Posted originally on CTH on February 15, 2026 | Sundance
Border Czar Tom Homan appears on CNN for a friendly discussion about Minnesota ICE operations, deporting illegals with the help of Democrat governors, the looming DHS shutdown and other matters.
CNN’s Jake Tapper dropped his customary combative technique during the interview and heaped praise upon Mr Homan for being a great DHS official and working collaboratively with Democrats. The polite nature of the questions and conversation seems odd coming from Tapper who heaped effusive praise on Mr Homan.
Posted originally on CTH on February 15, 2026 | Sundance
Kentucky congressman Thomas Massie appears on ABC This Week with Martha Raddatz to assert his position as our nation’s ultimate judge of morality and righteousness and pass judgement upon any individual that does not meet his expectation or standard.
Against the backdrop of billionaire leftist Reid Hoffman who has financed most of the claims promoted by Epstein victims for use by Representative Massie, the congressman pledges to remain on task. Hoffman never called as a witness. Video and Transcript below.
[TRANSCRIPT] – RADDATZ: I’m joined now by Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who helped lead the efforts to release the Epstein files.
Good morning to you, Congressman.
I would like your overall reaction to the hearing this week and Pam Bondi’s performance, combativeness.
REP. THOMAS MASSIE, (R) KENTUCKY & JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MEMBER: I don’t think she did very well. She came with a book full of insults, one for each congressperson. She obviously had one for me.
And, you know, I’ve been there when Merrick Garland was there. Obviously, politically, I don’t agree with him, but he performed much better in terms of at least not looking bad. And, unfortunately, we didn’t get the answers we wanted about the Epstein Files Transparency Act from her.
RADDATZ: You — did you get any of the answers you wanted?
MASSIE: No, but she did come off her script and engage with me about this production of documents where she admitted that 40 minutes after I pointed out to the DOJ that they had over-redacted some of the documents, they did unredacted documents. So, it’s clear they’ve made mistakes in the document production. At least she acknowledges that tacitly. And it’s clear that their work is not done here yet.
RADDATZ: And I want to go to those — some of those unredacted files. Congressman Ro Khanna said names of some of the men who were redacted shouldn’t have been redacted. They then sent that back to you, and two of them were not redacted. But on Friday, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche accused you and Congressman Khanna of unmasking those people, saying they had nothing to do with Epstein or Maxwell. They were from an FBI line-up years ago.
What’s your response to that?
MASSIE: Well, three hours before Todd Blanche himself unredacted those names, I told him in an X post, which I know he read because he reposted it, that those may be men in a line-up. And then I went on TV and said, those may be men in a line-up. And it was actually the DOJ who released those names, which is fine, but they omitted the context that I provided, which is these may be in a line-up.
Now, there were two men who needed to be named, one of whom has already resigned, the Emirate, a sultan, resigned for — as a CEO of a very large company because we released his name.
And there’s another man, Leslie Wexner, I’ll add him to the list with Jes Staley and Leon Black, who need to be investigated right now. They’ve appeared in these files.
Leslie Wexner is the one who — you know, Pam Bondi said, oh, he’s appeared thousands of times in these documents. We’re not covering up anything. But I pointed out to her, they redacted his name from the one document that says “child sex trafficking co-conspirator.”
And my question is, who is the person at DOJ who redacted Leslie Wexner’s name from a document titled “child sex trafficking” with “co-conspirator” next to this name?
(CROSSTALK)
RADDATZ: And I want to say right now that Wexner denies and they say he was not a co-conspirator. Wexner has a statement: The assistant U.S. attorney told Mr. Wexner’s legal counsel in 2019 that Mr. Wexner was neither co-conspirator nor target in any respect. Mr. Wexner cooperated full by providing background information on Epstein and was never contacted again.
But I’d like to move on, if we can.
MASSIE: Yeah.
RADDATZ: Yesterday, the DOJ sent Congress a letter explaining the reason for all these reactions. So, you are not satisfied with that?
MASSIE: No, they’re citing deliberative process privilege in order not to release some of the documents. The problem with that is the bill that Ro Khanna and I wrote says that they must release internal memos and notes and emails about their decisions on whether to prosecute or not prosecute, whether to investigate or not investigate.
It’s important they follow that because then we could find why they didn’t prosecute Leslie Wexner. What was the decision tree there? And also, why, in 2008 they gave Jeffrey Epstein such a light sentence?
And finally, I know the DOJ wants to say they’re done with this document production. The problem is they’ve taken down documents before we were able to go over to the DOJ and look at the unredacted versions. They took down some of the most significant documents. Two of them involving Virginia Giuffre’s case and other things, the picture of Epstein at — in a room where it’s — got CIA written on the boxes. That’s been taken down.
We want to be able to look at all these files. They can’t keep those documents down after they’ve already produced them.
RADDATZ: I want to talk to you about one of the moments in this hearing, and that is the attorney general would not look at the Epstein survivors behind her. Did that surprise you?
MASSIE: I think that was kind of cold on her part. I think she was afraid to.
And look, these survivors would love to have a meeting. It’s not about Bill Clinton, and it’s not about Donald Trump. This Epstein Files Transparency Act was about getting these survivors justice.
We’ve got some degree of transparency, but it’s called the Department of Justice, not the department of transparency.
And so, what these survivors need, they need to see some of their own 302 forms, which haven’t been released, and they also need to see some of the men that they’ve implicated prosecuted.
RADDATZ: Do you still have confidence in Pam Bondi as Attorney General?
MASSIE: I don’t think Pam Bondi has confidence in Pam Bondi. She wasn’t confident enough to engage in anything, but name calling in a hearing. And so, no, I don’t have confidence in her. She hasn’t got any sort of accountability there at the DOJ.
When I asked her specifically, who redacted Leslie Wexner’s name from the one document that mattered, she couldn’t give me an answer, she wouldn’t give me an answer. But ultimately, it’s her who is responsible for the document production according to our law, the attorney general.
It’s not Todd Blanche. It’s not the people below them. You can assign tasks to people but you can’t assign your responsibility.
RADDATZ: And just very quickly, if you will. You’ve supported most of what Donald Trump has done during his presidency. Because of your actions with these files, he is supporting your primary opponent and has waged very personal attacks on you.
I know we just have a few seconds here. But just your reaction to that.
MASSIE: Look, this is about the Epstein class, the people who are funding the attacks against me. They may or may not be implicated in these files, but they were certainly rubbing shoulders with the people who are in these files. They’re billionaires who are friends with these people. And that’s what I’m up against in Washington, D.C.
Donald Trump told us that even though, you know, he had dinner with these kinds of people in New York City and West Palm Beach, that he would be transparent. But he’s not. He’s still in with the Epstein class. This is the Epstein administration, and they’re attacking me for trying to get these files released.
RADDATZ: And again, I’m going to say, President Trump has not been accused of anything criminal here.
Thank you very much for joining us this morning, Congressman. We appreciate it.
MASSIE: Thank you. Thank you, Martha.
[End Transcript]
It is rather curious that congress has no interest in calling any of the state or federal officials, including the FBI, to give testimony as to the outcomes of their prior investigations. Show us what was actually done instead of theater. But no, theater seemingly has a greater value.
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.
Posted originally on CTH on February 13, 2026 | Sundance
Former White House legal counsel/fixer to Barack Obama, and former personal lawyer/fixer of Susan Rice, Kathryn Ruemmler was Chief Legal Counsel for Goldman Sachs for the past six years.
Throughout those jobs and networked professional relationships, Kathryn Ruemmler was also a personal friend and advisor to Jeffrey Epstein.
Yesterday it was reported that Kathryn Ruemmler has resigned from Goldman Sachs.
NEW YORK – Goldman Sachs’s top lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, resigned on Thursday in the wake of the Justice Department’s release of emails and other material that revealed her extensive relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier.
Ms. Ruemmler and representatives for Goldman said for years that she had a strictly professional relationship with Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender. But emails, text messages and photographs released late last month upended that narrative, leading to Ms. Ruemmler’s sudden resignation, which surprised many inside the firm.
Before joining Goldman in 2020, Ms. Ruemmler was a counselor, confidante and friend to Mr. Epstein, the documents showed. She advised him on how to respond to tough questions about his sex crimes, discussed her dating life, advised him on how to avoid unflattering media scrutiny and addressed him as “sweetie” and “Uncle Jeffrey.”
Mr. Epstein, in turn, provided career advice on her move to Goldman, introduced her to well-known businesspeople and showered her with gifts of spa treatments, high-end travel and Hermes luxury items. In total, Ms. Ruemmler was mentioned in more than 10,000 of the documents released by the Justice Department.
Ms. Ruemmler, in addition to being Goldman’s general counsel since 2021, was a partner and vice chair of its reputational risk committee. She earlier served as White House counsel under President Obama and was a white-collar defense lawyer at Latham & Watkins. (read more)
Newly released email exchanges add fresh details to the relationship between Kathy Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein. Ruemmler is a former Obama White House counsel and now one of the highest-paid lawyers in the country as the chief legal officer at Goldman Sachs. CNN's Andrew… pic.twitter.com/niXjxlDWvd
Posted originally on CTH on February 12, 2026 | Sundance
Asst Attorney General Gail Slater was the head of the Antitrust Division of the Dept of Justice. Today she announces she has “left her role.” CNN is reporting that AAG Slater was fired.
Gail Slater was in charge of the antitrust division and a hawk on the mergers and acquisitions of Big Tech and Big Corporate media. As head of the DOJ Antitrust Division, Slater’s view on competition was against the interests of the major Big Tech billionaires and corporate media conglomerates who intersect with them.
Slater was in a position to influence the Warner Brothers-Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount (David Ellison) is trying to stop.
If you have followed the influence of Larry Ellison (Oracle, TikTok) and his son David Ellison (Paramount, CBS) in/around the Trump administration as it relates to Elon Musk (a beneficiary of Ellison), then the timing of Gail Slater’s removal doesn’t look good at all.
Gail Slater came into the administration as a part of the JD Vance network (Peter Thiel, Palantir, etc.), and it looks like that same Vance network stood aside and watched Larry Ellison leverage his position to see her removed.
Slater was a solid MAGA voice in a critical Antitrust position against the interests of Big Tech and Big Corp. However, I said on Christmas Day 2024 – we were likely to be very disappointed by the influence of Big Tech/Big Corp in the White House {SEE HERE}.
Via CNN[…] Slater said in her Thursday post on X: “It is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as AAG for Antitrust today. It was indeed the honor of a lifetime to serve in this role.”
The anti-trust division is expected to play a critical role in assessing Netflix’s Warner Brothers Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount is trying to stop by appealing straight to shareholders with its own bid. (CNN is owned by Warner Brothers Discovery.)
In an NBC interview last week, Trump said, “I’ve decided I shouldn’t be involved. The Justice Department will handle it.” But Paramount CEO David Ellison returned to the White House last week to meet privately with Trump, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN. (read more)
There may be something else in the background that we do not understand. However, when former lobbyists and political consultants become key administration officials (Wiles, Bondi) these types of outcomes are possible.
Posted originally on CTH on February 11, 2026 | Sundance
This is one step further than simple Lawfare, this story is about lower court judges openly strategizing ways to stop the enforcement of laws they are supposed to uphold.
Last week the Fifth Circuit Cout of Appeals ruled that detaining illegal aliens during the deportation proceedings is entirely following current immigration law [SEE HERE]. Now, according to Politico, federal judges in Texas are openly strategizing ways to work around that higher court ruling and keep giving bond releases to illegal aliens under the guise of “liberty interest.”
POLITICO – […] two federal district court judges in Texas, who are bound by the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit’s ruling, said the 2-1 decision left an opening for them to continue granting immigrants’ release on other grounds, primarily constitutional arguments against detaining people who have established roots in the U.S. without due process. Those roots amount, in legal parlance, to a “liberty interest” that the Constitution says cannot be taken away without at least a hearing before a neutral judge.
“This conclusion is not changed by the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision,” Judge Kathleen Cardone, an El Paso based appointee of George W. Bush, ruled late Monday in at least five cases, concluding that the circuit’s decision “has no bearing on this Court’s determination of whether [the petitioner] is being detained in violation of his constitutional right to procedural due process.”
Judge David Briones, an El Paso-based Clinton appointee, reached a similar conclusion.
“The Court reiterates its original holding that noncitizens who have ‘established connections’ in the United States by virtue of living in the country for a substantial period acquire a liberty interest in being free from government detention without due process of law,” Briones wrote.
The decisions from the Texas-based judges are notable in part because the administration has often rushed detainees there after their arrests in other states such as Minnesota.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A Justice Department official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said the rulings were in keeping with the view that there are rogue judges who continue to make results-oriented decisions to suit their personal policy preferences.
The 5th Circuit’s ruling has yet to percolate through federal courts across Texas and Louisiana, where detained immigrants have been filing so-called “habeas” petitions in extraordinary numbers to seek freedom from what they say is illegal detention without the opportunity for bond. The losing parties in Friday’s ruling may still appeal the decision to the full bench of the 5th Circuit or the Supreme Court. (more)
Lower courts trying to circumvent higher court rulings, even before any plaintiff brings them a case or argument.
Posted originally on CTH on February 10, 2026 | Sundance
The Dept of Justice has unsealed the FBI affidavit that outlines the probable cause for the search and seizure of Fulton County, GA, 2020 election records [pfd Affidavit Here].
The affidavit, filed by FBI Special Agent Hugh Evans, outlines witness abnormalities in the records of the 2020 presidential election conducted in Fulton County, Georgia. Including a Georgia State Election Board member observed ballot images from 2020 that were modified in January 2024.
The FBI raid targeted the county’s election warehouse, resulting in the seizure of paper ballots, voter data, election records, and other materials from the 2020 general election.
“If these deficiencies were the result of intentional action, it would be a violation of federal law regardless of whether the failure to retain records or the deprivation of a fair tabulation of a vote was outcome determinative for any particular election or race,” Evans wrote.
Agent Evans did not outline precisely when the FBI’s investigation began, nor did he describe any steps agents took in the probe before seeking to seize the Fulton ballots and other materials. He pointed to two federal statutes that were likely violated: one making it a felony to engage in voting fraud in connection with a federal election and another making it a misdemeanor to fail to preserve records related to a federal election for at least 22 months after Election Day.
Posted originally on CTH on February 10, 2026 | Sundance
Representative Ilhan Omar is one of the most sanctimonious corrupt Democrats in congress, and she’s loud and proud about it because she understands how to engage in financial fraud safely. Just do what everyone else is doing but do it bigger, that way there’s no way her peers can approach it.
Someone in DC gave House Oversight Chairman James Comer the familiar tap on the shoulder and told him they don’t investigate their own Uniparty tribe. So, Comer drops his planned review of Omar’s corruption and shifts it to the ethics team.
BREAKING: James Comer says the House Ethics Committee will take over the investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar after a massive spike in her net worth was flagged in financial disclosures:
“We’ve been informed in the last few hours that the Ethics Committee is probably going to have… pic.twitter.com/YIO1DkOr91
A game of pretending is needed in order to retain the illusion of the Potemkin Village of DC. A construct manufactured by the power structure that exists behind the puppet show, with the full intention to distract us. Pretending is what gives rise to a Florida governor on a 2022 ‘book tour’ run for a 2024 campaign that everyone denied was going to happen. Pretending is also what kicks the can of accountability away until it can be buried.
Pretending is needed in order to convince the audience Republicans will make a difference, or the black eye doesn’t hurt and look he bought me flowers. Perhaps some reminders and clarifications of the real game inside DC politics are needed. After all, while all these chaff and countermeasures are replaying their familiar tunes, CTH is actually trying to accomplish something by destroying some IC silos.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, hereafter called the House Oversight Committee or HOC, has a very specific function in DC circles that too few understand. Once again, let us be clear while trying to explain decades of false information founded upon arcane legislative outlooks.
Understanding the DC game of Chaff and Countermeasures…. A “Countermeasure” is a measure or action taken to counter or offset a preceding one.
Politically speaking, the deployment of countermeasures is a well-used tactic by professional politicians in Washington DC to counter incoming public inquiry and protect themselves from anger expressed by the electorate. The Republican leadership are very skilled in the management of “chaff” (outrage), and “countermeasures” (the distraction).
Within Washington DC, the HOC has a very specific and unique function. What Fox News is to corporate conservative punditry, so too is the HOC to the same DC system of pretending. The House Oversight Committee is the “Chaff and Countermeasures” committee.
The HOC operates for both parties with the same mission.
The House Oversight Committee was/is created by the House legislative leadership to make money for the party in control of the Chair. When the House Speaker is notified of a DC corruption issue, inside his/her office they will often be heard saying, “give it to oversight.” The intent of that instruction is to give the issue to the HOC, so they can hold hearings, create soundbites and fundraise from the issue.
Making money for the party in control of the Chair is the primary function of the House Oversight Committee. The HOC does not exist to create accountability or oversight; the HOC exists to exploit the issue for fundraising and satiate the base voters of the party in control of the Chair.
The HOC presents the illusion of accountability by constructing soundbites and member performances which are then broadcast on television for appearances to the voting audience. It is essentially theater.
The HOC is a “general oversight’ committee, not a committee of “specific jurisdiction.” Thus, the HOC is the vehicle where Democrats and Republicans publicly display their political initiatives, frame their narratives and then broadcast them on MSNBC, CNN (Democrats) or FOX NEWS (Republicans).
Depending on the issues at hand, the HOC committee members are generally those performance actors best known to the audience of both parties. This is not accidental; this is by design. Again, for emphasis, I am only talking about the HOC, a “generalized oversight” committee. Only this specific committee has this specific mission.
A hot button topic enters the committee ecosphere. Specifically trained staffers and performance artists, uniquely qualified to put on theatrical productions (both parties), are then deployed to assist the representatives in creating the soundbites that hopefully will go viral and assist them with fundraising and opportunities to say, “here’s what we are doing.” Outlining this construct is not an exhibition in cynicism; this is the reality of what the HOC is designed and created to do.
When you see the HOC performing at their best, you will see lots of soundbites created.
The Chair of the HOC is always part of the House Speaker’s close inner circle. From that association you will discover by training, by habit, and by consequence, the HOC framework is developed to sustain the process itself as an end result. The questioning is the sum total of all accountabilities. The performance is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire.
Oversight, in the HOC framework of narrative creation, has evolved into reveling in the endless process (a fundraising proposition) and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter, and never actually applies accountability toward what might be discovered. This is why you end up with high blood pressure, frustrated with the questions not asked, and throwing bricks at the screen or monitors when viewing.
The point of HOC hearings is to create what are now described as “viral moments” that can be used to generate money.
The second, and lesser objective, is to give the illusion of accountability while not actually ever holding anyone or anything accountable. See prior HOC reference points like Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, the Twitter File review or the Joe/Hunter Biden crime syndicate investigation.
If you watch the HOC through the prism of expecting some form of accountability for the violations of law, you will be frustrated and disappointed. However, if you watch the HOC through the prism of how well the members will do at raising money from their performances, then you can evaluate the effectiveness – the proverbial winning and losing.
The HOC is designed by House leadership to perform the same basic function for both Democrats and Republicans. The HOC committee assignments are selected based on the theatrical skills of each representative. This is not to say the motives of the members are sullied or impure, it is simply to point out the motive of the committee itself is to generate fundraising from the skillsets of the members on the committee.
Once you fully grasp what the intent of the House Oversight Committee is about, and once you drop the expectation that any accountability in oversight is the intent, then you can watch the performances through the entertainment prism of partisan politics and genuinely enjoy them – or hate them.
The HOC is called the “Chaff and Countermeasures” Committee, because that’s essentially what the committee does. It gives the appearance of targeting, steering the target to a controlled destination, and then distracting the audience from the outcome of accountability.
If sunlight is achieved, meaning the Mainstream Media cannot ignore the issue as presented and questioned, and if the general public become more familiar with the controversial subject matter or topic at hand, and if the party of the Chair can fundraise from the issue, then the committee has succeeded. However, if you are looking for something to change as an outcome of any HOC investigation or hearing, you will be perpetually disappointed.
There seems to be a willful blindness on the part of the American people, a chosen refusal to acknowledge the implications of the unAmerican and unConstititional behaviors, actions and outcomes we are being served on a daily basis. It can no longer be presumed to be a matter of “I can’t see what’s happening”, because a whole lot of normal Americans really are clean and articulate.
“I can’t see it” just doesn’t cut it.
NONSENSE! Most people can see it. Most are just choosing to reconcile the irreconcilable because it is more comforting to ignore the truth of it. Just be honest, for many people avoidance has become a survival mechanism.
It’s more along the lines of “I see what’s happening, but it’s scary and complicated and confusing, and if I admit that I see it, I will become responsible in a way that I am not if I keep pretending I can’t see it or hear it or maybe I don’t understand it.”
Cue the audio visual. Do you remember the Awan Brothers scandal?
The political system in Washington DC has become so massive it is now capable of protecting itself. Any attempt to reduce the influence, scope or size of the system is considered a risk. The system is, in essence, protecting itself. Deep State is self-aware. NOTE 07:43 (just hit play)
Whether it’s John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Kevin McCarthy or Mike Johnson, leadership’s Lucy has unlimited footballs.
Whether it’s the Awan Brothers, the Huma Abedin laptop, the Clinton’s private servers, the Hunter Biden laptop, the Mark Warner/James Wolfe leak of classified information, the activity of CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella in the impeachment, the many aspects to Mary McCord, or the leaking of the Dobbs decision by Sheldon Snook, all of these things are very public, very visible and very well known. Yet did you see a single satellite truck in front of their house or a microphone in their face asking questions?
Nope. DC runs this game of pretending and all the media play the game.
The fourth estate (media) has long ago collapsed.
Now, the choices are ours.
Personally, I will not pretend, and I know most of you also refuse.
If we keep assembling enough people to stop pretending, then what happens?
Posted originally on CTH on February 6, 2026 | Sundance
A lesser-known member of Ansar al Sharia, the Islamic group who conducted the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi Libya, Zubayar Al-Bakoush, was captured and indicted by federal law enforcement. Attorney General Pam Bondi made the announcement earlier today.
Bakoush is labeled as a leading ‘facilitator’, essentially a ground planner of Ansar al Sharia during the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glenn Doherty. He was charged in an eight-count indictment unsealed today in U.S. District Court on multiple terrorism and murder counts. AG Pam Bondi made the announcement.
CTH followed the events closely, conducted a two-year research effort and then subsequently published the full story Benghazi Brief [SEE HERE]. Domestically, Barack Obama, Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Mike Morrell and James Comey participated in the coverup.
•Conspiracy to Provide Material Support and Resources to Terrorists Resulting in Death •Providing Material Support and Resources to Terrorists Resulting in Death •Murder of an Internationally Protected Person •Murder of a United States National Outside of the United States (Two Counts) •Attempted Murder of a United States National Outside of the United States •Arson and Placing Lives in Jeopardy Within the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States and Attempting to Do the Same •Maliciously Destroying and Injuring Property and Placing Lives in Jeopardy within the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States and Attempting to Do the Same
The charges stem from the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission and nearby CIA Annex that killed Ambassador Stevens and U.S. government personnel Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty.
According to the indictment, Bakoush was a member of Ansar Al Sharia (AAS), an Islamist extremist militia in Benghazi, which had the goal of establishing Sharia law in Libya.
On the evening of Sept. 11, 2012, a group of more than 20 heavily armed men – including Bakoush assembled outside the main gate of the U.S Special Mission in Benghazi. They were armed with assault rifles, other firearms, and explosive devices. At about 9:45 p.m., the group of armed men violently breached the main gate of the Mission. Upon entry, the men fanned out across the Mission complex, setting fires to building within the Mission compound.
When the attackers could not gain entry to the secure area of Villa C, the Ambassador’s residence, they set fire to it. Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith suffocated from the thick, black smoke that enveloped the residence. Diplomatic Security Services (DSS) Special Agent Scott Wickland, who had tried to guide Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith to safety, was injured and repeatedly took small arms fire while trying to rescue the two Americans.
The extremist group also attacked the Quick Reaction Force building, which was occupied by local Libyans serving as guards for the Mission.
About 10 p.m., Bakoush entered the Mission compound with other conspirators, and conducted surveillance of the Tactical Operation Center and the Villa. After Bakoush attempted to gain entry to vehicles belonging to Mission staff, he and his co-conspirators temporarily retreated to an area just outside the Mission.
About 11:15 p.m., conspirators assembled outside the southern gate and launched a second violent attack on the Mission using AK-type assault rifles, grenades, and rocket-propelled grenades. After 30 minutes, the group entered the compound and plundered the Mission’s office of documents, maps, and computers containing sensitive information about the location of the CIA Annex.
At 12:30 a.m., conspirators attacked the Annex with small arms, assault rifles, and rocket-propelled grenades.
Following the attack at the Mission, in the early hours of September 12, 2012, the violence continued at the CIA Annex, first with gunfire and then with a precision mortar attack. While defending the Annex, Mr. Woods, Mr. Doherty, DSS Special Agent David Ubben, and CIA security specialist Mark Tiegen were hit by a precision mortar attack, leading to the deaths of Mr. Woods and Mr. Doherty. Special Agent Ubben and Mr. Tiegen were seriously wounded but survived.
The Department of Justice previously charged and convicted two leaders in the Benghazi attack on federal terrorism charges and other offenses. Ahmed Abu Khatallah, aka Ahmed Mukatallah was sentenced in June 2018 to 22 years in prison and resentenced in September 2024 to 28 years in prison. Mustafa al-Imam was sentenced in January 2020 to nearly 20 years. (SOURCE)
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 