to our intelligence collection and maintenance of secrets capacity. That is a damage assessment, that frankly, even the judge in Florida has said, can continue.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Before November?
SEN. WARNER: This- once we get clarification from the judge in Florida, and again, I don’t think we can cherry pick what part of the legal system we like or dislike, I have trust in our legal system. I may not agree with the decision of the judge in Florida, but I respect our Department of Justice. I respect the FBI. I think they are trying under extraordinarily difficult circumstances to get it right and we owe them the benefit of the doubt.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator, thank you for coming on. And I know we’re going to continue to track this, and any potential impact to national security.
The legislative oversight group known as the “Gang of Eight” want to see the documents confiscated by the DOJ National Security Division from the FBI raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. The reason and motives are simple.
If Donald Trump has evidence of the corruption in the Trump-Russia collusion fabrication and targeting effort, there would be evidence of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) participating in joint-effort with the DOJ and FBI. When the FBI launched their 2016 targeting operation against candidate Donald Trump, it was the SSCI who coordinated with them.
When the Trump targeting operation began in 2015/2016, Dianne Feinstein was the Vice Chair of the SSCI, and her lead staffer was Dan Jones. You might remember that Jones left the committee to coordinate anti-Trump efforts outside government and work as a liaison back to the committee. The Chair of the SSCI was Richar Burr.
After Trump’s surprising 2016 victory, Feinstein stepped down to allow Senator Mark Warner to become Vice-Chair, thereby putting Warner on the Gang-of-Eight in January of 2017.
Senator Warner was then responsible for: (a) continuing the attacks and investigation of Trump; (b) covering up the prior work done by the SSCI to target Trump; and (c) working to appoint a special counsel in order to mitigate the risk, while throwing a bag over the prior activity.
When the FBI came under scrutiny (ex. FISA warrant), the corrupt actors within the DOJ and FBI collaborated *ONLY* with the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI). The same DOJ and FBI stonewalled the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) which was then led by Chairman Devin Nunes.
The corrupt entities in the DOJ/FBI would only work with the SSCI not the HPSCI, because it was the SSCI who was working hand in glove with them on the targeting operation. That’s why the SSCI, Mark Warner Vice-Chair with Security Director James Wolfe, was given a copy of the Carter Page FISA application on March 17, 2017. At the exact same time the DOJ and FBI were blocking the House intelligence committee from seeing it.
Senator Mark Warner wanted the FISA application as a tool to leak to the media as part of the effort to help the DOJ get Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller installed as the special counsel. Weissmann/Mueller would be the cover-up and continued targeting group.
Mark Warner and James Wolfe received the FISA on March 17, 2017, from the FBI (carried by agent Brian Dugan). Shortly after 4:00pm on March 17th, Warner and Wolfe then leaked the FISA application to the media (Ali Watkins). Two days later FBI Director James Comey testified before the House committee (March 20) publicly admitting for the first time that President Trump was under investigation.
These days in March 2017 became the narrative opening for the leaked FISA to support the installation of a special counsel a few weeks later. All of it carefully coordinated.
The background collusion and assist motive was also why SSCI vice-chair Mark Warner was covertly in contact with Adam Waldman (2017), the lawyer for Chris Steele, while continuing to operate the parallel Trump targeting and DOJ/FBI cover-up operation from the SSCI. Warner’s skill at this process is why Feinstein abdicated her chair to him at the beginning of Trump’s term.
If the Gang of Eight is currently trying to see what documents President Trump held in Mar-a-Lago, what they are really trying to see is what evidence President Trump has against them.
Watch carefully now….
Watch how the DOJ-NSD and FBI respond to the Gang of Eight. If they follow the pattern, then Main Justice will likely support legislative oversight onlythrough the SSCI.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 11, 2022 | Sundance
To accept a bigger picture is often to accept the foundation of what is present is not what it appears.
Recently a Florida judge dismissed the lawsuit brought by President Trump against Hillary Clinton. [65-page Ruling Here] The media have enjoyed ridiculing Trump by using the words of the judge who dismissed the case. As noted by the Washington Times, “Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks, a Clinton appointee, said Mr. Trump’s filing was too lengthy, detailing events that “are implausible because they lack any specific allegations which might provide factual support for the conclusions reached.”
Pay attention to the framework underpinning Middlebooks’ opinion. I have been reluctant to write about the decision to dismiss the lawsuit of President Trump against a multitude of conspirators, including Hillary Clinton, for two reasons.
First, because when I originally read the 108-page lawsuit filed in March, it took me a few moments, and then I realized this was not a lawsuit; this was a legal transfer mechanism created by lawyers to establish a proprietary information silo. Second, because I do not want another ridiculous subpoena from DC simply because they can’t fathom how any outside entity could solve a puzzle without insider assistance. As to the former, I have prayed on it and come to the opinion it’s worth sharing. As to the latter, it’s just another waste of taxpayer funds, but whatever – the truth has no agenda.
So, here’s a totally different take on the issues surrounding the Trump -v- Clinton lawsuit, which -from the outset- I always believed was going to be dismissed because suing all of those characters under the auspices of a civil RICO case was never the objective. However, in the aftermath, the silo created by the lawsuit is also grounded upon attorney-client privilege, a legal countermeasure to a predictable DOJ-NSD lawfare maneuver, which unfolded in the Mar-a-Lago raid and ongoing issues.
In March 2022 President Trump filed a civil lawsuit against: Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America Campaign Committee, DNC, DNC Services Corp, Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Dolan, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robby Mook, Phillipe Reines as well as Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith and Andrew McCabe. [108-Page Lawsuit Here]
When I was about one-third of the way through reading the lawsuit, I initially stopped and said to myself this is going to take a lot of documentary evidence to back up the claims in the assertions. Dozens of attachments would be needed and hundreds of citations to the dozens of attachments would be mandatory. Except, they were not there.
After reading further, while completely understanding the background material that was being described in the filing, I realized this wasn’t a lawsuit per se’. The 108-pages I was holding in my hands was more akin to legal transfer mechanism from President Trump to lawyers who needed it. The filing was contingent upon a series of documents that would be needed to support the claims within it.
Whoever wrote the lawsuit had obviously reviewed the evidence to support the filing. However, the attachments and citations were missing. That was weird. That’s when I realized the purpose of the lawsuit. In hindsight, things became clear when the DOJ-NSD raided the home of Donald Trump, and suddenly the motive to confiscate the documents that would be the missing lawsuit attachments and citations surfaced.
With the manipulative, and I say intentional, “ongoing investigation” angle of the John Durham probe essentially blocking public release of declassified documents showing the efforts of all the lawsuit participants (Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax), President Trump needed a legal way to secure and more importantly share the evidence.
Think of it like the people around Trump wanting to show lawyers the evidence in the documents. However, because of the construct of the lawfare being deployed against Trump, any lawyer would need a *reason* to review the evidence. The Trump -v- Clinton et al lawsuit becomes that ‘reason.’
The “documents” (classified or not) are reviewed by lawyers in preparation for the lawsuit. This is their legal justification for reviewing the documents. In essence, the lawsuit is a transfer mechanism permitting the Trump legal team to review the evidence on behalf of their client, former President Donald Trump.
Once the formation of the lawsuit is established, the retainer and acceptance of the lawyers to represent their client cemented, the legal counsel, discussion and information within legal duties/obligations of those who represent the plaintiff (Trump) becomes an information silo. In addition to previous executive privilege established by President Trump himself; outside government there is now another silo to defend against the motives of the Lawfare crew (DOJ), the attorney-client privilege.
The lawsuit itself is the transfer mechanism permitting sharing of the documents and providing legal cover for the reviewers (lawyers). The details within the 108-page filing constitute the claims of the plaintiff in the lawsuit, which were established by the evidentiary documents later seized by the DOJ and FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.
“Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks, a Clinton appointee, said Mr. Trump’s filing was too lengthy, detailing events that “are implausible because they lack any specific allegations which might provide factual support for the conclusions reached.”
There were no attachments and/or citations to the documentary evidence in the 108-page filing, because there was a legal risk to citing evidence with a status in dispute by the corrupt people in Main Justice and the FBI. Secondarily, there was an obstruction risk to the President, if his legal team was to publish citations that were part of an ongoing investigation (Durham). However, this doesn’t negate the value of constructing the information silo, an attorney-client privilege.
If the documents seized by the FBI were part of the lawsuit established by President Trump and his legal team via Trump -v- Clinton, then the material seized is all attorney client work product. Lawfully obtained, constitutionally declassified and legally protected material.
This is where the ‘special master’ will play a key role.
While many are praising Biden for maintaining his campaign promise to cancel student debt, others are furious that the costs will be passed on to the taxpayers. Even Mitt Romney accused Biden of bribing voters before the midterms. “Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan may win Democrats some votes, but it fuels inflation, foots taxpayers with other people’s financial obligations, is unfair to those who paid their own way & creates irresponsible expectations,” the perhaps most liberal Republican senator wrote on Twitter.
Under the plan, borrowers earning under $125,000 annually will receive a $10,000 debt cancelation, while Pell Grant recipients will see a $20,000 reduction. The Penn Wharton School conducted a study in which they believe this program will cost the average taxpayer $2,000. The study found:
"We estimate that a one-time maximum debt forgiveness of $10,000 per borrower will cost around $300 billion for borrowers with incomes less than $125,000. This cost increases to $330 billion if the program is continued over the standard 10-year budget window. Eliminating the borrower income limit threshold produces a 10-year cost of $344 billion. Increasing the maximum amount forgiven to $50,000 per borrower increases the total cost to as much as $980 billion."
Yet, this does nothing to prevent predatory lending, albeit dismissing some interest on loans. This does not reinstate Glass Stegall, the provision that Bill Clinton erased to make student debt non-dischargeable in the case of bankruptcy. In fact, Clinton’s top financial advisor, Larry Summers, believes that this measure will increase inflation. “It consumes resources that could be better used helping those who did not, for whatever reason, have the chance to attend college. It will also tend to be inflationary by raising tuitions,” Summers wrote on his Twitter page. He also warned against continuing the moratorium of benefits expected to last until the end of the year.
Some state that we should be happy for those who are receiving relief, but the true culprits are the predatory lenders offering asinine interest rates and the universities that continually raise their fees. It also causes a disconnect between classes as those who chose trade school or blue-collar roles to avoid college fees will not be too fond of this initiative. It certainly will not help America’s plea to recruit more military personnel either. This is a temporary solution to a deeper problem.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on August 16, 2022 | Sundance
CBS narrative engineer Norah O’Donnell made the rounds today proclaiming the DOJ did not seize President Trump’s passports. At least that was the carefully constructed narrative within her messaging. LOOK: [Tweet Link]
Pretty cut and dry effort there. “The FBI is not in possession of former President Trump’s passports.” “Trump had accused the FBI of stealing his three passports”…
Ten minutes later this statement from CBS Kelly O’Donnell. LOOK: [Tweet Link]
Riddle me this…
How does the Dept of Justice return something they did not take?
Washington DC journalism is stenography for the democrat regime. Nothing more.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 