Institutional Fear and the Excavation of the Rabbit Hole


Posted originally on CTH on March 27, 2026 | Sundance |

I shared with readers last year that if CTH felt confident DC engagement would lead to positive results, I would take you on the journey.  Having spent so many years inside the rabbit holes of the DC intel matrix, We The People deserve to fully understand just how this corrupt system operates.  Well, as promised….

When you mention sensitive intelligence and the whereabouts of corrupt evidence that could expose the state of our weakened Republic, one of the first things you notice is that almost everyone in DC is afraid—both personally and institutionally—to acknowledge it.

The Deep State relies on this fear.

You can find this fear promoted in the words of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer when he said in January 2017, “when you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday to get back at ya.”

Schumer said this two weeks before Donald Trump first took office, aiming to drive home a key point – the DC intelligence system is built to go after anyone who threatens the interests of those overseeing it. Basically, if you try to take on DC corruption, there are guards in place ready to take you down.

President Trump, you, me and all Americans spent the next several years watching that dynamic play out in real time.

After a long stretch of exhausting research, endless digging, and getting lost in the rabbit holes created by the IC, you eventually figure out how to face the fear they stir up. The real issue isn’t the fear held by those providing the information—it’s the fear carried by those who receive it and are tasked with acting on it.

Taking on the intelligence community requires two key things. First, a fearless person in a position of authority who can stand strong against the intense manipulation they may unleash. Second, a strategy that makes telling the truth a personal mission.

The IC have a pattern in their targeting; they repeat previously successful tactics.  An effective strategy -to get beyond the fear and gain support from the Executive- is to predict how the IC will eventually target them if they take no action.

In the example of retrieving and making public the Inspector General Michael Atkinson transcript as a datapoint to expose the IC corruption, the strategy was to reinforce how intelligence community would use the same approach to target IC leadership, if no sunlight is provided.

In essence, if you don’t go see what they did, review the past event, put it into the context of what it means, well, they will repeat that attack against you.

This might not get the person in power to take immediate action; after all, the information provider is basically predicting something that would be remarkable for them to encounter if it happened.  The only thing the information provider can do is to tell the location of the evidence, emphasize why it is important and then predict what will happen if the underlying corrupt activity is not exposed.

Thankfully, the “Seven Ways from Sunday” group are predictable.

Corrupt officials control us by manipulating our love of country; so, we must expose them by using their predictable hatred of it against them.

What followed a few months later was an IC targeting operation that was essentially a duplication of what took place before.  Suddenly, the previous reference point takes on an entirely new perspective.  Yes, it becomes personal:

[SOURCE]

That’s the backstory.

♦ Additionally, last year you might remember that DNI Tulsi Gabbard moved the National Intelligence Council (NIC) out of the CIA.  This was done specifically because the covert nature of the CIA was used by the NIC members to manufacture political intelligence.

Any resulting NIC analysis, much of which was fraudulently shaped by politics, could not be easily challenged because the covert nature of the CIA protected the authors (analysts) and their constructs.

Both Eric Ciaramella and Julia Gurganus worked inside the CIA on the NIC analysis that framed John Brennan’s Russian Interference narrative in January 2017, known as the fraudulent Intelligence Community Assessment. Eric Ciaramella was also the anonymous CIA whistleblower in 2019 for the impeachment effort.

The opaque nature of the CIA was used by NIC analysts as a fabrication tool, one of the “ways” Chuck Schumer described.

When DNI Gabbard and CIA Director Ratcliffe worked together to remove the NIC from the CIA, the bad actors within the IC game lost a strategic and political narrative tool.

The Intelligence Community embeds were angry and started leaking stuff to allies in media (WSJ, WaPo, Politico and NYT). The goal was to undermine Tulsi Gabbard at every step, using every resource and doing whatever it took.

However, DNI Gabbard stayed on mission despite the IC trying to also penetrate the concentric circles around the Office of The President with their bulls**t narratives.

♦ Last point, the current “Trump supporters” who try to undermine ODNI Tulsi Gabbard are either: (1) brutally naïve, (2) easily manipulated, or (3) working intentionally to retain the Intelligence Community control system that DNI Gabbard is dutifully deconstructing.  A shockingly large number of popular voices are part of group three.

Think about it in very commonsense terms.

DNI Gabbard is digging, declassifying and releasing information that exposes what very bad people have done against President Trump and our nation. The outcomes of her patriotic activity flow steadily from her office.  Everyone can see them.  So, what exactly are the motives of those who want to undermine Tulsi Gabbard?

Keep it simple, don’t reconcile bad behavior.

From 2020: “A new Democratic-aligned political action committee advised by retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former head of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, is planning to deploy technology originally developed to counter Islamic State propaganda in service of a domestic political goal” …..“The group, Defeat Disinfo, will use artificial intelligence and network analysis to map discussion of [opposition] claims on social media. It will seek to intervene by identifying the most popular counter-narratives and boosting them through a network of more than 3.4 million influencers across the country — in some cases paying users with large followings to take sides against [their opposition].”

[…] The initiative reflects fears within the Democratic Party that Trump’s unwavering digital army may help sustain him … as it has through past controversies, even as the economy craters … and Trump suffers in the polls.  “It’s often said campaigns are a battle of ideas, but they’re really a battle of narratives,” said David Eichenbaum, a Democratic media consultant who is a senior adviser to the PAC. “Today those narratives spread quickly online.” (source)

Big News – House Intel Committee Releases Hidden Transcript of Inspector General Michael Atkinson


Posted originally on CTH on March 25, 2026 | Sundance

For the past several years I have been advocating for ‘sunlight as the best disinfectant.’ Since September of 2025 I have been working through a painfully slow and convoluted process to share research, assist truth tellers and guide those who have the authority to deliver the sunlight. Today, I can happily report on progress.

In 2019 an impeachment effort against President Trump was triggered when a member of the National Security Council named Alexander Vindman coordinated with a member of the National Intelligence Council named Eric Ciaramella to fabricate a false claim that President Trump leveraged his power and authority to demand Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy release information on Joe and Hunter Biden’s corrupt financial dealings in Ukraine.

At the time of the 2019 impeachment construct Eric Ciaramella was working for the CIA as an analyst within the National Intelligence Council (NIC).

Two years prior to the 2019 impeachment construct, in January 2017, the same CIA analyst, Eric Ciaramella, had worked on the fraudulent Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) at the behest of CIA Director John Brennan.

[SIDEBAR: In 2025 Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, working with CIA Director John Ratcliffe, removed the NIC from inside the CIA.  To provide greater overall transparency within the intelligence community, the National Intelligence Council was moved into the purview of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)].

Key point: Eric Ciaramella was one of the key analysts who constructed the fraudulent ‘Russian interference ICA’ (2017) and later the fraudulent impeachment effort (2019).  Eric Ciaramella became the “anonymous CIA whistleblower” in the 2019 impeachment effort.

Before 2019, CIA analysts weren’t allowed to anonymously make claims against political officials. Because of the sensitive information they handled, any allegation of wrongdoing based on intelligence had to be made with their name attached.

Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson changed or modified the ICIG rules permitting Ciaramella to remain anonymous and make a claim that ultimately led to an impeachment effort.

Eric Ciaramella allegedly fabricated intelligence information, shared it with Congress and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), and then remained anonymous. HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff was said to have assisted him.

On October 4, 2019, as part of the House impeachment inquiry, Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson gave closed-door testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) as part of their impeachment investigation. One of the key questions to ICIG Atkinson surrounded the authority of his office changing the CIA whistleblower rules that permitted Eric Ciaramella to remain anonymous.

During later questioning by then-Congressman John Ratcliffe, as part of the House impeachment effort, it came to light that Inspector General Michael Atkinson testified CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella, the anonymous ‘whistleblower’, had lied about key details when questioned by Atkinson. WATCH VIDEO: 

[The look on Dan Goldman’s face during that questioning was both priceless and insufferable. John Ratcliffe is now CIA Director]

Because the anonymous whistleblower complaint by Ciaramella was the cornerstone of the impeachment effort, Chairman Adam Schiff sealed the transcript of ICIG Atkinson testimony, classifying it under the guise of national security interests and burying it in the HPSCI control system.

It’s worth reemphasizing that Eric Ciaramella was both the analyst behind the disputed 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment for Director Brennan and, later in 2019, involved in the contested impeachment effort. Both operations involved impeding and targeting President Donald Trump.

If congress, or more importantly the American public, had known CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella was both the key author of the fraudulent 2016 ICA and the later 2019 CIA complaint, it’s doubtful any impeachment effort would have moved forward.

Inside the Intelligence Community oversight system, the Ciaramella connection to both IC operations could have been made.  His anonymity as a whistleblower served a purpose.  [DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s 2025 decision to remove the National Intelligence Council from behind the curtain of the CIA is additionally supported with this hindsight.]

The transcript of Inspector General Michael Atkinson’s testimony becomes a key document to release because at its core we know that Atkinson testified that Ciaramella lied.  The Ciaramella lie is at the heart of the impeachment attempt.

Don’t get lost in the details or the politics of this.  When you peel back all the layers of DC, at its epicenter this was an operation to impeach a sitting President that came from within the CIA, and it almost succeeded. {GO DEEP}

When a top administration intelligence official, holding what I believe to be the best possibility of making a difference, reached out, I began the assist by citing specific documents that would reveal a much bigger story.  The Atkinson transcript was one of those documents.

I have outlined how the silo system is constructed to intentionally impede or stop review. Adam Schiff isn’t stupid. He knew what he was doing and how to use the separation of powers for his purposes.  The executive branch would not easily be able to reach into the legislative branch and extract information.  That’s why then HPSCI Chairman, Impeachment Chairman and now Senator Adam Schiff buried the Atkinson transcript in the vault of the House Intelligence Committee.

The process.

♦ First, you need a republican President in the White House √. Second, you need an aligned Intelligence Community DNI √, and third you need a Republican controlled HPSCI √:

[¹] • To extract the transcript the Executive would first need to understand its value. • Then the Executive would need to know where it was. • Then the Executive would need a qualified stakeholder, with appropriate clearances, to request to review the transcript in the HPSCI secure compartmented intelligence facility (scif).  • If the HPSCI approved, the Executive would be given an appointment date to read it (no notes, no copying, just reading).  • Then, after reading, the Executive stakeholder would then need to request the HPSCI Chair and Ranking Member for a classified copy.  • The Chair and Ranking Member would need to agree to the value of the sunlight on the Legislative Branch controlled information. • To get a copy the entire House Intelligence Committee would need to vote on the release to the Executive.  • The vote would need to be scheduled on the committee calendar.  • A HPSCI vote would then take place:

[SOURCE]

WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence held a business meeting to consider multiple Committee actions. During the business meeting, the Committee voted in favor of releasing two transcripts from 2019 hearings with the former Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson. The hearings were held to examine Atkinson’s role in an alleged whistleblower complaint, which ultimately led to Democrats’ first impeachment efforts against President Trump in December 2019. One transcript would be released to the ODNI for classification review, and then subsequently released to the public by the Committee with the second unclassified transcript.

“The great deal of widespread speculation about the Atkinson classified hearing transcript is indicative of the American people’s complete and warranted mistrust of the Intelligence Community,” said Chairman Crawford. “In far too many instances, the IC hides behind the veil of overclassification. Sometimes sunlight is the best disinfectant. As part of the Committee’s continued effort to balance the transparency the American people deserve and the need to protect sensitive national security information, we hope that the release of these transcripts allows the American people to make their own determinations. As Chairman, I remain committed to ensuring this Committee, where possible, is transparent as the IC works to rebuild trust with the American people.”

The transcripts will be posted on the Committee website once they undergo the standard classification review with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.  (source)

The HPSCI has voted to release the Atkinson Transcript.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard will now walk the unhidden transcript through the declassification process. The fastest way is through President Trump’s office.   Hopefully the redactions will be minimal.  Then we will all get to see it.

This has been a long, frustrating and complicated process – but we have succeeded.

[SUPPORT The Ongoing CTH Effort HERE]

.

[¹] FINAL POINT: You can tell this is a long arduous process. However, once the process begins, you’ll note that certain tripwires are crossed, and people in/around DC find out what you are doing.  Yes, DC ‘interests’ realized months ago that Tulsi Gabbard was on the trail of this transcript.

Now do the recent attacks against DNI Tulsi Gabbard gain context?

Elise Stefanik Questions DNI Gabbard About Politically Shaped Intelligence, and Joe Kent


Posted originally on CTH on March 19, 2026 | Sundance

Representative Elise Stefanik is a strong supporter of Israel and has concerns about current narratives swirling around the politicization of Intelligence Community information to shape anti-Israel sentiments.  Part of that collective effort is a not-so-subtle effort to remove DNI Gabbard from her position by questioning her loyalties.  A considerable segment of Washington DC wants to return to a more Dan Coats style DNI.

As a tenured member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Mrs. Stefanik used her time during the congressional testimony of Gabbard, Ratcliffe and Patel to confirm the Trump administration policy toward the IC to remove all political interests.  WATCH:

.

In the political horse racing analogy, the stable of Peter Thiel has taken major hits recently as the stable of Larry Ellison is gaining considerable influence.  However, it’s a steeplechase and anything can happen.

Peter Thiel <-> Elon Musk <-> Larry Ellison

DNI Gabbard, CIA Director Ratcliffe and FBI Director Patel Testify to HPSCI – 10:00am Livestream


Posted originally on CTH on March 19, 2026 | Sundance

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, FBI Director Kash Patel, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and other national security officials testify on threats to the U.S. amid the Iran war before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).

The testimony begins at 10:00am ET, with livestream links below:

.

.

DNI Gabbard, FBI Director Patel and CIA Director Ratcliffe Testify on Global Threats – 10:00am Livestream


Posted originally on CTH on March 18, 2026 | Sundance

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and FBI Director Kash Patel are scheduled to deliver testimony on Global Threat Assessments today at the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).  The hearing is scheduled to begin at 10:00am ET.  Livestream Links Below.

The SSCI sits at the center of the U.S. Intelligence Community operations, providing support and alignment with all ongoing IC activity, with control mechanisms that work around the leadership of all IC institutions.  The SSCI, acting as an oversight body, facilitates all activity.

Keep in mind, as DNI Tulsi Gabbard appears for testimony today the worst elements of the Intelligence Community, and the orcs within the SSCI that underpins the IC, despise Tulsi Gabbard.

Remember, Gabbard intercepted an impeachment construct (TdA, Venezuela deportation – Boasberg et al) and Gabbard refused to promote the fabricated IC construct that Jared Kushner was in control of Trump and manipulating the White House on behalf of Israel. Today, the SSCI will take strides to regain control. WATCH:

.

.

.

Strange – CNN Found a War to Cover Again


Posted originally on CTH on March 6, 2026 | Sundance

CNN is bragging about the teams they have on the ground in Iran and around the war zone to provide coverage for Operation Epic Fury. [SOURCE]  Which again, brings up an interesting contrast that seemingly flew under the radar from past events.

[Citation – link]

As we noted in the beginning of the Russian war in Ukraine, where was the media for that one?  Where was this CNN coverage for the war in Ukraine?  The Ukraine war was the only war in modern history with ZERO mainstream media reports complete with helmets, flak jackets and play-by-play reporting of every moment within the conflict.  Why?

The answer is not necessarily complicated.  The Ukraine war was a war of narratives.  Yes, there was actual fighting, but the physical conflict itself was not in alignment with the narrative the media intended to create from it.  The reality within Ukraine did not fit in the pert chart and the visuals would not ever have supported the claims.

Ukraine was/is the COVID-19 of wars.  A western intelligence operation using the geography of Ukraine to push an agenda in alignment with western interests. It would not and does not serve the interests of truth and transparency for media to report from inside a battlespace that might contradict their claims.  Hence, we labeled it “World War Reddit,” and it remains that way through today.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy was installed by the same interests who triggered the conflict.  As an outcome, the media participation was limited to column inches, punditry reports, claims and scripted presentations that worked alongside Zelenskyy, the actor, traveling all around the world promoting the conflict and raising money.

The physical battlespace was far less valuable than the EU/NATO and Intelligence Community narratives needed to maintain it.  As soon as everyone started making money from the screenplay, maintaining ticket sales was prioritized over the performance itself.  Criticism and critiques can be completely avoided by keeping the curtain down and just narrating what’s going on behind it.

That system of deception continues through today. Strange that everyone just accepted it.

Democrats in Intel are Big Mad That Tulsi Gabbard Will Not Share Details of Gossip About Jared Kushner


Posted originally on CTH on February 26, 2026 | Sundance 

The summary of the story basically circles back to that NSA/CIA whistleblower intercept they previously were using to attack DNI Tulsi Gabbard.  Now that the whistleblower’s lawyer (same lawyer as last CIA whistleblower, Ciaramella) has leaked the subject of the conversation was Jared Kushner the democrats really want to know the details.

Two foreign nationals (unknown countries) were discussing the U.S. position toward Iran. In their conversation they talked about Jared Kushner. Their conversation was intercepted by NSA/CIA using an “exceptionally sensitive surveillance method.”  The intercept was written, evaluated and determined to be “gossip” but given to the ODNI, Gabbard.

The whistleblower was upset the intercept was not shared with the larger intelligence apparatus. Thus, they were angry at Gabbard.  The ODNI followed the distribution for the whistleblower complaint, but not the underlying intercepted details of the conversation.

The White House has now asserted “executive privilege” over the content of the intercept, thereby bolstering the position of not sharing what was previously determined to be gossip.  The DNI was asked for the details, and Gabbard has told the Democrats the White House has asserted privilege.  The House and Senate Intelligence committee democrats are now big mad they don’t get to read the gossip.

(VIA WSJ) – WASHINGTON—The Trump administration told Congress it won’t share with lawmakers the classified intelligence that led to a whistleblower complaint against U.S. spy chief Tulsi Gabbard, citing presidential claims of executive privilege.

In an email to Democratic congressional staffers sent on Feb. 13 and reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, Gabbard’s office said it was unable to provide the unredacted intelligence that underpinned the complaint “due to the assertion of executive privilege to portions” of the intelligence itself.

In a Tuesday letter to Gabbard, Sen. Mark Warner and Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrats on the congressional intelligence committees, asked who asserted privilege over the intelligence report and on what basis.

[…] A spokeswoman for Director of National Intelligence Gabbard declined to directly address the decision to not share the underlying intelligence with Congress. She instead referred to a previous letter to lawmakers from the office’s general counsel that said Gabbard had met her requirements concerning notification to Congress about the complaint.

[…] The intelligence, which is at least in part about Iran, is said to derive from an exceptionally sensitive surveillance method. Officials have said any disclosure of the collection method could damage U.S. national security. Gabbard’s office ultimately shared the complaint with select lawmakers earlier this month, but redacted significant portions of it, also chiefly on grounds of executive privilege.

In the new letter, Warner and Himes said they weren’t able to confirm whether the discussion at issue was about Kushner because the version of the complaint they received was so heavily redacted. (more)

If I had to hazard a guess as to what is going on, based entirely on the current state of politics and what we know about how the IC and Democrats operate, overlaid against the domestic IC influence provocations currently underway, here’s my suspicion:

Bad actors within the CIA organized two friendly foreign intel officials to have a conversation. The script is about U.S. policy toward Iran, and the ‘gossip’ is that Jared Kushner is an Israeli intelligence asset, a blue sparrow, previously inserted into the Trump family.  That ‘intercept’ would send everyone in the USA bananas regardless of truth or merit.

It sounds crazy, but that’s the level of conspiratorial nuttery, the sort of thing the IC would feed, to bolster the currently swirling year of crazy and further divide Trump’s base of support.

Whatever the underlying intercept consists of, it’s coming out of a highly political U.S. intelligence system; therefore, I would not give it any merit – unless, of course, you choose to cling to their prior construct of Trump colluding with Russia.

Alan Dershowitz, If Epstein was a CIA or Mossad Asset He Never Would Have Gone to Jail


Posted originally on CTH on February 21, 2026 | Sundance

This is a little surprising to hear in someone’s outside voice.  According to Jeffrey Epstein’s former lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, if his client had told him he worked for Israeli intelligence or the CIA Dershowitz could have gotten him off the charges with no jail time.

Essentially, Dershowitz is saying any sex criminals or pedophiles that work for intelligence agencies would never receive any prison sentences.  WATCH (prompted):

As remarkable as it sounds, Alan Dershowitz is actually confirming what many people suspect.  If a U.S. or Israeli intelligence asset commits a crime, they can leverage their position to get out of any criminal accountability.

Good grief. I’m not sure Dershowitz realizes we can hear what he is saying.

The Subject was Kushner – More Details Surface About Subject of Intel Gossip Underneath Ridiculous Whistleblower Claim Against DNI


Posted originally on CTH on February 13, 2026 | Sundance

It’s a strange time within the Intelligence Community. You can tell it’s all in flux when you see the New York Times giving a version of the story that is positive toward DNI Tulsi Gabbard, and the Wall Street Journal continuing with debunked/fake information still trying to get DNI Tulsi Gabbard removed.

The New York Times version appears to be the most truthful, factual and cited. It also makes the most sense.

In essence, two foreign nationals were having a phone call about Iran and discussing Jared Kushner’s role and influence in the policy of Trump toward Iran. The phone call was intercepted by a foreign intelligence agency, who then relayed their interpretation of the discussion to the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

NEW YORK TIMES – […] It was a discussion last year between two foreign nationals about Iran, not an unusual topic for American spies to study. But an intercept of that communication, collected by a foreign spy service and given to the United States.

[…] Mr. Kushner’s name was redacted in the original report from the National Security Agency, but people reading it, including the whistle-blower, were able to determine that the reference was to him.

[…] The foreign nationals, they said, were commenting on Mr. Kushner’s influence with the Trump administration. At a time last year when Mr. Kushner’s role in Middle East peace talks was less public than it is now, the foreign officials were recorded saying that he was the person to speak to in order to influence the talks.

[…] The intercept also included what officials described as “gossip” or speculation about Mr. Kushner that was not supported by other intelligence.

[…] The whistle-blower report was based on a telephone intercept provided to the N.S.A. from a foreign intelligence service. Intercepts are notoriously difficult to interpret. 

[…] The whistle-blower, an intelligence official whose identity has not been publicly disclosed, said Ms. Gabbard’s actions improperly limited who could see the report.

[…] Some administration critics, who have reviewed the report and have considered the underlying intelligence to be significant, also agreed that Ms. Gabbard did not act improperly by restricting distribution of the report. (more)

Democrats (administration critics) agreed that DNI Gabbard did not act improperly.

If it was possible to tell the identity of the U.S. person (aka Kushner) simply by reading the intel report, and this report is simply gossip by two other people talking about a U.S. person, then yes, duh – the report should be secured and not spread.

This story becomes more of a nothingburger each time new information is leaked.

NSA “Whistleblower” Attorney Andrew Bakaj Appears on Video Making False Claim About “Underlying Intercept”


Posted originally on CTH on February 9, 2026 

Allison Gill is an ally of the Lawfare network and recently sat down for an interview with NSA whistleblower attorney Andrew Bakaj; the same attorney used by former CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.

This interview appears to be taking place after Bakaj revised his statements to The Guardian forcing them to rewrite the central claim of the leak he provided. The Guardian rewrote their article removing the key claim within the intelligence intercept that a foreign intelligence person was in contact with a person close to President Donald Trump.

The revision now states:

[…] “The Guardian reported earlier on Saturday that the phone conversation was between a person associated with foreign intelligence and a person close to Trump, based on Bakaj’s recollection of the complaint, which he confirmed over multiple calls. However, after publication, Bakaj said he misspoke.

He clarified his understanding of the complaint in a statement: “The NSA picked up a phone call between two members of foreign intelligence involving someone close to the Trump White House,” he said. “The NSA does not monitor individuals without a reason.” {citation}

This is not a small “revision,” it is essentially a rewrite of the central component to the whistleblower complaint.  As it is now clarified two foreign people were intercepted talking about a person who knows Donald Trump.  This could be any two foreign people gossiping or talking about anyone who is in the orbit of Donald Trump.  That explains why intelligence analysts reviewed the NSA intercept, disregarded it and said it is hearsay likely just ‘gossip” according to New York Times reporting.

However, that said, Andrew Bakaj then appears on a podcast with Allison Gill during their effort to put traction to the claims, and Bakaj repeats the false statement.  See video at 7:45:

…”So, in the spring of last year there was intelligence that was gathered by an agency that captured, um, activity that was being conducted by someone close to the President.”…

This is the same lie the whistleblower’s attorney Andrew Bakaj told The Guardian; that someone close to the president was a participant in the “activity.” This is demonstrably false through all other reporting.

The complaint alleges two foreign individuals were intercepted talking to each other about a person who Bakaj defines as close to the president, on the subject of Iran.

It could simply be two Germans or Israelis talking about Iran and wondering what Devin Nunes thinks about it.

The entire predicate claim is silly. Foreign officials and foreign intelligence officials talk to each other all the time about Trump and or his people.

This complaint is a fabrication, and the fact that the NSA Whistleblower included the TSSCI material in the complaint, literally outlining who was intercepted talking, is the reason why the complaint could not be shared or circulated without careful guidance by the DNI.

The whistleblower did this on purpose. If the whistleblower wanted to share his complaint with more people, he could have just avoided including the TSSCI aspect.

This is intelligence community Lawfare in action.