Posted originally on the CTH on January 25, 2024 | Sundance
The most brutally Machiavellian Senator, Mitch McConnell (U-DC), is the leader and source of anxiety created by the coalition of professionally Republican liars we call DeceptiCons. They are a select group of around 16 “Republican” senators who scheme, lie and support the left-wing of the UniParty vulture. McConnell is their leader.
Yesterday, on the heels of the New Hampshire primary win by Donald Trump, Senator McConnell intentionally fed a media narrative that a border crisis deal could not be reached because candidate Trump didn’t want one. The media ran with the story based on comments by Republican senators who were in the meeting. McConnell made those comments intentionally, because he is trying to create as much friction for MAGA and Trump as possible.
Today, McConnell says he supports the Ukraine funding proposal connected to the “border security” proposal being negotiated by James Lankford (U-DC). The red-haired DeceptiCon from Oklahoma, shifted from his prior role on the Senate Intel Committee (SSCI) to his current role in supporting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce plan for amnesty and expanded illegal entry (cheap labor) at the border.
[NOTE: It’s not about USA “food pickers” and farm workers for domestic agriculture operations. The illegal aliens are needed to expand the export equation for Big AG multinational corporations who ship U.S. harvests and protein derivatives (pork, chicken, beef & bugs) overseas. Enhanced, bioengineered and genetically modified harvests, created by science for maximum yield per acre, is a food production industry for maximum profit. USA Big Ag creates processed food products mostly for controlled global markets, not for domestic consumption.]
Just like their friends on the “other side of the wing aisle,” the DeceptiCons do not want a secure border. The Republican politicians are paid well to ensure immigration issues follow the chosen pathway of corporate lobbyists. Meanwhile, Joe Biden’s administration is in court fighting against Texas enforcing border security, while simultaneously saying they are working with James Lankford to secure the border. The border security/immigration bill is so transparently fraudulent and manipulative, that even Marco Rubio has withdrawn support for it.
WASHINGTON DC – […] At the tail end of the Senate GOP’s last meeting of the week, however, McConnell removed any doubts: He is still forcefully pushing a deal that would pair new border and immigration restrictions with money for Ukraine. It’s a critical piece of McConnell’s legacy — and the GOP leader isn’t letting go at this late stage in the game.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a Ukraine aid skeptic, said McConnell’s comments on Wednesday had somehow gotten “flipped around” and a day later “he just tried to get it straight … some of the senators came out and got kind of misconstrued on what he was talking about.”
“For me it was certainly clarifying … He made clear that he has been supportive of Senator Lankford’s negotiating efforts and that we should be supportive of any work product that leads to greater border security,” Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) said.
Still, McConnell is clearly at an inflection point with his own party. He has no working relationship with Trump, who is racking up endorsements from GOP leaders and consulting with Speaker Mike Johnson on how to handle any border deal that may emerge from the Senate.
Many of McConnell’s own members are Ukraine funding critics, and Johnson counts many more skeptics in the House GOP. Yet McConnell is clearly determined to keep maneuvering toward a politically feasible compromise to boost Kyiv’s fight against Russia, which stands to serve as the capstone to his record-setting leadership of the Senate GOP.
“Sen. McConnell has not changed his point of view,” said Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). McConnell’s remarks on Wednesday amounted to dispassionate analysis, Wicker explained: “And I don’t think anybody disagreed with him. We are at a particular set of crossroads and intersections.” (read more)
Take Mitch McConnell out of politics, and half the Republican resistance to President Trump and MAGA goes with him.
Posted originally on the CTH on January 24, 2024 | Sundance
Governor Greg Abbott today issued a statement on Texas’ constitutional right to defend and protect itself as President Joe Biden continues to attack Texas and refuse to perform his duties to secure the border.
“The Executive Branch of the United States has a constitutional duty to enforce federal laws protecting States, including immigration laws on the books right now,” reads the statement. “President Biden has instructed his agencies to ignore federal statutes that mandate the detention of illegal immigrants. The failure of the Biden Administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this State the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas’s constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary.” [Full statement pdf HERE]
Posted originally on the CTH on January 18, 2024 | Sundance
Yup, another kick-the-can continuing resolution spending bill has passed the House. This extension lasts until March 1st and 8th.
The short-term CR negotiated in part by House Speaker Mike Johnson, passed the House on a 314-108 vote margin. 207 Democrats and 107 Republicans voted for it. Yes, that’s correct; more democrats supported the CR than republicans, and this is with a republican house majority.
It’s a Democrat CR bill being brought up by a Republican House Speaker and passed by the UniParty. Almost half of the Republicans voted against it (106), while just 2 Democrats voted no. The DC UniParty in its full glory.
“Our Speaker, Mr. Johnson, said he was the most conservative speaker we’ve ever had, and yet here we are, putting this bill on the floor,” said. Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona in a floor speech ahead of the vote, adding that the situation is what “led to us to vacate Speaker McCarthy in the first place.”
WASHINGTON DC – On a 314-108 House vote, Congress just bought six more weeks to continue the fiscal 2024 funding fight. But even the new March government shutdown deadlines are going to be a challenge to meet.
STEP 1: ANOTHER NUMBERS DEAL — Top Hill leaders might have agreed on overall spending levels nearly two weeks ago, but appropriators can’t get to work writing legislation until the two appropriations chairs — Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) — work out their own deal on how to divvy up the topline number among the 12 individual bills, setting what’s known among wonks as the 302(b)s.
It’s been slow going, and other top appropriators are growing impatient. “I have no insights as to why it’s taking so long,” said Senate Appropriations Vice Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine). “I’m very concerned.” As to whether there’s enough time for Congress to meet the split March 1/March 8 deadlines: “I think there is if we get the allocations promptly next week,” Collins said.
People familiar with the process have stressed that negotiating subcommittee allocations typically takes a while. Speaking before the Senate passed the latest stopgap earlier this afternoon, Murray said she’s “working nonstop” with her House counterparts to keep things “moving as quickly as we possibly can.”
STEP 2: ENTER THE SUBCOMMITTEES — Once the 302(b)s are set, the 12 appropriations subcommittee chairs and ranking members will start trading offers on how to distribute their allocations among each department, agency and program in their jurisdiction, while also haggling over potential policy stipulations.
For several of the bills, that’s going to be a challenge, considering the vast differences between the measures that the House and Senate each pumped out last year.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), chair of the State-Foreign Operations panel, told us that he and GOP counterpart Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) have a lot of daylight to close in negotiations with their peers across the Capitol. “Lindsey and I work well together,” he said. “But the gap between our bill in the Senate and the House is pretty significant. So once we have allocations, there’s still a lot of work to do.”
STEP 3: RIDER TIME — House conservatives, who’ve failed for months to secure steep spending cuts, say they’re hellbent on securing major policy wins, such as anti-abortion provisions and immigration restrictions that are dead on arrival for the Democratic-controlled Senate. They have backing from Johnson, who just last Sunday said the new funding patch will buy time to fight for “meaningful policy wins” while cajoling Republicans to support the latest stopgap.
As our Alice Miranda Ollstein and Meredith Lee Hill report today, House Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) said many in the House Republican conference will be “disappointed and upset” if the speaker doesn’t win on anti-abortion language, arguing that House Republicans “should get at least half of what we want.”
STEP 4: PASS IT OR BUST — If lawmakers fail to pass full-year appropriations bills over the next six weeks, senior appropriators are warning that will mean yet another continuing resolution — this time, through the rest of the fiscal year. They are counting on the threat of flat budgets and potentially devastating cuts to avert that outcome.
A continuing resolution through Sept. 30, for instance, would cut non-defense budgets by a total of $73 billion from current levels. Separately, lawmakers are facing another potential “sequester” scenario, thanks to a provision baked into the debt limit package passed last year. If the government is operating under any short-term CR come April 30, there will be a $10 billion cut to the military’s budget and a $41 billion cut to domestic programs. (MORE)
Posted originally on the CTH on January 14, 2024 | Sundance
NBC published an extensive article outlining how the DC administrative state is responding to the potential for another President Trump victory [SEE HERE].
Once again, a very specific name surfaces who is part of the organizational effort to stop Donald Trump. {EMPHASIS mine}
(NBC) – […] Now, bracing for Trump’s potential return, a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers is quietly devising plans to try to foil any efforts to expand presidential power, which could include pressuring the military to cater to his political needs.
Those taking part in the effort told NBC News they are studying Trump’s past actions and 2024 policy positions so that they will be ready if he wins in November. That involves preparing to take legal action and send letters to Trump appointees spelling out consequences they’d face if they undermine constitutional norms.
“We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to,” said Mary McCord, executive director of the Institution for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law.
Part of the aim is to identify like-minded organizations and create a coalition to challenge Trump from day one, those taking part in the discussions said. Some participants are combing through policy papers being craftedfor a future conservative administration. They’re also watching the interviews that Trump allies are giving to the press for clues to how a Trump sequel would look. (more)
There she is again, Mary McCord, the former head of the DOJ National Security Division, and the one specific functionary that is found at the epicenter of every single deep state Lawfare operation against President Trump. However, that citation is not the biggest reveal in the past several days….
Pay very close attention to these next two citations:
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)
Then consider:
January 10, 2024 – Georgia prosecutors probing Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election got an early boost in the spring of 2022. It came from another set of investigators who were way ahead of them: the House Jan. 6 select committee.
Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered. (read more)
The “J6 committee staff” that led the conversations with Fani Willis is a person, and that person’s name is Mary McCord. As the lead in the J6 staff effort, there is simply no way to believe the committee staff that met with Fani Willis did not include McCord.
You know what seems bizarre to me?
What seems bizarre is how I began writing about the detailed activity of Mary McCord FOUR YEARS AGO. Literally four years ago last Friday, and everything that has followed from her activity in October 2016 through to the present day is singularly focused on the removal of President Trump. Yet, almost no one seems to connect the obvious dots. Why?
What is it about Mary McCord and Washington DC circles that pundits and political researchers fear?
You read me writing about the key functionaries inside the system. To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key functionary, consider what we can document.
♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.
♦ McCord created 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.
♦ 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 is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.
In short, Mary McCord is the lawfare string that winds through every legal ‘stop Trump’ effort; yet no one ever calls her out?
Posted originally on the CTH on January 5, 2024 | Sundance
When you understand how the UniParty operates, and then you hear something like this from David Plouffe, immediately you begin to wonder if the DNC decision to forego a New Hampshire Dem primary might have been part of a larger strategy.
New Hampshire is not holding a Democrat primary this year, and Obama’s campaign strategist sees an opportunity with the open primary for Democrats to meddle in the Granite State election outcome by supporting Nikki Haley. Prompted, Listen Below:
“I think it’s probably too distasteful for a lot of people. But for those who would be up for it, to do something tactically—I don’t know if it would stop Trump, but, you know, it could help extend the primary.” … “I think, when you look out in the rest of the states, Trump’s clearly a dominant favorite, but in a two-person race, there’s a healthy number of Republicans who are open to an alternative if she’s the only one. So, I think for liberals, or Democrats, or independents who might not ever support Nikki Haley to be the president to cast a strategic or tactical vote, to me, makes a lot of sense.” ~ David Plouffe
Is this just opportunism, or was this the intent by design?
Keep in mind, this is what David Plouffe and the UniParty in DC are supporting:
Posted originally on the CTH on December 22, 2023 | Sundance
Using his Twitter/X platform to promote the 5-minute-long teaser, Tucker Carlson has finally released the interview with Julian Assange that took place on November 2, 2023. Why wait 51 days? Your guess is as good as mine. {Direct Rumble Link Here}
Within the prologue, and after interviewing Julian Assange, Tucker Carlson references the extremely important DNC email issue and states unequivocally, “democrats claim the emails had been hacked by the Russian government. But they hadn’t been, that was a lie. The emails had been leaked from within the DNC itself, almost certainly by a disgruntled employee.” WATCH:
It is an exceptionally good teaser, and the only way to see the full Julian Assange interview is through THIS LINK (TuckerCarlson.com).
The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This DNC hack claim is the fulcrum issue structurally underpinning the Russian election interference narrative pushed by the Weissmann and Muller Special Counsel. However, this essential claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, as outlined during a Dana Rohrabacher interview and by Julian Assange’s own on-the-record statements.
Assange was arrested at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London immediately after the Weissmann/Muller report was released to Bill Barr. Despite investigating the background of the Trump-Russia nonsense, John Durham never touched the DNC hacking claim – the core of the Mueller report. Why? Because Durham knew the U.S. Government threw a bag over Assange to protect the fraudulent Trump-Russia and Russian interference claims.
Again, this reality speaks to the corruption within the John Durham investigation. Durham was protecting Weissmann, Mueller and the core of their justification for a 2-year investigation. Durham knows why Assange was arrested. Durham stayed away from it, intentionally.
The Russians HAD TO have made efforts to interfere in the election, or else the factual basis for the surveillance operation against candidate Donald Trump is naked to the world.
That’s why so much DOJ, FBI and Mueller special counsel energy was exhausted framing the predicate.
“Seventeen intelligence agencies,” the December 29th Joint Analysis Report, the expulsion of the Russian diplomats which was an outcropping of the JAR, the rushed January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, shoving microphones in everyone’s faces and demanding they answer if they believed Russia interfered – all of it, and I do mean every bit of it, is predicated on an absolute DC need to establish that Russia Attempted to Interfere in the 2016 election.
The “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” (full pdf) is pure nonsense. It outlines nothing more than vague and disingenuous typical hacking activity that is no more substantive than any other hacking report on any other foreign actor. However, it was needed to help frame the Russian interference narrative.
There were no Russian diplomats involved; there was no Russian election interference; there was no Russian hacking of the DNC; it was all a fraud created by the intelligence community (IC), FBI and Main Justice to support Hillary Clinton’s lies and then cover their own targeting tracks.
On September 26, 2021, Yahoo News published an extensive article about the CIA targeting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in 2017 and the extreme conversations that were taking place at the highest levels of the U.S. government about how to control him.
There is a much bigger story transparently obvious when overlapped with CTH research files on the Mueller investigation and the U.S. intelligence community. Specifically, the motive intentionally not outlined by Yahoo News.
What I am going to share is a deep dive using the resources and timeline from within that Yahoo article and the specific details we have assembled that paints a clear picture about what interests existed for the Deep State, the Intelligence apparatus and the Mueller-Weissmann special counsel.
This fully cited review is not for the faint of heart. This is a journey that could shock many; it could alarm more and will likely force more than a few to reevaluate just what the purpose was for Mike Pompeo within the Donald Trump administration.
As the Yahoo News article begins, they outline how those within the Trump administration viewed Assange as a risk in 2017.
Here it is critical to accept that many people inside the Trump administration were there to control events, not to facilitate a policy agenda from a political outsider. In the example of Assange, the information he carried was a risk to those who attempted and failed to stop Trump from winning the 2016 election.
Julian Assange was not a threat to Donald Trump, but he was a threat to those who attempted to stop Donald Trump. In 2017, the DC system was reacting to a presidency they did not control. As an outcome, the Office of the President was being managed and influenced by some with ulterior motives.
Yahoo, via Michael Isikoff, puts it this way: “Some senior officials inside the CIA and the Trump administration even discussed killing Assange, going so far as to request “sketches” or “options” for how to assassinate him. Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred “at the highest levels” of the Trump administration, said a former senior counterintelligence official. “There seemed to be no boundaries.”
As we overlay the timeline, it is prudent to pause and remember some hindsight details. According to reports in November of 2019, U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr were spending time looking carefully at CIA activity in the 2016 presidential election. One quote from a media-voice increasingly sympathetic to a political deep-state noted:
“One British official with knowledge of Barr’s wish list presented to London commented that, “It is like nothing we have come across before, they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services”“. (Link)
It is interesting that quote came from a British intelligence official, as there was extensive pre-2016 election evidence of an FBI/CIA counterintelligence operation that also involved U.K. intelligence services. There was an aspect to the FBI/CIA operation that overlaps with both a U.S. and U.K. need to keep Wikileaks founder Julian Assange under tight control.
To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to FBI/CIA interests, and effectively the Mueller special counsel, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the FBI/CIA were in 2016. It is within this network of foreign and domestic operations where FBI Agent Peter Strzok was clearly working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI operations.
By now, people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor generally identified as a western intelligence operative who was tasked by the FBI/CIA to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep} John Durham ignored him.
In a similar fashion, the FBI tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor, Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent, under the false name Azra Turk, Halper also targeted Papadopoulos. Again, John Durham ignored it.
The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets legal and much easier. If Durham went into this intelligence rabbit hole, there would be a paper trail that leads back to Robert Mueller. Durham didn’t go there.
John Durham and IG Michael Horowitz both outlined how very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and Main Justice, yet that evidence was withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page and/or it was ignored. The FBI fabricated information in the FISA and removed evidence that Carter Page was previously working for the CIA. This is what FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was indicted and convicted for doing.
One week after the FBI and DOJ filed the second renewal for the Carter Page FISA [April 7, 2017], Yahoo News notes how Mike Pompeo delivered his first remarks as CIA Director:
[…] On April 13, 2017, wearing a U.S. flag pin on the left lapel of his dark gray suit, Pompeo strode to the podium at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington think tank, to deliver to a standing-room-only crowd his first public remarks as Trump’s CIA director.
Rather than use the platform to give an overview of global challenges or to lay out any bureaucratic changes he was planning to make at the agency, Pompeo devoted much of his speech to the threat posed by WikiLeaks. (link)
Why would CIA Director Mike Pompeo be so concerned about Julian Assange and Wikileaks in April 2017?
In April of 2017 Pompeo’s boss, President Donald Trump, was under assault from the intelligence community writ large, and every deep state actor was leaking to the media in a frenzied effort to continue the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy.
The Trump-Russia effort was so all consuming that FBI Director James Comey was even keeping a diary of engagement with President Trump in order to support an ongoing investigation built on fraud – yet, Mike Pompeo is worried about Julian Assange.
Again, here it is important to put yourself back into the time of reference. Remember, it’s clear in the text messages between FBI Agent Strzok and Lisa Page that Peter Strzok had a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA.
♦ Former CIA Director John Brennan admitted Peter Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and it was also Peter Strzok who authored the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” from the CIA to the FBI that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane.” Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief intelligence officials around Australian Ambassador to the U.K. Alexander Downer.
In short, Peter Strzok was a profoundly overzealous James Bond wannabe who acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for 2016’s CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.
Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open-Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015, at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons. One, if not the primary extractors, has now been identified as Rodney Joffe at Neustar. “The campaign plot was outlined by Durham in a 27-page indictment charging former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false report to the FBI. The plot was also outlined in the finished Durham report. Eight individuals who allegedly conspired with Sussmann but does not identify them by name. The sources familiar with the probe confirmed that the leader of the team of contractors was Rodney L. Joffe.” {Go Deep}
It was also Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskaya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working as a double agent for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S as part of his Trump-Russia creation.
Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting, back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash.
Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against Republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s handler, was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Byrne the instructions on where to send her. {Go Deep}
All of this context outlines the extent to which the FBI/CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. A large international operation directed by the FBI/CIA and domestic operations seemingly directed by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin] Durham eviscerated the predicate for all of this in his report, yet stayed away from the part that leads to Robert Mueller in 2017.
Recap: ♦Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA) and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr. (CIA, Fusion GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Trump and Donald Trump Jr (FBI).
Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer hired by Fusion GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. Deripaska refused to participate.
All of this engagement directly controlled by U.S. intelligence, and all of this intended to give a specific Russia impression. This predicate was what John Durham was reviewing in November of 2019, and then released in his final report – while whitewashing the parts that led to the Mueller silo.
The key point of all that contextual background is to see how committed the CIA and FBI were to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ and a multitude of political operatives, put a hell of a lot of work into it.
We know John Durham looked at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talking to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This context is important, because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks. This is where the motives of Mike Pompeo in mid/late 2017 come into play.
[…] By the summer of 2017, the CIA’s proposals were setting off alarm bells at the National Security Council. “WikiLeaks was a complete obsession of Pompeo’s,” said a former Trump administration national security official. (link)
On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA). From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:
On Tuesday April 15, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….
The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.
Why the delay?
What exactly was the DOJ waiting for from March 2018 to April 2019?
This timeframe is the peak of the Robert Mueller/Andrew Weissmann special counsel investigation.
Here’s where it gets interesting….
The Yahoo article outlines, “There was an inappropriate level of attention to Assange“, by the CIA according to a national security council official. However, if you consider the larger ramifications of what Julian Assange represented to all of those people inside and outside government interests who created the Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy, well, there was actually a serious risk.
Remember, in May 2017 Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann effectively took over the DOJ. The purpose of the Mueller investigation was to cover up the illegal operation that took place in the preceding year. The people exposed in the Trump-Russia targeting operation included all of those intelligence operatives previously outlined in the CIA, FBI and DOJ operations. These are the people John Durham did not indict.
The FBI submission to the Eastern District of Virginia Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”
(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.
Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.
“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”
Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)
Knowing how much effort the CIA and FBI put into the Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative; and knowing that Assange could essentially destroy the baseline predicate for the entire Trump-Russia investigation – which included the use of Robert Mueller; it would make sense for corrupt government officials to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange.
That contact between Rohrabacher and Assange explains why those same government officials would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.
Within three months of the grand jury seating (Nov/Dec 2017), the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018.
The EDVA then sat on the Julian Assange indictment while the Mueller/Weissman probe was ongoing.
As soon as the Mueller probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).
As a person who researched this fiasco, including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16, and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17, this timing against Assange is not coincidental.
It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange, because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes, and that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes. Again, John Durham stayed away from it!
♦ This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election.
This claim is the fulcrum underpinning the Russia election interference narrative. However, this core and essential claim is directly disputed by Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange’s on-the-record statements.
The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment (Peter Strzok); and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from another Michael Sussmann partner, Shawn Henry at Crowdstrike, yes another DNC contractor and collaborator with the Clinton campaign.
The CIA held a massive conflict of self-interest problem surrounding the Russian hacking claim as it pertained to their own activity in 2016. The FBI and DOJ always held a massive interest in maintaining the Russian hacking claim. Robert Mueller and Andrew Weismann did everything they could to support that predicate; and all of those foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also carried a self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.
Julian Assange was/is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange claimed he has evidence it was from an inside DNC leak, not from a DNC hack.
The Russian “hacking” claim was ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K Intelligence apparatus. Well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be public. And that is exactly what Main Justice and the U.S. intelligence community did.
This is why John Durham never touched it.
All of them know what happened.
All of them know why Julian Assange was taken from the Embassy in London. A bag had to be thrown over Assange in order to retain the justification for the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel and the larger Russian election interference claims. None of them do not know this. They all know.
Start asking the right questions about the timeline of Assange being arrested. Ask about the DNC hack and Russian provenance according to Crowdstrike. Ask key and specific questions about the FBI working with Crowdstrike and about the DOJ and EDVA case against Assange.
The people around the Deep State all know what happened. SO DO WE!
Posted originally on the CTH on December 11, 2023 | Sundance
After years of assembling datapoints around the potential for the Supreme Court to be compromised, it was the discovery of Mary McCord’s husband Sheldon Snook deep in the office of Chief Justice John Roberts that finally sealed the deal for me personally. Yes, the Supreme Court is compromised.
Quick Context. Mary McCord was the architect of all Trump targeting efforts. The FISA on Carter Page, the weaponization of the DOJ-NSD, the installation of Michael Atkinson as Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), the companion to Sally Yates in the Flynn targeting, lead staff for the Schiff/Nadler impeachment effort, later appointment by FISA Presiding Judge Boasberg to be amicus to the FISC, in combination with Chief Justice John Roberts holding authority over the FISC, and the discovery that Sheldon Snook, McCord’s husband works in Robert’s office as “special assistant to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s counselor. The counselor’s office advises the chief justice not only on the management and budget of the Supreme Court but also on his interactions with the executive and legislative branches, along with numerous other public roles in which Roberts serves.” (link)
Mary McCord is the fulcrum point for all of the above issues. She connects all of the targeting operations. Mary McCord is the center of it, and John Robert’s office is compromised by the appointment of her husband Sheldon Snook. So, this story below does not surprise me.
Special Prosecutor Jack Smith jumped over the appeals court and asked the Supreme Court to decide on President Trump’s position of presidential immunity for his requests to secure the integrity of the 2020 election while in office. In the fastest turn around time in history, the Supreme Court [Robert’s office] said yes, they will hear the arguments.
WASHINGTON DC – Special counsel Jack Smith is urging the Supreme Court to urgently resolve Donald Trump’s claim that he’s immune from prosecution for charges related to his bid to subvert the 2020 election.
Without the Supreme Court’s swift intervention, Trump’s trial could be indefinitely delayed, the special counsel warned in a petition to the high court on Monday.
That’s because the trial, scheduled to begin March 4, is effectively suspended while Trump pursues his appeal of the trial judge’s ruling rejecting his immunity arguments, Smith wrote. Resolution of the novel legal question is necessary to ensure the case proceeds “promptly,” he argued.
By coming directly to the Supreme Court, Smith is hoping to bypass a federal appeals court and is mounting an aggressive bid to keep the timing of the election-focused trial on track. If the March 4 trial date sticks, it would be the first trial for Trump in the four criminal cases he is facing as he mounts a bid for re-election to the White House.
[…] The justices acted quickly on Smith’s motion. In a brief order Monday afternoon, they directed Trump’s lawyers to respond by Dec. 20 to the prosecutor’s request for the Supreme Court to add the case to its docket for this term. (read more)
There’s your inflection point timeframe.
The executive branch wants Trump on trial by Super Tuesday, March 5th the main primary election date. The legislative branch wants to extend warrantless surveillance, the mechanism to exploit the Trump supporter targeting operation, through April 19th. [Patriots Day ]
There’s the 2024 detonation timeframe, between March and mid-April.
Elon Musk herds all the MAGA groups and “domestic violent extremists” into the Twitter stadium. All seats are filled by March. Boom, everyone scrambles. Thousands of subpoenas released as part of the metadata hit list.
Posted originally on the CTH on December 11, 2023 | Sundance
In this short clip {direct Rumble link here} former AG Eric Holder is asked about the potential for a President (Trump) to target his political opposition using the DOJ.
Not coincidentally, nor ironically, Holder goes on to outline the exact process that Joe Biden is using to target Donald Trump. Which is the exact same process Barack Obama used through Eric Holder to target his political opposition in the aftermath of the 2010 shellacking. First the video, then the reminder. Eric Holder knows a great deal about how this process works, because he did exactly what he is outlining. WATCH:
What too few people remember is that back in 2011, in the aftermath of the November 2010 shellacking of the Democrats by activist Tea Party groups around the country, AG Holder asked the Treasury Department to participate in a “special research project.”
The IRS was asked for the Schedule-B’s of groups who were registered as “patriot” groups (Tea Party Patriots) and other names associated with the political uprising against Barack Obama and the takeover of federal healthcare, ie Obamacare. The Cincinnati field office of the IRS then sent the DOJ a batch of CD-ROM’s containing the names of the individual donors listed on the IRS 501-c (3)(4) forms. That list was then compiled and used by the federal government to target the donors and supporters.
A Cincinnati IRS office worker blew the whistle.
An investigation was launched by congress.
IRS head Lois Lerner then pleaded the 5th amendment, and later the IRS/DOJ settled a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of the targets.
During the investigation, former Obama Chief of Staff Jack Lew was moved into position as Treasury Secretary, with the priority to cover-up and hide the DOJ initiating request.
Specifically, because the Tea Party groups were primary targeting the Republican members of the UniParty, the DOJ effort to destroy the participants was fully supported in 2012, 2013, 2014, by Republican leadership as well as complicit Democrats. This was the most transparent UniParty cover-up operation through that date. Only later exceeded by their unity in common cause against the Donald Trump presidency.
The Obama/Holder group learned a lesson in 2012 when the IRS whistleblower came forward. The use of the IRS was dropped, and instead the administration switched to using the NSA database for their targeting data. Federal officers, FBI offices and contractors working on behalf of the government, then began exploiting the NSA database for information on opposition to the Obama administration.
Approximately 80% of all NSA database searches were non-compliant.
Meanwhile, back in the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), the Holder operation continued with the use of weaponized FISA-702 exploits as surveillance and FARA violations as the process tool. The DOJ-NSD was created by Eric Holder and refused any DOJ inspector oversight until 2017 under the Trump administration. The process of having no oversight made it easier for the targeting operations to continue.
This is the truth of the thing, and CTH covered it in detail as it was happening.
President Obama and AG Eric Holder did exactly what Mr. Holder is now outlining in that CNN interview. Essentially, Holder is saying the quiet part out loud, while recognizing that too few people will ever understand that he is guilty of the exact process he is explaining.
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 