PDirector of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard continues her effort to deconstruct the politicization of the intelligence community with the revocation of security clearances from 37 intelligence analysts. Many of these names are from the fraudulent Intelligence Community letter that dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation.
In a Twitter announcement today, DNI Gabbard posts a notification letter that the security clearances are revoked effective immediately. Most of the names on the list are unknown to the general public, but these are the people buried deep inside the intelligence information system who are tasked with interpreting intelligence data.
The names on the list come mostly from the staff pool of the National Security Council (NSC), CIA National Intelligence Council (NIC), State Dept. and various sub-silos within the offices that deliver finished intelligence products to the CIA, FBI Counterintelligence Division, NSA intelligence analysis center and ultimately the DNI and White House.
These are the sources of politicized, often manufactured, intelligence interpretations.
When former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, DNI James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan said, “give me this outcome,” the targeted names today are the people who constructed the fraud. Some of the names, like Beth Sanner, are currently working as “National Security Analysts” for various media operations, like CNN.
(ODNI – VIA Twitter) – “Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right. Those in the Intelligence Community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold. In doing so, they undermine our national security, the safety and security of the American people and the foundational principles of our democratic republic.
This is why, at POTUS’ direction, ODNI directed the revocation of the security clearances of 37 current and former intelligence professionals who have abused the public trust by politicizing and manipulating intelligence, leaking classified intelligence without authorization, and/or committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards.
Our Intelligence Community must be committed to upholding the values and principles enshrined in the US Constitution and maintain a laser-like focus on our mission of ensuring the safety, security and freedom of the American people.” (read more)
DNI Tulsi Gabbard appeared on Fox News, Sean Hannity (ugh), to discuss the latest developments.
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard continues her effort to deconstruct the politicization of the intelligence community with the revocation of security clearances from 37 intelligence analysts. Many of these names are from the fraudulent Intelligence Community letter that dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation.
In a Twitter announcement today, DNI Gabbard posts a notification letter that the security clearances are revoked effective immediately. Most of the names on the list are unknown to the general public, but these are the people buried deep inside the intelligence information system who are tasked with interpreting intelligence data.
The names on the list come mostly from the staff pool of the National Security Council (NSC), CIA National Intelligence Council (NIC), State Dept. and various sub-silos within the offices that deliver finished intelligence products to the CIA, FBI Counterintelligence Division, NSA intelligence analysis center and ultimately the DNI and White House.
These are the sources of politicized, often manufactured, intelligence interpretations.
When former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, DNI James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan said, “give me this outcome,” the targeted names today are the people who constructed the fraud. Some of the names, like Beth Sanner, are currently working as “National Security Analysts” for various media operations, like CNN.
(ODNI – VIA Twitter) – “Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right. Those in the Intelligence Community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold. In doing so, they undermine our national security, the safety and security of the American people and the foundational principles of our democratic republic.
This is why, at POTUS’ direction, ODNI directed the revocation of the security clearances of 37 current and former intelligence professionals who have abused the public trust by politicizing and manipulating intelligence, leaking classified intelligence without authorization, and/or committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards.
Our Intelligence Community must be committed to upholding the values and principles enshrined in the US Constitution and maintain a laser-like focus on our mission of ensuring the safety, security and freedom of the American people.” (read more)
DNI Tulsi Gabbard appeared on Fox News, Sean Hannity (ugh), to discuss the latest developments.
Posted originally on CTH on August 18, 2025 | Sundance
I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is the fourth.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.
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.
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.
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.
KEY: Michael Atkinson was forced to testify to the joint House impeachment committee about the CIA whistleblower rule change and the process he authorized and participated in as the Intelligence Community Inspector General. Adam Schiffsealed that deposition, and no one has ever discussed what Atkinson said when questioned.
House Speaker Mike Johnson can unseal that testimony, and Tulsi Gabbard can declassify his deposition.
Moving on…
♦ 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.
♦ 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)
Yes, that is correct. After seeding and guiding all of the Lawfare attacks against candidate Donald Trump, then President-Elect Donald Trump, then President Donald Trump, Mary McCord took up a key legal position inside the J6 committee to continue the Lawfare against President Trump after he left office.
But wait,…. Remember the stories of the J6 investigative staff going to work for Jack Smith on the investigation of Donald Trump, that included the raid on Mar-a-Lago? Well, Mary McCord was a member of that team [citation]; all indications are that her efforts continued as a quiet member of the Special Counsel team
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….
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.
BACK TO MARY in 2025 – During the question session for Attorney General Pam Bondi’s nomination, Adam Schiff asked Mary McCord about whether AG Bondi should recuse herself from investigating Adam Schiff and Mary McCord. It’s a little funny if you understand the background.
I prompted the video to the part at 01:36:14 when Schiff asks McCord, and Mrs. McCord responds with “yes, Pam Bondi should recuse.” WATCH:
Mary McCord says Pam Bondi must recuse herself from any investigative outcome related to the first impeachment effort.
Who was the lead staff working for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on the first impeachment effort?
Mary McCord.
Now, triggering that first impeachment effort… Who worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to change the CIA whistleblower regulations permitting an anonymous complaint?
Yep, that would be the same Mary McCord.
In essence, the woman who organized, structured, led and coordinated the first impeachment effort, says Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating the organization, structure, leadership and coordination of the first impeachment effort.
If all that seems overwhelming, here’s a short recap:
♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.
♦ McCord helped create the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House.
♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on Impeachment Committee.
♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.
♦ McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create.
♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review.
♦ McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed.
♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia.
♦ McCord was working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.
♦ McCord is now coordinating outside Lawfare attacks against Donald Trump in term #2
♦ McCord also testified that AG Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating McCord.
Posted originally on CTH on August 14, 2025 | Sundance
FBI Director Kash Patel appears on broadcast with Sean Hannity to discuss his goals and objectives with the ongoing information releases from the FBI, “The Transparency Initiative.”
Take your emotion out of it. Take your feelings out of it. Do not project anything onto it. Imagine yourself hearing and reviewing this for the first time. Watch and listen carefully to it. Your intuition will not be wrong. WATCH:
BREAKING: Kash Patel just made the rare appearance on Fox and HOLY CRAP! He's uncovered the largest scandal in American history!
No wonder these corrupt crooks in DC are sweating!
"I was blown away, but sadly, it's come to be expected in this town when corrupt bureaucrats… pic.twitter.com/7xWoOdMqgZ
FBI Director Kash Patel promises MAX ACCOUNTABILITY for those who manufactured IC hoaxes to destroy President Trump 🔥🔥
"We are educating the American public as we build through this transparency initiative. And where the investigation goes, I can assure you of this: We will… pic.twitter.com/cBb1wy6aTI
What you are witnessing is a performance. This is performative, not substantive.
It sounds simplistic, but the #1 easiest *tell* is the venue, Sean ‘tick-tock’ Hannity. The #2 and #3 are the references to Trey Gowdy et al. The chaff and countermeasures process.
Kash Patel says, “we are building a case for the American public“… There it is.
Accept things as they are, not as we would wish them to be. Do not project onto it.
There’s the defined “accountability” outcome Kash Patel and Pam Bondi are delivering.
It’s okay. Sunlight is a good goal, exposure is a good goal, but moderate expectations and do not expect to see any indictments. They “are building a case for the American public,” not a jury.
If they were building a case for a jury, they wouldn’t be on television talking about building their case.
Posted originally on CTH on August 14, 2025 | Sundance
I am writing this outline because we have many new readers and also to keep everyone on the same page, so to speak.
There is a reason why information held within an administrative agency, within a silo, is called an “equity.” The information has ownership exclusive to the originating agency or silo. A known equity of a specific silo.
EXAMPLE of an “FBI equity” and how it is handled below:
An “equity” is information with ownership belonging to a specific agency or silo. Only the agency head can declassify information within their silo. Ex. The head of the FBI cannot declassify or release the “equity” of the CIA. The head of the CIA can declassify an equity of the CIA, and the FBI head can declassify the equity of the FBI.
Only the President and the Director of National Intelligence (Tulsi Gabbard) can reach into any agency (silo), retrieve information then declassify it. The President and the DNI can work together to release information from any silo.
This process is what we are seeing with the releases of information, FBI equities, from FBI Director Kash Patel. These are exclusive equities of the FBI, and can be released (with approval) from the head of the executive, the President.
Then the issue of distribution surfaces. Once an equity is declassified, Patel then has to determine how to make the information public. He could: (a) release it directly from the FBI to the public; (b) release it to the legislative branch for distribution to the public (Grassley or similar): or (c) release it to a media outlet (Solomon), who in turn releases it to the public.
The White House may not want the FBI to release it directly to the public due to the appearance of politics. The legislative option may not want to be the distribution hub due to the appearance of politics. The media outlet may or may not want to release it for their own reasons.
The office of the President may not want the FBI to release the information directly because it can create a problem for the Executive if the material is framed politically. The FBI is a subsidiary of the Executive. The information can look very political if a political appointee is releasing information that is politically explosive in nature.
In the first set of FBI declassification releases, the White House obviously approved of the release and the office of Senator Chuck Grassley was working with Kash Patel to distribute the declassified information, because it pertained to research and investigations they were conducting. The “equity” was beneficial to their interests.
In the current FBI releases by Kash Patel, the exclusive FBI equities are being released to John Solomon for distribution. This approach is because of a pre-existing relationship.
At the same time Director Patel is releasing information from within the specific FBI silo, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is declassifying and releasing information from both her silo (DNI) and other silos (CIA). In the CIA releases, Gabbard is coordinating with the declassification approval of CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
When you understand the silo system and how information is considered an equity of each silo, you start to realize how certain silos cannot operate without the approval of another.
The DOJ cannot use a CIA equity unless the CIA approves. The DOJ cannot use an NSA equity unless the NSA approves. Regardless of how the information is identified, each silo must approve of their equities being released. If they do not approve the only option is for the President to override the silo head and declassify the information himself.
As an outcome of the way our checks and balances have been modified against our interests, the judicial branch has repeatedly deferred to the DOJ around the issue of “national security.” In fact, if the DOJ labels any Lawfare approach as a national security matter the subsequent evidence therein, the NSI (even when not seen) is accepted by the judicial branch without question. The judicial branch defers to the executive on all matters defined by the executive as “national security.”
This is the area of exploit being discussed by Mary McCord in this segment. However, notice there is one apparatus that can supercede the DOJ-NSD’s ability to weaponize Nat Sec Information, that’s the power of the intelligence apparatus. WATCH:
Lawfare coordinator Mary McCord admits that she and another lawfare coordinator, Andrew Weissmann, worked with the DOJ and intelligence losers on what bogus charges to bring against Trump. pic.twitter.com/4jqgetvURZ
McCord notes how she and Andrew Weissmann navigate through the process of using National Security Information (NSI) as they move toward their target; the most common reference is their political opposition, Donald J Trump.
This silo process is also how the DC system protects itself from sunlight.
A whistleblower from the CIA cannot go to the FBI with evidence of corrupt activity and expect the FBI to take action on that evidence without the approval of the CIA. If the CIA whistleblower takes the equity evidence to the FBI and the CIA does not permit the equity evidence to be used, the FBI cannot use it.
Similarly, if a non-silo member of the public connects the dots using information/evidence from multiple silos, the DOJ cannot use that evidence without first requesting approval from each of the silo heads.
Silos only know their own information. Silos do not know the information in other agencies. This was the entire premise of creating the DNI, a super-silo that can cross reference each silos’ equities. Using this power is what I have been outlining for the past several years, and this is what Tulsi Gabbard has been doing for the first time since the DNI office was created.
Alternatively, Kash Patel has selected John Solomon for the release of information exclusive to Kash Patel’s silo. Because the equities do not involve any other silo, this is possible. Solomon doesn’t care if the information release is defined as political, and most of the information is expired old news being repackaged for public consumption.
Throughout this process, the MSM regards all declassified information against their interests to be political constructs, easily ignored. Trump as head of the executive is framed as releasing information against his political opposition.
Also understand, each legislative committee or sub-committee within congress (legislative branch) is its own independent silo. The HPSCI doesn’t know what the SSCI is doing, and vice-versa. Additionally, each agency within the executive branch is its own independent silo. There are also silos within the judicial branch, and within each federal court within the judicial branch – including the FISA Court.
Each silo is its own compartment of information holding exclusive equities.
This DC system has been weaponized over time to create the complicated mess that currently exists.
Keep all of this in mind, as you look at the information outflow and distribution network.
Posted originally on CTH on August 13, 2025 | Sundance
Former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper was always a doofus, sticking his foot in his mouth about all kinds of Intelligence Community stuff. It was his doofusness that led to President Obama keeping him as DNI, while the rest of the IC worked around him (a little funny at the time).
Today, current Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, declassified and released the content of an email exchange between then NSA Director Mike Rogers and DNI Clapper about the bogus nature of the rushed December 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment, that Obama wanted to help frame the Trump-Russia story.
Adm Mike Rogers is telling James Clapper his NSA team was not comfy with manufacturing and spinning intelligence for a political hit job on the incoming administration. Clapper responds to Rogers telling him to get on board, because this level of IC fabrication requires all key elements to be on the same page. Clapper saying the Russian stuff, “is our story, and we’re sticking to it.”
As noted by Tulsi Gabbard: “Newly declassified Top Secret emails sent on December 22, 2016 complying with President Obama’s order to create the manufactured January 2017 ICA about Russia expose how DNI James Clapper demanded the IC fall in line behind the Russia Hoax. Clapper admits that it was a “team sport” that required “compromise on our ‘normal modalities’”.
This release by DNI Tulsi Gabbard is a solid drop of evidence, albeit in hindsight.
In real time in 2016 and 2017, CTH was watching Adm Mike Rogers very closely, because we could tell he was not a willing participant in the overall fraud. In fact, the pressure on him was transparently obvious to anyone paying attention and listening to the actual words from NSA Director Rogers at the time.
It is not coincidental the two most politicized intelligence operatives, John Brennan (CIA) and James Comey (FBI), presented the information along with like-minded political traveler ODNI James Clapper. While Admiral Mike Rogers (NSA) is also included in the report authorship, it is largely overlooked that Rogers only held a “moderate confidence” in the overall report finding. It was only Brennan and Comey who claimed “high confidence” in the overall report content.
We have continually pointed out at the time the report was written it appeared to be entirely political in construct. The intent of the report was to provide source material for the overall Russian conspiracy narrative; and also establish some framework for the White House to take action, vis-a-vis sanctions.
Against the backdrop of the December 2016 sanctions announcement, President Obama’s administration released the Joint Analysis Report claiming it outlined details of Russia’s involvement hacking into targeted political data-base or computer systems during the election.
Except it didn’t
Not even a little.
The “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” (full pdf below) was/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.
This might as well be a report blaming Nigerian fraud phone solicitors for targeting U.S. phone numbers. Just because you didn’t actually win the Nigerian national lottery doesn’t mean the Nigerian government are targeting you for your portion of the lottery revenue.
The December FBI report was/is, well, quite simply, pure horse-pucky.
What the report does well is using ridiculous technical terminology to describe innocuous common activity. Example: “ATPT29” is Olaf, the round faced chubby guy probably working from his kitchen table; and “ATPT28” is his unemployed socially isolated buddy living in Mom’s basement down the street.
This paragraph below is priceless in it’s humorous and disingenuous gobblespeak:
Both groups have historically targeted government organizations, think tanks, universities, and corporations around the world. APT29 has been observed crafting targeted spearphishing campaigns leveraging web links to a malicious dropper; once executed, the code delivers Remote Access Tools (RATs) and evades detection using a range of techniques.
APT28 is known for leveraging domains that closely mimic those of targeted organizations and tricking potential victims into entering legitimate credentials. APT28 actors relied heavily on shortened URLs in their spearphishing email campaigns. Once APT28 and APT29 have access to victims, both groups exfiltrate and analyze information to gain intelligence value.
These groups use this information to craft highly targeted spearphishing campaigns. These actors set up operational infrastructure to obfuscate their source infrastructure, host domains and malware for targeting organizations, establish command and control nodes, and harvest credentials and other valuable information from their targets.
(*note the emphasis I placed in the quote) All that nonsense is saying is a general explanation for how hacking, any hacking, is generally carried out. The entire FBI report was nothing more than a generalized, albeit techno-worded, explanation for how Nigerians, Indians, or in this case Russians, attempt to gain your email passwords etc., nothing more.
What was alarming to consider was: A) how far the various radical leftists were willing to go to create a straw man crisis for political benefit; and B) how diminished the executive office of the U.S. presidency actually became amid this level of ridiculous propaganda.
There’s no doubt the intended outcome was to create internal confusion amid the U.S. electorate, and seed a media narrative. There were/are millions of people who bought into these widely discussed fabrications.
Consider the example inside a Yahoo News article showcasing the report:
[…] The US intelligence community has concluded that a hack-and-release of Democratic Party and Clinton staff emails was designed to put Trump — a political neophyte who has praised Putin — into the Oval Office. (link)
There was no evidence the DNC was “hacked” (WikiLeaks claims the information was an inside job of “leaking”), Hillary Clinton blames the Macedonians, and even John Podesta admitted himself he was a victim of an ordinary “phishing” password change scam. Not exactly a “hack” per se’.
Does hacking exist, of course it does. Do hackers exist in every country connected by the internet, of course they do. Do state governments participate in hacking offense and defense, again – yes, of course they do. And yes, the FBI and U.S. intelligence community act purposefully against all participants they can catch.
But what does that intellectual truism have to do with the specific allegation that hostile Russian hackers attempted to gain entry into the DNC or John Podesta? These are two entirely different issues which the Obama administration (Brennan and Comey) attempted to conflate simply for political and ideological purposes.
Here is where we see the overall intended and conflated outcome. Consider the Yaho0 media paragraph above against the headline which accompanied the content:
There’s a reasonable case to be made that all of those previous political players have quite a bit to hide within the construct of the entire narrative. Some like James Comey, and possibly Susan Rice, appear to have violated laws on leaking information and unmasking U.S. citizens within intelligence reports.
Former CIA Director John Brennan has clearly established his own exit from the risk matrix. While former ODNI James Clapper is almost too inept to be held accountable for any of it.
It would be disingenuous in the extreme to ignore that NSA Director Mike Rogers was the least willing and least engaged intelligence leader within the scheme and simultaneously highly political ODNI James Clapper was calling for him to be fired.
Admiral Mike Rogers traveled to Trump Tower (after the election) on November 17th without notifying the White House or Clapper. The next day, November 18th, President-Elect Trump moved the entire Transition Team to his New Jersey country club. Mike Rogers remains the current head of the NSA.
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 