The Cleaner…


There are ongoing consequential election battles taking place in multiple states that are far more urgent than my meager outlines; and it is not my intent to distract from the more pressing matters of our political surrounding.  However, there is a strong possibility the current election events are symptoms of a larger battle within government.

An enigma:

You see, there’s a bunch of ‘unofficial’ evidence, or data-points, that no-one can explain how or why they came to be visible.  The data did not surface sequentially; but it surely surfaced purposefully from within the apparatus of government. Putting the evidence into a sequence that clarifies the picture is not easy. As a respected person recently shared:

“It’s almost like a separate discipline, sort of like textual forensics or document historiography; I don’t know how to describe it yet.”

In an earlier outline I shared the following questions:

  • How do we find out about the Mark Warner text messages?
  • Who publicly released the Carter Page FISA application?
  • Where did the four day flood of information (Dec 1st – 4th, 2017) about Lisa Page and Peter Strzok come from?
  • Who released that Page/Strzok information to the media?  Why?
  • Who made the decision not to indict James Wolfe for leaking classified information?
  • Why be so specific details within the Wolfe indictment; then dismiss them?
  • Who made the decision NOT TO redact the key FISC clerk stamp?
  • Where is all of this “unofficial” evidence coming from?

Well, here’s my answers.

In the James Wolfe indictment, released June 8th, 2018, we find out the Senate Select Committee on intelligence was sent the FISA application on Carter Page.  We don’t find out from the indictment, we only see a description:  [Source Link]

Now, keep in mind this indictment as written ends without any charges of leaking classified documents.  The indictment [Read Here] ends with three counts of giving “false statements to a government agency”, ie. lying to the FBI [18 USC 1001 violation]

If you read the indictment, and the subsequent charges within the indictment, there is absolutely NO REASON, for the extent of the specificity within page #6, lines 17 through 20. As pictured above.  Wolfe was not charged with leaking “classified information”, yet the specific details describe the “top secret” document that was leaked.

A month later, on a Saturday, July 21st, 2018, the redacted FISA Title-1 application used against U.S. person Carter Page is released.  At the time of its release, no-one was looking for it and no-one was requesting the release.

On page #54, 63, 65, 66, and 83 of the heavily redacted FISA application – the FISC Clerk copy stamp appears, drawing attention to the date of distribution, March 17th, 2017. [Source Link]

All dates within the FISA application are redacted, except for the FISC Clerk stamp dates.  Curiously, this March 17, 2017, clerk stamp date is what connects that document to the description of the “top secret” document outlined in the Wolfe indictment.

Against the refusal of the DOJ and FBI to declassify supporting documents to the Nunes memo, this unanticipated weekend release of the FISA application was that much more interesting.  FISA documents are not foia-able; consider the painstaking effort to get the Nunes memo released; in essence this FISA application would have been the easiest document to keep hidden.  Yet, it appeared.

Additionally, another curious unanticipated and never explained document release from February 9th, 2018, overlays with both the Wolfe indictment and the Carter Page FISA application.

In February, 2018, someone, for some reason, released the text messages between Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, and a lobbyist/lawyer named Adam Waldman. [Source Link]  The resulting sunlight showed Senator Warner seeking Waldman’s assistance in setting up a private meeting/interview with Trump dossier author Christopher Steele.

On page #5 of the Warner text messages, we see the date March 17th, 2017, again.  The same date the Senate received the FISA application.  This time we see that Warner was going into the Senate “skif” (SCIF) shortly after 4:00pm; (presumably to review the document):

Using 2018 hindsight and putting together the three documents, released six months apart [Feb (Warner), June (Wolfe), July (FISA)] the picture emerges that the Senate Intelligence Committee received the Carter Page FISA application on March 17th, 2017, delivered to James Wolfe and reviewed by Vice-Chairman Mark Warner.   From the indictment, we discover the content of this document production was leaked by James Wolfe, to his reporter/girlfriend, Ali Watkins the same day.

The important notations here are: (1) two of the three sets of data were released without any specific purpose (FISA App and Warner texts); (2) no-one knows why two data points were released; (3) no-one knows who released them; (4) the FISC Clerk Stamp appears to have been intentionally left unredacted; (5) the specificity within the page #6 data within the Wolfe indictment was unnecessary for the direct purpose, yet important for the indirect purpose of connecting the data; (6) the Wolfe indictment was unsealed six months after the fact; and (7) NONE of these three sets of data were essential information at the time they were released.

This tells me, someone wanted this information into the bloodstream of public knowledge; yet non of this information was part of an official release; except the Wolfe indictment – yet it too contained unnecessary specificity within the page-6 details when unsealed.

This brings us to the critical question: Who?  Who wanted this out there?

The answer to that question, is uniquely narrow when you think about the documents and the position the person would have to hold in order to influence the release.

Because of the documents in question, the person would need to be inside the DOJ.  Because of the content of the documents, the person would have to be important enough to have access and knowledge of the bigger dynamic at play.  This person would also need to be high enough in the food chain to authorize the FISA release and have some control over the redaction process (leaving the FISC Clerk stamp date visible).  This person would have to be high enough to ‘unofficially’ release the Warner text messages, and yet not be in fear after doing it.

In my opinion, that describes Matt Whitaker – AG Jeff Sessions Chief of Staff.

Additionally, when considering another set of unsourced and very consequential data that followed the plea of Michael Flynn as demanded by the prosecution from Robert Mueller November 30th, 2017.   The public releases on December 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, immediately following the Flynn plea (Strzok FISC buddy Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Contreras), were massive in consequence, and appeared reactionary.

Those early December 2017 releases revealed: the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok removals and suspensions; the text messaging; the connections to Bruce Ohr activity (demotion 1); and the connections to Nellie Ohr and Fusion GPS.   No-one ever asked who was the source of that mountain of evidence against the conspiracy group.

Again, in my opinion, that information could only come from someone with deep knowledge of what was going on; and tends to point toward Matt Whitaker.

In short, I think Matt Whitaker was our behind-the-scenes ‘deep throat’; pushing information into the public consciousness that would paint a picture being hidden by opposing voices within the administrative state.  All of the countermeasures became visible after Whitaker was hired in October 2017.

Again, apply common sense, what interests were served; and whose interests were undermined by this information being released?

Whitaker joined Sessions in October 2017; immediately before the FBI investigators zeroed in on the SSCI leaking [See Indictment].

Whitaker came in after the leak task force was in place and investigating.  I believe it was Matt Whitaker who left the disparate breadcrumb trail for us to follow.

Given the nature of how hard Rosenstein and Mueller are/were working to block sunlight and the release of information, as evidenced within their recent threats against declassification by President Trump, these data/evidence points certainly did not come from their collective DOJ camp or the ‘small group’ within the Special Counsel.  Factually the sunlight from the mysterious media information was adverse to their interests.

So here’s my summary:

  • How do we find out about the Mark Warner text messages? – Matt Whitaker
  • Who publicly released the Carter Page FISA application? – Matt Whitaker
  • Where did the four day flood of information (Dec 1st – 4th, 2017) about Lisa Page and Peter Strzok come from? – Matt Whitaker
  • Who released that Page/Strzok information to the media? – Matt Whitaker
  • Why? – Push back against the sketchy Mueller framework within the Flynn plea.
  • Who made the decision not to indict James Wolfe for leaking classified information? – Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, in an effort to protect the interests of corrupt elements within the SSCI. [ Despite the leak task force identifying the leaker, the content of the Wolfe leak meant Sessions could not be the decision-maker; the recusal firewall was crossed.]
  • Who wrote the initial Wolfe indictment to contain such specific evidence as to outline how he had leaked classified information?  – The task force [Whitaker allies].
  • Who made the decision NOT TO redact the key FISC clerk stamp? – Matt Whitaker as push-back against, and evidence toward, the corrupt elements within the SSCI.
  • Where did all of this “unofficial” evidence come from? – Matt Whitaker, current Acting Attorney General.

Additionally, the Office of the President is not an individual, it is an institution.  There are people, mostly lawyers, responsible for the office of the president who are there specifically to protect the executive office and not necessarily the person within it. By protecting the Office of The President, they protect the president.

Part of that protection involves NOT allowing the President to posses information that could put him in a position of compromise or legal jeopardy.  Therefore, in my opinion, President Trump does not have direct knowledge, nor has he been informed, of any of this.

In my humble opinion, those near the President are telling him to keep publicly expressing his distance from Matt Whitaker specifically because Whitaker is “the cleaner” for the DOJ and FBI.  That’s why we are seeing this:

The President needs factual and honest deniability of knowledge, and or any involvement, in what Matt Whitaker has done (as CoS) and/or will do (as AAG) internally.

That scenario doesn’t make former AG Jeff Sessions out to be good or bad, just recused and unable to deal with the issues over the past 20 months – prior to exit.

The conflict and compromise carried by Rod Rosenstein makes him a risk to the office; that’s why Whitaker was recommended as the ‘cleaner’.

I suspect one of Whitaker’s key tools will be to oversee and then utilize the IG report on FISA abuse to expel those within the DOJ and FBI who participated. [See Here]

The deepest elements of the DC swamp will go bananas to get rid of Whitaker specifically because he is positioned to be the cleaner.

Who has given Whitaker counsel?  Likely Senate Judicary Chairman Chuck Grassley.

Will this effort work? I have no idea.

There you have it.  That’s my take.

“Matthew Whitaker”

.

.

The Importance of Matt Whitaker -vs- The Administrative State…


Robert Mueller (the entire team) was put into place by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in 2017.  The specific selection of Robert Mueller was an outcome of recommendations and advice from FBI Chief Legal Counsel, James Baker, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

In hindsight; and specifically against the backdrop of known illegal activity [remember, McCabe is under criminal referral] there was a motive of self-interest within Baker and McCabe, specifically to cover for the 2015/2016/2017 DOJ and FBI activity that preceded the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

From the initial perspective of self-interest, Mueller’s role had/has three essential aspects:

♦(1) Create an investigation – Just by creating the investigation it is then used as a shield by any corrupt FBI/DOJ official who would find himself/herself under downstream congressional investigation.  Former officials being deposed/questioned by IG Horowitz or Congress could then say they are unable to answer those questions due to the ongoing special counsel investigation.  In this way Mueller provides cover for officials.

♦(2)  Use the investigation to keep any and all inquiry focused away from the corrupt DOJ and FBI activity that took place in 2016, 2016, 2017.  Keep the media narrative looking somewhere, anywhere, other than directly at the epicenter of the issues. In this way, Mueller provides distraction and talking points against the Trump administration.

♦(3) Use the investigation to suck-up, absorb, any damaging investigative material that might surface as a result of tangentially related inquiry.  Example: control the exposure of evidence against classified leak participants like SSCI Director of Security, James Wolfe. In this way Mueller provides cover for the institutions and the administrative state.

In all of these objectives the Mueller special counsel has been stunningly effective.

That leads to a discussion of the role of Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.

All of the visible activity being conducted by Rosenstein has been going in one direction, and only one direction.  That direction has been an intentional effort to keep as much of the damaging evidence hidden from public review and away from congressional oversight.

Back on October 7, 2017, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes pointed out that Rosenstein’s motives were to keep hidden the documentary evidence he was requesting President Trump to declassify.  Rosenstein communicated to President Trump that Special Counsel Robert Mueller would consider any declassification of documents as “obstruction” within his investigation:

President Trump backed-down from requesting the declassification of documents and agreed to allow the Inspector General report to review and outline the material being discussed.  This is a key point.

The takeaway from this framework tells us that DAG Rod Rosenstein, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, wanted to put the substantive issues under the purview of the IG.   There’s a strategic aspect to this which has remained un-discussed.

However, before getting to the IG motive, allow me to emphasize how much the current corrupt DOJ activity (Rosenstein/Mueller) is not isolated to FISA abuse and documents the usurping officials want to keep hidden.

The agenda to hide corrupt activity also flows outward and can be found in the DOJ behavior surrounding James Wolfe; the busted Senate Intelligence Security Official who was caught leaking the classified FISA application to the media.

Despite overwhelming evidence James Wolfe was not indicted for the more serious charges of leaking classified intelligence.  The decision was made by DAG Rod Rosenstein because AG Jeff Sessions was recused.  An intellectually honest review of what was/is taking place would indicate the *CURRENT* DOJ, controlled by the actions of Rod Rosenstein, needed to hide what was taking place as evidenced in the original indictment.

James Wolfe became a benefactor of current DOJ officials who are protecting the institutions within the administrative state and hiding the fingerprints of the officials, and congressional allies (Vice Chairman Mark Warner), who engaged in activity in 2016 and 2017.

These corrupt DOJ and FBI officials are not protecting Wolfe as much as they are protecting themselves and their institution(s).  This effort transparently includes Rosenstein, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Deputy FBI Director David Bowditch and current FBI general counsel Dana Boente; as well as all the second level and third level carry-over career officials.

The efforts of Rosenstein, Wray, Bowditch, Boente et al, to cover-up the institutional corruption extends far beyond their blocking activity of the declassification requests; and shows up in the lack of substance behind the Wolfe plea agreement when compared to the devastating evidence within the original indictment.

There is a clear pattern.  In addition to the disparity of outcome within the Wolfe indictment/plea deal we exhibit: redactions in material evidence provided to congress; refusal to release material to congress; fighting declassification of documents that would be damaging to the previous officials; refusal to discuss events with congress by officials who hide behind the shield of the Mueller investigation; the list is long.

Additionally, the Mueller control agenda also extends into the two previous IG reports submitted by DOJ Inspector Michael Horowitz.

With Robert Mueller in charge of an ongoing investigation, the two previous IG reports (1. Investigation of McCabe and 2. Clinton email/FBI bias) could not outline anything tangentially connected to the Mueller investigation without first passing through his teams approval and review.

That level of Mueller influence kept the most severe elements of investigative sunlight away from public review.

These officials defending the administrative state are still in place.  We know they are in place because their influential conduct is visible. Three of them are inarguable:

(1) By redacting innocuous, albeit highly damaging information, within the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages and emails.  Officials within the agencies are hiding information and even eliminating the most damaging material.

(2) By controlling what records IG Horowitz has access to; in addition to who he is interviewing. The IG is only as effective as the material he has to review.

(3) By shaping the executive summaries of the two previous IG reports to ensure the specific material within the report is diluted as much as possible in the summary and conclusions.

The collaborative efforts of the current group of corrupt officials, maintaining the administrative state, was also evident in the hit job against Judge Brett Kavanaugh.  Those former DOJ/FBI officials (Bromwich, McLean, Laufman, etc.), who were/are part of the Blasey-Ford construct, were clearly working with a set of current officials. [This collaborative interest extends to people within government (the legislative branch) and those outside government (media allies).]  We saw surface it live on television.

The appearance of former DOJ lawyer Michael Sussmann working with Perkins Coie and on behalf of the DNC, to feed information to former FBI legal counsel James Baker, only highlights this systemic collaboration and corruption within the DOJ and FBI.   That corruption has not been addressed; it is currently being protected from sunlight.

This landscape is inarguable.  There is no debate as to the visibility within the current administrative state.

In essence, and against the understanding of how these officials manipulated the recusal of AG Jeff Sessions; DAG Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Deputy FBI Director David Bowditch, FBI Chief Legal Counsel Dana Boente, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the affiliated network of political operatives within the DOJ/FBI; this crew has held free reign to shape everything in the past two years.

That is why there has been ZERO progress.

However, with the resignation of Jeff Sessions and the appointment of Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker, the Deep State landscape has shifted.

For the first IG report on Andrew McCabe, and the Second IG report on FBI misconduct and bias, Jeff Sessions was essentially recused from any input or structural oversight because each of the aforementioned IG investigations crossed over into 2016 campaign review and/or the FBI-DOJ counterintelligence operation (Russia).

On this third IG report, looking into FISA abuse, Matt Whitaker has replaced Jeff Sessions.

♦Background: On March 28th, 2018, the DOJ Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz formerly announced an additional investigation of how the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation engaged with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in matters relating to the FISA Title-1 application filed against U.S. person Carter Page.  However, one part of the OIG notification was generously overlooked by a defensive and IC compliant media:

As part of this examination, the OIG also will review information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source. Additionally, the OIG will review the DOJ’s and FBI’s relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISC applications.  (pdf link)

Two months later on Monday May 21st, driven by demands and questions from President Trump, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein added a significant DOJ mandate to the Inspector General review.  Rosenstein expanded the original FISA review to include looking at whether officials within the intelligence community may have unlawfully used human intelligence assets to “spy” or “surveil” the Trump campaign:

“The Department has asked the Inspector General to expand the ongoing review of the FISA application process to include determining whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation of persons suspected of involvement with the Russian agents who interfered in the 2016 presidential election.” (link)

If my hunch is correct, this is one of the key background objectives of having AAG Matthew Whitaker in place.  Whitaker removes the ability of current officials from watering-down the IG report; as they did in the previous two releases.

This puts a timeline in place for President Trump to keep Whitaker around and delay any replacement nomination until after the IG report is published.

The IG process for the FISA report is structural.  Once the interviews and investigation is complete the “IG referencer” phase takes several weeks.  The referencer could be a person or a group of people depending on the size of the report.

The referencer has the responsibility for going through every statement of fact and providing the citation or footnote for the assertion. The person(s) doing the reference review has/have the most arduous of tasks.

The referencer checks every sentence, every assertion, and ensures only provable facts with citations are part of the report. Every assertion of fact must be cited (or footnoted) to include the investigative material that proves the fact.  After the footnotes, citations and all fact assemblies are reconciled a draft report is written. The Draft Report encompasses the findings.

The Draft Report is then reviewed by the DOJ and sent to the principals for review. It is in-between the time frame where the draft is completed, and IG is awaiting the responses from the principals, where interference from any corrupt DOJ official takes place.  This is also when the “Executive Summary” is written, with influence from the administrative state, that tamps-down the findings.  As we saw in IG report #2 (FBI bias) the executive summary completely downplayed the evidence within the report.

The ‘Draft Report review’ phase allows the principals (those who’s behavior, action and conduct, is outlined in the report) to provide input on the facts identified and outlined within the draft.  Normally this part of the process takes at least two to three weeks.  Responses from the principals about the facts outlined in the draft report are then reviewed, cleared for addition if appropriate, and included in the final report.

The “executive summary” is added; and then the final report goes to print and is released to the public.

The switch from a recused Jeff Sessions to a non-recused Acting AG in Matthew Whitaker has completely changed the risk dynamic for the corrupt internal officials.  This is why all voices are now focused to remove Whitaker.

Whitaker is now President Trump’s most valuable weapon in the ongoing battle against a bipartisan and corrupt administrative state.

More to follow…

The Realist View of the Midterms


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Your take on the midterm elections is that the Democrats really failed and simply won a symbolic victory?

Thank you

IE

ANSWER: Yes. The Democrats keep making lower highs and deeper lows. They do not review the major trend nor are they willing to revise their central theme.  While the Democrats won the majority in the US House of Representatives can blow their horn really loudly, are a more important shift in domestic power balance has taken place. Trump’s gains in the Senate demonstrate that his election was not a fluke. The FOX poll that showed more Republicans identified with Trump than the Republican Party demonstrates above all the trend is away from both party mantras.

The possible consequences of the Democratic House victory will probably lead to the banter of impeachment, but they will lack the votes in the Senate where a trial would have to take place. That means this will be just a dog and pony show. Mueller will dop his best to try to prosecute Trump for something because4 that is the Deep State goal. We are also likely to see important implications for Trump’s foreign policy. By and large, the Democrats will press their revenge against Russia and the talk is they would love nothing more than war with Russia. They will keep stirring the pot to achieve that goal and they will do their best to try to block anything Trump does regardless if it is good or bad for the country. This is all about winning in 2020 right now.

Democrats may be pushing for changes in the defense budget – including the attempt to block new low-yielding tactical nuclear weapons targeted by the Trump government. There will be more pressure to get results in
Afghanistan or to demand a withdrawal blaming Trump for that mess as well despite the fact he did not start it the confrontation there. The Democrats will also push for an end to the Yemen war and a blockade of arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, keep in mind that Trump has a lot of room for foreign affairs, but the US House of Representatives can shed light on fraudulent or failed political initiatives with a spotlight for political brownie points with again an eye on 2020.

The Democrats will speak out against Trump’s “anti-globalism” approach and they will promote support for multilateral institutions and alliances to support the EU against Trump. The US House Democrats see the EU as an important center for pressure on Trump and they will use it. Democrats are also likely to turn to the EU for trying to legislate on climate change against Trump and to support more control and taxes on the people.

The Democrats will take an even tougher attitude towards Russia. They want revenge against Putin and believe if they had not leaked their emails which showed the truth, Hillary would have been in the White House and they would have control also the Senate. This is the fictional world they live in these days. Hence, the will continue to pus for investigations into Trump / Republicans related to Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign. This is something they are DESPERATE to prove for they really think this will deliver them the White House in 2020.

The will also issue compulsory summonses for Trump’s tax returns so they can make them public for the 2020 elections. Don’t forget they are Socialists at heart so to them bashing people with money is their ticket to the White House in their mind.

Nevertheless, the Democrats will have a major impact on US policy in China and Russia. They will be yelling and screaming about everything. They would love nothing more than to obstruct Trump on every level and create war if they really can. They do see China’s trade as a problem. Ironically, they are actually closer to Trump’s view on trade with China than on any other topic.

Don’t forget, we will now have Nacy Pelosi at the helm. This is the woman who actully said: “I don’t know what was so great about the great depression

Comprehending The DOJ/FBI Administrative State Battle…


There is a significant issue of understanding and comprehension that must be addressed for anyone interested in actually learning about what is happening, and what has happened.

The issue surrounds recusal.

Effective March 2nd, 2017, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was recused from any involvement in DOJ issues, investigations and decision-making, that surrounded the “Russia Probe” or “Russia Investigation”.  FULL STOP.

Setting aside the for/against argument around the decision by Sessions, the resusal meant that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was recused from any involvement in the Mueller investigation.  FULL STOP.

Within this dynamic DAG Rod Rosenstein was/is the central DOJ decision-maker for anything surrounding the Mueller investigation and larger Russia investigation. FULL STOP.

Does that make sense?

If yes, continue….

On August 4th, 2017, AG Jeff Sessions and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats made an announcement they were initiating a “Classified Intelligence Leak Task Force.” [DOJ LINK]

The “just don’t do it” program, as launched by an obviously angered Sessions, included three measures. They were:

♦First, I directed my Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein—whose district in Maryland encompassed the NSA headquarters and who has personally led these kinds of investigations— and FBI Director Christopher Wray to oversee all classified leak investigations and actively monitor the progress of each and every case.

♦Second, I directed the National Security Division and U.S. Attorneys to prioritize cases involving unauthorized disclosures. The Department will not hesitate to bring lawful and appropriate criminal charges against those who abuse the nation’s trust.

♦Third, as I said, we tripled the number of active leak investigations. In response, the FBI has increased resources devoted to leak cases and created a new counterintelligence unit to manage these cases. Simultaneously, the Department is reviewing policies that impact leak investigations.

The DC-based intelligence leaking community was put on notice.

Does that make sense?

If yes, continue….

As a result of that August 4, 2017, announcement we discover an effort by the DOJ and ODNI to launch a task force to track down the leakers within the intelligence apparatus who have been revealing unauthorized, often ‘classified, information to the media.

Later, we discover in hindsight, that in October 2017, not coincidentally when AG Jeff Sessions hires Matthew Whitaker as his chief-of-staff, the leak task force, as part of ONE of their investigative reviews, zeros-in on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).

As a result of that singular FBI/DOJ/ODNI investigation into the SSCI, the head SSCI security official James Wolfe was identified as a leaker of classified information. [Indictment Available Here which has all the details]

Are you familiar?

If yes, continue….

When you review this specific SSCI investigation; and overlay the outcome therein (Wolfe); against the backdrop of the Sessions recusal; this is what you discover:

For the leak task force objectives, Sessions is involved, briefed.

As the leak task force focuses in on the SSCI Sessions is still involved, briefed.

When the leak task force identifies the specific evidence of what was leaked; ie. the FISA Application against Carter Page – which is part of the Russia Investigation; *NOW* Jeff Sessions is removed; no longer briefed.

*NOW* the recusal firewall is crossed.

Do you see how that works?

If yes, continue….

When the leaking by James Wolfe is discovered to be information specifically related to the FBI and DOJ Counterintelligence Operation (the Russia investigation); the resulting evidence now causes the decision-making to jump from AG Jeff Sessions, to DAG Rod Rosenstein.  (Sessions is now in his recusal bubble)

Does that make sense?

This is an example of how the recusal firewall works.  This example is specifically focused on a factual classified leak investigation within the DOJ and FBI.   The most important part of this example is to show how the decision-making oversight shifts from Jeff Sessions to Rod Rosenstein just by the nature of the evidence within the events.

I cannot emphasize enough how important this distinction is; because it is the source of mountains of misunderstanding, misinformation, and disinformation.  If you don’t understand how the recusal issues impacted the events of the past 18 months you are going to be completely lost as I expand on some stunning revelations.

This understanding of “resusal” may seem like a small and common sense issue; but more than 80% (estimated) of people following the DOJ and FBI corruption story don’t understand it.   However, when you understand it the role of, and previous action by, Matthew Whitaker and Rod Rosenstein makes almost immediate sense.

Overseeing the leak investigations was part of AG Jeff Sessions office; that specifically would include his chief-of-staff Matthew Whitaker.  However, as soon as one of those leak investigations crossed the recusal firewall, all subsequent action is then decided by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

I must ask again, before I can expand further, if readers understand this dynamic?

Please answer in the comments section.

Thanks

View image on Twitter

TheLastRefuge @TheLastRefuge2

IMHO one of the more *consequential* background objectives of Whitaker has nothing to do with Mueller; and more to do with Horowitz. As in: stopping a DOJ/FBI administrative state officials from doing what they did with the prior IG report (June ’18) on DOJ/FBI bias & misconduct.

Sunday Talks: Michael Mukasey Defends Administrative State – States: Whitaker Must Recuse Himself…


Pay close attention.  WARNING: There is a battle within the administrative state that most of you are aware of.  Within this interview; and amid the larger conversation; the critical question to ask yourself is:

Is Rod Rosenstein working for the cause of justice; or is he an entrenched ideologue put in place to defend the interests of the administrative state?

President Trump’s appointment of Matt Whitaker as acting attorney general sparks outrage from Democrats, collaborative media and all professional administrative state advocates; who say he should recuse himself from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.  Here’s reaction from former Attorney General Michael Mukasey.

Sunday Talks: Kevin McCarthy Discusses Midterm Election Results….


Maria Bartiromo holds the most significant conversations today surrounding the midterm election and the predictable consequences therein.  Starting next week, what we see in the lame-duck congressional session will form the cornerstone of the next two years.

Historically, Wall Street Republicans (GOPe) prefer to be in the minority; it is part of their structural Decepticon model.  Representative Kevin McCarthy appears with Ms. Bartiromo to discuss his take on what is to come, and his desire to become Minority Leader.

Remarks by President Trump at the American Commemoration – Suresnes, France…


Comemorating the 100 year anniversary of the end of World-War-One, President Trump a ttends the American Commemoration Ceremony at Suresnes American Cemetery hosted by the Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission:

[Transcript] Suresnes, France – 4:14 P.M. CEST – PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you very much. Please.

Major General Matz, I want to thank you and everyone at the American Battle Monuments Commission for doing just an absolutely fantastic job.

Exactly 100 years ago today, on November 11th, 1918, World War I came to an end. Thank God. It was a brutal war. Millions of American, French, and Allied troops had fought with the extraordinary skill and valor in one of the bloodiest conflicts in human history.

We are gathered together, at this hallowed resting place, to pay tribute to the brave Americans who gave their last breath in that mighty struggle.

Earlier, Melania and I were deeply honored to be the guests of President Macron and Brigitte at the Centennial Commemoration of Armistice Day. It was very beautiful and so well done.

To all of the French military leaders and dignitaries in attendance with us now: Thank you for joining us as we honor the American and French service members who shed their blood together in a horrible, horrible war, but a war known as the Great War.

We are also joined by many distinguished American military leaders. Thank you to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford. Thank you, Joe. Thank you. Army Chief of Staff, General Mark Milley. Thank you, Mark. Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Curtis Scaparrotti. General, Thank you. And Air Force Commander Europe, General Tod Wolters. Thank you. Thank you, General.

Thank you as well to the members of Congress who have joined us: Ralph Abraham, Anthony Brown, John Carter, Paul Cook, Henry Cuellar, Richard Hudson, Bill Huizenga, Dutch Ruppersberger, John Rutherford, and Steve Stivers. Thank you all very much for being with us. Thank you very much. I know you wanted to be here very badly. We appreciate it.

In the United States, Armistice Day is now enshrined as Veterans Day. We have a number of amazing veterans with us today, including six veterans of World War II:

James Blane. James? Where is James? James, thank you. Thank you, James. Frank Devita. Thank you, Frank. Thank you very much. You look so comfortable up there, under shelter — (laughter) — as we’re getting drenched. You’re very smart people. (Laughter.) Pete DuPre. Pete, thank you very much. Gregory Melikian. Thank you, Gregory. Steven Melnikoff. Thank you. Thank you, Steven. And Jay Trimmer. Thank you. Thank you, Jay. Thank you.

You look like you’re in really good shape, all of you. (Applause.) I hope I look like that someday. You look great. America is forever in debt, and we are forever in your debt. And we really appreciate you being here.

We’re also joined by another very special guest: a 13-year-old boy from the United States named Matthew Haske. Matthew is in the eighth grade, and he worked and saved all of his money for two years to make this trip to France. He wanted to be here in person to honor the American heroes of World War I. Matthew, thank you. You make us very proud. Where is Matthew? Matthew. Matthew. (Applause.) Thank you very much. You’re way ahead of your time, Matthew. Thank you.

On this day, in the year 1918, church bells rang, families embraced, and celebrations, as you know, filled the streets like never before, in towns throughout Europe and the United States.

But victory had come at a terrible cost. Among the Allied Forces, more than one million French soldiers and 116,000 American service members had been killed by the war’s end. Millions more were wounded. Countless would come home bearing the lasting scars of trench warfare and the grisly horrors of chemical weapons.

During the final battle of the war, over 26,000 Americans lost their lives and more than 95,000 were wounded. It was the single deadliest battle in United States history. Thank of that — 26,000 Americans lost their lives in a battle.

Here on the revered grounds of Suresnes American Cemetery lie more than 1,500 U.S. service members who made the ultimate sacrifice in the First World War. Among those buried here are legendary Marines who fought in the Battle of Belleau Wood.

In that treacherous forest and the surrounding fields, American Marines, soldiers, and Allied Forces fought — and they fought through hell — to turn the tide of the war. And that’s what they did — they turned the tide of the war.

It was in that battle that our Marines earned the nickname “Devil Dogs,” arising from the German description of their ferocious fighting spirit. John Kelly knows that name, “Devil Dogs,” very well, John. Right?

Earlier this year, President Macron presented an oak sapling from Belleau Wood as a gift to our nation — an enduring reminder of our friendship sealed in battle. We fought well together. You could not fight better than we fought together. Sergeant Eugene Wear from Hazleton, Pennsylvania was one of the Marines at Belleau Wood. Eugene raced straight into a barrage of enemy fire, like no one has ever seen before, to bandage his friend’s wounds and carry him back to safety.

Months later, Eugene was mortally wounded. He passed away one day after Christmas. His mother would come right here to mourn by the grave of her precious son. She loved him so much. She was one of the thousands of American moms and dads whose beloved children found their final resting place on the hillside of Suresnes.

Each of these marble crosses and Stars of David marks the life of an American warrior — great, great warriors they are — who gave everything for family, country, God, and freedom. Through rain, hail, snow, mud, poisonous gas, bullets and mortar, they held the line, and pushed onward to victory — it was a great, great victory; costly victory but a great victory — never knowing if they would ever again see their families or ever again hold their loved ones.

Here are the words of a young soldier named Sergeant Paul Maynard from a letter he wrote only a few days before the end of the war: “Dear Mother, I think of you all at home, and I know if I am spared to get back, that I shall appreciate home more than ever, [ever] before. It will seem like heaven to me to be once more where there is peace and only peace.”

On November 11th, 1918, Paul died in the final hours of battle, just before the end. No, sadly, he did not make it. He was among the countless young men who never returned home. But through their sacrifice, they ascended to peace in heaven. Rest in peace, Paul.

The American and French patriots of World War I embody the timeless virtues of our two republics: honor and courage; strength and valor; love and loyalty; grace and glory. It is our duty to preserve the civilization they defended and to protect the peace they so nobly gave their lives to secure one century ago.

It is now my great honor to present Major General William Matz with an American flag, as a symbol of our nation’s gratitude to the American Battle Monuments. The Commission has done such an incredible job. And, General, we very much appreciate it. Today, we renew our sacred obligation to memorialize our fallen heroes on the soil where they rest for all of eternity.

Thank you very much. And, General, this is a great honor. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you all. God bless you. This has been a wonderful two days we spent in France. And this is certainly the highlight of the trip. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. (Applause.)

END 4:24 P.M. CEST

Media List of Names Under Consideration For Attorney General….


With Jeff Sessions now removed, the question becomes who will be the next person selected by President Trump to lead the institutionally corrupt U.S. Department of Justice.

With the loss of the House of Representatives to the arch-enemies of the President; and with the predictable likelihood of resistance investigations starting almost immediately in January; the next AG nominee is perhaps the most important cabinet choice in the second half of President Trump’s first term in office.

The upcoming 2019 siege of the White House will be record-breaking in anger, incivility, rage, activist-driven political violence, Machiavellian schemes, death threats against cabinet officials, increased Antifa activity, and media assaults.  The next AG faces the full weaponized deployment of well-planned DC swamp attacks.

That said, the series of names currently being promoted includes:

♦Former NJ Governor Chris Christie
♦Former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani
♦Former Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
♦Former Kansas SoS Kris Kobach
♦Congressman John Ratcliffe [(R-TX) possible frontrunner]
♦Florida AG Pam Bondi
♦Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
♦Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar
♦Former U.S. Attorney SDNY Andrew McCarthy

According to multiple media reports, citing close White House officials, the key advisor to President Trump, on this important decision, is Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

[Anyone else picturing a possible set-up here?]

Here’s my review of the current names and situation therein.

♦Trump cannot pick Christie or Giuliani because  the Mueller investigation is, by design, not over – and there’s no end in sight.  Christie and Giuliani would face the identical recusal issues as Jeff Sessions for exactly the same reason.  Both are shrewd enough to withstand the firestorm; but both were also on the 2016 election campaign – just like the elf on the shelf.  However, likely for this very reason, they are the two being pushed by the media and democrats.

♦Given the history of Scott Walker and his relationship to big GOPe he would be a Never Trump pick.  Predictably, in his off hours, Walker would fly down to the border wall with his staff and personally use pick-axes to tear it down.  Walker, might not be Brutus, but he would polish the spear, drive Brutus to the White House and keep watch while the deed is done.  His ability to look in both directions simultaneously does have benefits.

♦In a similar vein, Trey Gowdy would be even worse than Walker.  Dear God, can you even imagine the chaos?…  Democrats wouldn’t need a Trojan Horse, roosterhead would hold the door open while singing Muellers praises and personally ordering every member of the Trump family, and administration, to be on 24/7 mattress tag surveillance.  Purple-tied Gowdy would likely hire Peter Strzok as his deputy. Um… no!

♦Next up, Pam Bondi – the BFF of Benjamin Crump and most ineffective politically correct AG in the history of Florida.  If you want to know if me-me-me Bondi would bow-down under pressure; you need to look no further than her decision-making in the Zimmerman case.  How’s that Broward County election accountability working out?  Nuf said.

♦HHS Secretary Alex Azar doesn’t want the job.  Thankfully, Mr. Bean takes a pass.

♦If the AG job required writing 3,000 word daily essays to defend the administration from the legions knocking down the gates; and then standing atop a gilded podium talking to them with the intention of boring them into submission with articulate prose… Andrew McCarthy would be ideal.  Otherwise, well, not-so-much.

♦That leaves John Ratcliffe and Kris Kobach.  Ratcliffe is generally unflappable and knows the likely force of the alliance against him. Actually, Kobach and Ratcliffe both know what’s coming.  Could Kris Kobach pass confirmation? Likely yes; however, he would be fuel for the resistance horde.  That’s probably why John Ratcliffe is the frontrunner.

The success or failure of this person, whoever President Trump picks, will strongly influence: (A) his decision on running for re-election in 2020; and (B) the likelihood of success in the 2020 election.

Given the DOJ history and ‘in-your-face‘ evidence over the past two years, if the next AG can’t or won’t deal with the institutional corruption that has fully metastasized within the Department of Justice, President Trump’s support could erode quickly.

Peter Navarro Warns Wall Street Globalists: “Stand Down” Or Else…


The words from Peter Navarro will come as no surprise to any CTH reader who is fully engaged and reviewing the multi-trillion stakes, within the Globalist (Wall St.) -vs- Nationalist (Main Street) confrontation.

For several decades Wall Street, through lobbying arms such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (Tom Donohue), has structurally opposed Main Street economic policy in order to inflate profits and hold power – “The Big Club”. This manipulative intent is really the epicenter of the corruption within the DC swamp.

U.S. National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro discusses how Wall Street bankers and hedge-fund managers are attempting to influence U.S.-China trade talks. He speaks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

https://videopress.com/embed/0kCDXSwK?hd=0&autoPlay=0&permalink=0&loop=0Originally outlined a year ago. At the heart of the professional/political opposition the issue is money; there are trillions at stake.

President Trump’s MAGAnomic trade and foreign policy agenda is jaw-dropping in scale, scope and consequence. There are multiple simultaneous aspects to each policy objective; however, many have been visible for a long time – some even before the election victory in November ’16.

If we get too far in the weeds the larger picture is lost. CTH objective is to continue pointing focus toward the larger horizon, and then at specific inflection points to dive into the topic and explain how each moment is connected to the larger strategy.

If you understand the basic elements behind the new dimension in American economics, you already understand how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. The intentional shift in fiscal policy is what created the distance between two entirely divergent economic engines.

REMEMBER […] there had to be a point where the value of the second economy (Wall Street) surpassed the value of the first economy (Main Street).

Investments, and the bets therein, needed to expand outside of the USA. hence, globalist investing.

However, a second more consequential aspect happened simultaneously. The politicians became more valuable to the Wall Street team than the Main Street team; and Wall Street had deeper pockets because their economy was now larger.

As a consequence Wall Street started funding political candidates and asking for legislation that benefited their interests.

When Main Street was purchasing the legislative influence the outcomes were -generally speaking- beneficial to Main Street, and by direct attachment those outcomes also benefited the average American inside the real economy.

When Wall Street began purchasing the legislative influence, the outcomes therein became beneficial to Wall Street. Those benefits are detached from improving the livelihoods of main street Americans because the benefits are “global”. Global financial interests, multinational investment interests -and corporations therein- became the primary filter through which the DC legislative outcomes were considered.

There is a natural disconnect. (more)

As an outcome of national financial policy blending commercial banking with institutional investment banking something happened on Wall Street that few understand. If we take the time to understand what happened we can understand why the Stock Market grew and what risks exist today as the monetary policy is reversed to benefit Main Street.

President Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin have already begun assembling and delivering a new banking system.

Instead of attempting to put Glass-Stegal regulations back into massive banking systems, the Trump administration is creating a parallel financial system of less-regulated small commercial banks, credit unions and traditional lenders who can operate to the benefit of Main Street without the burdensome regulation of the mega-banks and multinationals. This really is one of the more brilliant solutions to work around a uniquely American economic problem.

♦ When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.

Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their traditional role as traded stocks on the U.S. Stock Market and were evaluated accordingly. However, over time investment instruments -which are secondary to actual company results- created a sub-set within Wall Street that detached from actual bottom line company results.

The resulting secondary financial market system was essentially ‘investment markets’. Both ordinary company stocks and the investment market stocks operate on the same stock exchanges. But the underlying valuation is tied to entirely different metrics.

Financial products were developed (as investment instruments) that are essentially wagers or bets on the outcomes of actual companies traded on Wall Street. Those bets/wagers form the hedge markets and are [essentially] people trading on expectations of performance. The “derivatives market” is the ‘betting system’.

♦Ford Motor Company (only chosen as a commonly known entity) has a stock valuation based on their actual company performance in the market of manufacturing and consumer purchasing of their product. However, there can be thousands of financial instruments wagering on the actual outcome of their performance.

There are two initial bets on these outcomes that form the basis for Hedge-fund activity. Bet ‘A’ that Ford hits a profit number, or bet ‘B’ that they don’t. There are financial instruments created to place each wager. [The wagers form the derivatives] But it doesn’t stop there.

Additionally, more financial products are created that bet on the outcomes of the A/B bets. A secondary financial product might find two sides betting on both A outcome and B outcome.

Party C bets the “A” bet is accurate, and party D bets against the A bet. Party E bets the “B” bet is accurate, and party F bets against the B. If it stopped there we would only have six total participants. But it doesn’t stop there, it goes on and on and on…

The outcome of the bets forms the basis for the tenuous investment markets. The important part to understand is that the investment funds are not necessarily attached to the original company stock, they are now attached to the outcome of bet(s). Hence an inherent disconnect is created.

Subsequently, if the actual stock doesn’t meet it’s expected P-n-L outcome (if the company actually doesn’t do well), and if the financial investment was betting against the outcome, the value of the investment actually goes up. The company performance and the investment bets on the outcome of that performance are two entirely different aspects of the stock market. [Hence two metrics.]

♦Understanding the disconnect between an actual company on the stock market, and the bets for and against that company stock, helps to understand what can happen when fiscal policy is geared toward the underlying company (Main Street MAGAnomics), and not toward the bets therein (Investment Class).

The U.S. stock markets’ overall value can increase with Main Street policy, and yet the investment class can simultaneously decrease in value even though the company(ies) in the stock market is/are doing better. This detachment is critical to understand because the ‘real economy’ is based on the company, the ‘paper economy’ is based on the financial investment instruments betting on the company.

Trillions can be lost in investment instruments, and yet the overall stock market -as valued by company operations/profits- can increase.

Conversely, there are now classes of companies on the U.S. stock exchange that never make a dime in profit, yet the value of the company increases. This dynamic is possible because the financial investment bets are not connected to the bottom line profit. (Examples include Tesla Motors, Amazon and a host of internet stocks like Facebook and Twitter.) It is this investment group of companies that stands to lose the most if/when the underlying system of betting on them stops or slows.

Specifically due to most recent U.S. fiscal policy, modern multinational banks, including all of the investment products therein, are more closely attached to this investment system on Wall Street. It stands to reason they are at greater risk of financial losses overall with a shift in fiscal policy.

That financial and economic risk is the basic reason behind Trump and Mnuchin putting a protective, secondary and parallel, banking system in place for Main Street.

Big multinational banks can suffer big losses from their investments, and yet the Main Street economy can continue growing, and have access to capital, uninterrupted.

Bottom Line: U.S. companies who have actual connection to a growing U.S. economy can succeed; based on the advantages of the new economic environment and MAGA policy, specifically in the areas of manufacturing, trade and the ancillary benefactors.

Meanwhile U.S. investment assets (multinational investment portfolios) that are disconnected from the actual results of those benefiting U.S. companies, and as a consequence also disconnected from the U.S. economic expansion, can simultaneously drop in value even though the U.S. economy is thriving.

Florida Secretary of State Orders Election Result Recount…


Rick Scott’s margin over Bill Nelson in the unofficial U.S. Senate race result is 12,562 votes. Ron Desantis is holding a 33,684-vote lead over Andrew Gillum in the governor race; and in the Florida agriculture commissioner race Democrat Nikki Fried has a 5,326-vote lead over Republican Matt Caldwell.

By order of the Florida Secretary of State, Ken Detzner, a mandatory recount will now take place.

Per state law, any Florida election result with an outcome below half a percentage point triggers an automatic recount. The machine recount result is due next Thursday.  However, if the final difference in votes is found to be less than .25 points, a hand recount will begin.