House Judiciary Committee Debates Articles of Impeachment – 7:00pm ET Livestream…


Tonight the House Judiciary Committee is urgently rushing to debate articles of impeachment against President Trump.  The hearing begins at 7:00pm ET.

♦Article One is “Abuse of power” – and structured on a false premise that President Trump “exercised the powers of his public office to obtain an improper personal benefit, while ignoring or injuring the national interest.”

♦Article Two is “Obstruction of Congress” – and structured on a ridiculous premise that President Trump “engaged in unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of the impeachment inquiry”, by challenging congressional subpoenas and seeking relief from the judicial branch.

Fox Business Livestream – CBSN Livestream Link – CSPAN Livestream

.

.

IG Modifies FISA Report, Adds Declassification Aspect Per DOJ (Barr?)…


Well, it looks like some efforts have paid off.  In an unusual update two days after the IG report was published, the IG modifies the report content. See Update Notification Below:

Apparently the DOJ and FBI had a change of heart about the FISA dates.

Actually they’ve re-written a portion of the report, and moved some material completely.  As an example this section formerly present on page ii of the executive summary is now moved to page vi:

Prior Paragraph:

Revised Paragraph per November 11, 2019:

This matches the FISA dates we already identified: Original application Oct 21, 2016. The first FISA renewal was January 12, 2017 (84 days from origination). The second renewal was April 7, 2017 (85 days from prior renewal). The third renewal was on June 29th, 2017 (83 days from prior renewal).

Now, if the DOJ or any enterprising congressperson wants to really dig into the issue, they can request a declassified copy of the exact version the FISC generated on March 17th, 2017, to be delivered to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Custodian James Wolfe.

The March 17th copy delivered to SSCI Director Wolfe and Vice-Chair Mark Warner would only have the original and first renewal.

Start asking questions about why the copy from March 17th, 2017, has different dates than the original FISA application and first renewal.  That March 17th copy was seeded with a false date of origination. The reason for the false date appears to be the FBI leak taskforce initiated by Sessions. The false date was a leak trap.

That’s exactly what happened.

♦ On March 17th, 2017, the Senate Intelligence Committee took custody of the FISA application used against Carter Page.   We know the FISA court delivered the read and return Top-Secret Classified application due to the clerk stamp of March 17, 2017.

(Page FISA Application, Link)

The FISA application (original and first renewal) was delivered to Senate Security Director James Wolfe.  Senator Mark Warner entered the basement SCIF shortly after 4:00pm on March 17, 2017, the day it was delivered (texts between Warner and Waldman):

Now, when SSCI Security Officer James Wolfe was indicted (unsealed June ’18), we could see the importance of the March 17th date again:

(Wolfe Indictment Link)

We could tell from the description within the Wolfe indictment FBI investigators are describing the FISA application.  Additionally Wolfe exchanged 82 text messages with his reporter/girlfriend Ali Watkins.  The FISA application is 83 pages with one blank page.

The logical conclusion was that Wolfe text Ali Watkins 82 pictures of the application.

FBI Investigators applied for, and received a search warrant for the phone records of journalist Ali Watkins through November 2017.  Ms. Watkins was notified in February 2018, three months after Wolfe was questioned by FBI investigators in December 2017.

However, despite the overwhelming (public) circumstantial evidence that Wolfe leaked the FISA application, he was never charged with leaking classified information.  Wolfe was only charged with lying three times to federal authorities, and he pled down to one count of lying to the FBI.

CTH made the case in mid 2018 that someone at the DOJ had influenced a decision not to charge Wolfe with the leaking of the FISA application; despite the FBI and DOJ having direct evidence of Wolfe leaking classified information.

The logical reason for the Rosenstein DOJ not to charge Wolfe with the FISA leak was because that charge would ensnare powerful Senators on the powerful committee.  Worse still, in hindsight we now see how that committee was working to aide the purposes and intents of the corrupt DOJ and FBI officials as they built their impeachment agenda.

Remember, the SSCI has intelligence oversight of the DOJ, DOJ-NSD, FBI and all associated counterintelligence operations. Additionally, when the FBI was investigating Wolfe for leaking classified documents, according to their court filings they had to inform the committee of the risk Wolfe represented.  Who did they have to inform?.. Chairman Richard Burr and Vice-Chair Mark Warner.

Think about it.  Both gang-of-eight members (Warner/Burr), who happened -as a consequence of the jaw dropping implications- to be two SSCI members who were warned by the FBI that Wolfe was compromised…. and they, along with Feinstein in 2016, were the co-conspirators who used James Wolfe.  The ramifications cannot be overstated.

Any criminal charges for leaking classified intelligence information against James Wolfe would likely result in a major scandal where the SSCI itself was outlined as participants in the weaponization of government for political intents.  Thus, the perfect alignment of interests for a dropped charge and DC cover-up.  REMEMBER:

(Source)

If it wasn’t already transparently sketchy, in an act of serendipity and self-preservation, the accused Security Director James Wolfe evidenced the schemes when he threatened to subpoena members of the SSCI as part of his defense. [See Here]

[…] Attorneys for James A. Wolfe sent letters to all 15 senators on the committee, notifying them that their testimony may be sought as part of Mr. Wolfe’s defense, according to two people familiar with the matter.

[…] Mr. Wolfe’s defense lawyers are considering calling the senators as part of the proceedings for a variety of reasons, including as potential character witnesses and to rebut some of the allegations made by the government in the criminal complaint, these people say.  (link)

Immediately after threatening to subpoena the SSCI (July 27, 2018), the DOJ (Rosenstein authorizing) cut a deal with Wolfe and dropped the charges down to a single charge of lying to investigators.  However, someone in the FBI who was doing the investigative legwork wasn’t happy with that decision.

The overwhelming circumstantial evidence that Wolfe leaked the FISA application went from a strong suspicion, to damn certain (after the plea deal) when the DOJ included a sentencing motion in mid-December 2018.

On December 15th, 2018 the DOJ filed a response to the Wolfe defense teams’ own sentencing memo (full pdf), and within the DOJ response they included an exhibit (#13) written by the FBI [redacted] special agent in charge, which specifically says: “because of the known disclosure of classified information, the FISA application”… Thereby admitting, albeit post-plea agreement, that Wolfe did indeed leak the FISA:

(link to document)

Right there, in that FBI Special Agent description is the bombshell admission that James Wolfe leaked the Carter Page FISA application to journalist Ali Watkins at Buzzfeed. (Keep Reading Background)…

Because the copy delivered to the SSCI on March 17th, 2017, had a modified date as a leak tracer. All subsequent public releases of the FISA dates had to either: (A) duplicate the false date; or (B) be redacted.

Oddly, and *coincidentally*, after the DOJ made the decision to declassify the previously hidden dates today, another announcement followed:

WASHINGTON — The primary liaison between the Justice Department and the special counsel’s office is set to step down at the end of the month, after helping oversee the department’s most consequential and controversial investigation in a generation.

Edward O’Callaghan, who served as the deputy attorney general’s right-hand man, worked closely with the deputy attorney general at the time, Rod J. Rosenstein, to oversee the Russia investigation. He had primary supervisory responsibilities over the special counsel’s office, which was led by Robert S. Mueller III. (more)

And for the Trifecta:

US Attorney Terwilliger

@USATerwilliger

Congratulations to US Attorney for D.C. Jessie Liu on the announcement regarding the intent to nominate her to undersecretary at the Treasury Department. https://publicpool.kinja.com/subject-president-donald-j-trump-announces-intent-to-1840349025 

Subject: President Donald J. Trump Announces Intent to Nominate and Appoint Individuals to Key…

The White HouseOffice of the Press SecretaryFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEDecember 10, 2019President Donald J. Trump Announces Intent to Nominate and Appoint Individuals to Key Administration PostsToday,…

publicpool.kinja.com

18 people are talking about this

What do all three have in common?

(1) DOJ tells IG to declassify FISA dates.

(2) Ed O’Callagahan removed (going to private practice).

(3) Jessie Liu removed as U.S. DC Attny (going to treasury).

Answer:  The James Wolfe Coverup.

Horowitz Testimony: “The Only FISA We Found That Existed Was The One For Carter Page”…


Amid the investigative and research questions over the past several years, there was always a question about who, within thee Trump orbit, may have been subject to FISA court authorized surveillance during their activity in 2016.

Because they were initially four targets of the FBI investigation, there was speculation that Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos and/or Lt. General Michael Flynn were also subjects of Title-1 FISA Court authorized surveillance, in addition to Carter Page.

Today during his testimony, Inspector General Michael Horowitz specifically noted there was no other FISA application against any other campaign official. [See 05:23 of testimony to questions by Senator Chris Coons – prompted just hit play]:

“The only FISA we found existed was the one we have written about here as to Carter Page”…

That means all other FBI investigative evidence documented against Manafort, Papadopoulos, or Flynn had to come from some other method of surveillance.

This begs a significant question….

Carter Page was not associated with the campaign or transition after the election, so under what authority did the DOJ allow the Mueller team to gain access to all of the Trump transition emails, texts, electronic and phone communications? 

.

….Maybe a good question for Rod Rosenstein?

Then again, perhaps this speaks to why the DOJ is hiding the scope memos…

I digress.

IG Horowitz Senate Testimony on FBI FISA Abuse During Election – 10:00am ET Livestream…


The Senate Committee on the Judiciary hearing entitled “Examining the Inspector General’s Report on Alleged Abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act” will be held today at 10:00am Eastern.

Fox News Livestream Link – Fox Business Livestream – CBS Livestream

.

.

Impeachment Poker!


ALL IN FOR IMPEACHMENT

The Democrats hold no viable hand in their game to remove Trump from office. Regardless, they’re going ‘all in’ on impeachment. They can’t win. President Trump is holding the winning cards.

Trump has not committed any sort of ‘high crime’ that would warrant an impeachment. He was actually carrying out his duties when it came to his Ukraine call. He didn’t want US taxpayer money to be siphoned off as graft. Congress should be going after Joe Biden, not Trump. However, the Democrats control the House and they are corrupt to the core.

The Democrats are holding a losing hand, but they’re desperate. They can’t beat Trump in 2020, so they will use their mass media to lie to the country about the reasons for impeachment. The Democrats have no poker face—their hatred for Trump can’t he hidden.

—Ben Garrison

USMCA Gains Bipartisan Support in House – Senate Leader Mitch Jinping Says Not-so-Fast, Impeachment First…


It’s funny to watch this transparently predictable stuff play out in real time.

After Pelosi gives the nod for USMCA ratification in the House, Senate Leader Mitch McConnell declares he will not allow Senate support until he extracts his impeachment indulgency fees.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on Tuesday the U.S. Senate would not take up the USMCA trade deal next week before congressional recess.

The Republican leader said that trade deal likely will come up in the Senate after the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump. McConnell said the Senate does hope to tackle the defense and spending bills next week. (link)

Too funny…. and way too predictable.

Now, if you are wondering what the heck is going on, it might be worthwhile to remember the question CTH presented about this dynamic last week:

“So what will the White House need to give McConnell… or what will McConnell’s ask be, in order to protect the office of the president?  Here’s where you have to remember Tom Donohue and the Wall St priorities.

McConnell (subtext Donohue) would prefer the confrontation with China be eliminated and the tariffs dropped.  Is that too big an “ask”?  Would the White House sell/trade McConnell a China deal for better impeachment terms?

All of these are questions worth pondering now, because there’s no doubt they are being discussed amid those in DC sitting on the comfy Corinthian wing-backs and gleefully rubbing their hands around a well polished mahogany table” (read more)

Majority Leader McConnell is not about to lose the opportunity to gain his traditional indulgence fees for his legislative work.  Passing the USMCA before the Senate trail of President Trump would be giving up leverage.  It would be akin to working for free.

Both China and Wall Street have been pouring money into K-Street lobbyists.  There’s a boatload of extraction available before any Senator should be forced to take a final position. Slow down there cowboy, the check-writers are lined up at the doors.

First, delaying USMCA benefits China.  Beijing has invested heavily in Mitch McConnell and that level of alignment needs to be carefully navigated.

Second, passage of the USMCA hurts the Wall Street multinationals.  Those multinational corporations have paid the legislative brokers, K-Street lobbyists, to defend their interests. The multinationals who were ignoring President Trump’s multiple warnings, likely need more time to reposition their assets.

Third, the Wall Street hedgefunds have also paid K-Street.  If USMCA assists the decoupling from China (it does), those hedgefunds need time to extract their financial position from the Stock Market.   **nudge/nudge, wink/wink** We’re talking “folding money” here. Trillions at stake.  If you’re in the market… position yourself accordingly.

All of these trade opportunities are tied together.  The impeachment effort is the Alamo for a global financial network.   Imagine how much money McConnell can make from each of these issues?  (1) Impeachment is worth billions. (2) USMCA is worth billions.  (3)U.S-China is worth billions.  McConnell cannot move quickly without giving up some major financial opportunities. Slowing it all down makes it easier to indulge.

Each of the three issues above is worth some major cash; each must be taken individually.

….You give me the impeachment rules, and you can take the budget and trade checks, deal?….

James Wallner@jiwallner

“If McConnell and Schumer can’t secure a deal, that leaves two backup options: passing GOP-only rules, which some Republicans say they are willing to do, or a free-for-all on the Senate floor where whatever can get 51 votes is adopted.” https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/473462-senate-braces-for-brawl-on-trump-impeachment-rules 

Senate braces for brawl on Trump impeachment rules

Senators are bracing for a partisan brawl over the rules of President Trump’s looming impeachment trial.

thehill.com

23 people are talking about this

Leader McConnell

@senatemajldr

It was my pleasure to meet today with @NathanLawKC, a Hong Kong activist and member of a new generation of aspirational leaders continuing Hong Kong’s fight for freedom and autonomy. The United States is proud to stand with them.

View image on Twitter
3,146 people are talking about this

AG Bill Barr One-on-One With Wall Street Journal…


U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr sits down with the Wall Street Journal to discuss the information released within the IG report on FBI 2016 election surveillance against candidate Trump; and FISA exploitation for use therein.

Full Interview – AG Bill Barr Discusses IG Report and FBI Institutional Issues With Political Corruption…


U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr has sent the totality of the U.S. media into spasmodic fits of apoplexy today as he discusses the findings of the DOJ inspector general review of a highly corrupted FISA process.

The Attorney General talks about how the FBI weaponized their official duty in an effort to carry out what seems to be a political agenda.  Mr. Barr goes into detail with his thoughts on the current criminal review assigned to U.S. Attorney John Durham; and the unfortunate issues with a group at the top of the organization who politicized the FBI as an investigative agency and used an alliance of media assets to achieve political goals.

.

Many people are writing and asking for my personal opinion of AG Bill Barr. I shall provide that below.

.

Thoughts: Leading up to the trial of George Zimmerman he had two attorneys: Mark O’Mara and Don West. Don West was the deliberate and angered attorney who was rightly furious over how a completely false case was assembled against his client. The entire CTH community agreed on the value of Don West.

(Left to Right) Mark O’Mara, Don West, Mark Geragos.

However, Don West wasn’t the lead attorney… there was another, Mark O’Mara.

Mr. O’Mara gave the intentional impression of being above it all, elevated above the politics, and affable to the groups who wanted to hang Zimmerman in the town square and also understandable toward the defenders of Zimmerman who recognized the rail-roading.

O’Mara became a Rosetta stone. Some Zimmerman supporters saw O’Mara as self-serving, duplicitous, cunning (not in a good way) and essentially deceiving his client by not trying to be assertive in defense. Others saw O’Mara as smart, prudent and staying above the fray to be more influential toward the benefit of his client amid circles of media opposition.

The strong differences of opinion over O’Mara were fought on the pages of CTH for over a year. Pro-O’Mara and Anti-O’Mara we both good groups of people; excellent and passionate people; but each saw Mark O’Mara in a different way.

Personally I did not see Mark O’Mara in a good light. I predicted his positioning was to gain a lucrative media gig at the conclusion of a fraudulent trial. [He took a CNN contract within three weeks of trial ending]  But more important than that recognition of selfish sensibility was the evidence.

The evidence was overwhelming (at least to CTH in 2012) that Witness #8, Rachel Jeantel, was an imposter.

The anonymous Witness #8 was the only reason the State of Florida could get an arrest. Witness #8 was also manufactured by the corrupt Scheme Team of Trayvon’s family.

Completely made up.

Incredibly the corrupt State of FL prosecution team consisting of SAO Angela Corey and Bernie De La Rionda went along with a criminally corrupt prosecution using evidence they knew was manufactured.

If we knew the manufacturing of evidence to be true… demonstrably and provably true.. well, Don West and Mark O’Mara certainly knew it to be true.

Yet Mark O’Mara did nothing about it… EVER. O’Mara knew the state had manufactured evidence. O’Mara Explicitly knew his client was being railroaded by a criminal enterprise carried out by the State of Florida and Trayvon Martin Family. And Mark O’Mara never brought it up before, during, or even after the trial… Not once.

Attorney Mark O’Mara won the case because the case itself was a fraud. However, the “case” never should have gone to trial. In my passionately frustrated opinion O’Mara should have called out the fraud and defended his client by avoiding the ridiculous trial.

[NOTE: Seven years later, with Witness #8 admitting to the fraud, George Zimmerman is rightly suing all of those who participated.]

Why do I bring up this example?

Because in my opinion, having watched nine months of his professional effort, right now the metaphor is: Bill Barr is Mark O’Mara, the U.S. Constitution is George Zimmerman, and we’re about to go to trial again.

Peace.

Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff Announce Two Articles of Impeachment – Abuse of Power, and Obstruction of Congress…


The Democrats within the House of Representatives have decided to suspend House Impeachment Resolution [HR 660] without following their own rules that established a House Minority Hearing. Instead, House leadership have produced two partisan articles of impeachment for a full house vote.

Both articles are exceptionally weak; the Democrats are rushing to cut their losses:

♦Article One is “Abuse of power” – and structured on a false premise that President Trump “exercised the powers of his public office to obtain an improper personal benefit, while ignoring or injuring the national interest.”

♦Article Two is “Obstruction of Congress” – and structured on a ridiculous premise that President Trump “engaged in unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of the impeachment inquiry”, by challenging congressional subpoenas and seeking relief from the judicial branch.

Both articles are structurally deficient in the extreme. It will be interesting to see which House democrats could possibly vote for these articles, especially article two. There is a possibility some democrats will ignore Pelosi’s whip.

The weakness of the articles now actually appears to be a feature, not a flaw. The exercise of the “impeachment process” writ large was more of a political promise to the far-left constituents of the resistance movement itself. Structurally there is no strength to either article; they appear designed to fail in the Senate. Again, a feature not a flaw.

Nationally the democrat resistance voters are not too smart. What Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler are delivering for them is an impeachment in name only. The downstream consequences for this incredibly partisan political effort could be a massive backlash amid independent voters and centrist democrats.

Traditionally, impeachment is constitutionally designed to remove an elected official from office. However, in this modern example the process has been intentionally corrupted to disparage the President, not to remove him.  In essence Pelosi has used the impeachment process as way to sooth the emotional needs of the far-left resistance.

.

Jim Jordan Eviscerates Democrat Impeachment Narrative and a Key Witness….


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on  by 

Jumpin’ Ju-Ju bones, Jim Jordan eviscerated about eleventy insufferable articles of impeachment in a single rapid-fire round of questioning.   WATCH:

.

I can only imagine what Jimmy Jacket was like as a young ‘un:

You can git outta ma way, or we kin keep talkin’… yer call!