Posted originally on CTH on August 12, 2025 | Sundance
I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is the third.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.
In 2022, the legal case brought by prosecutor John Durham against Chris Steele’s primary sub source, Igor Danchenko, was predicated on the notion that Christopher Steele’s primary source for his dossier willfully and intentionally lied to the FBI. Therefore, according to Durham’s legal theory, Danchenko was guilty of purposefully misleading FBI investigators assigned to the Trump-Russia/”Crossfire Hurricane” investigation.
Every intellectually honest person knew the FBI were not duped by Danchenko, and later records proved Danchenko told them the Steele dossier was full of fabricated nonsense. However, to keep the revelation of the dossier presented “as nonsense” hidden, the FBI then hired Danchenko as a confidential human source, technically shielding him from being questioned or exposed.
The FBI decision to hire Danchenko was to keep the fraudulent Steele Dossier useful for their Trump targeting operation. After all, the Trump surveillance warrants were dependent on it.
The pretending by Durham highlighted two things: (1) Durham was protecting the corrupt DOJ and FBI institutions by not investigating any government action; and yet, (2) Durham was simultaneously exposing corrupt FBI and DOJ action through his Danchenko court filings.
FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified in court that Hillary Clinton’s contracted opposition researcher, Christopher Steele – hired by Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Donald Trump, was offered up to $1 million by the FBI in early October 2016, if Chris Steele could prove the claims within the Trump dirt dossier he authored.
Steele was never paid the money, because he could not prove the claims within the dossier, nor would he originally give up the name of the primary source for the information, Igor Danchenko.
However, despite the FBI knowing the dossier could not be proved, validated or verified, later that same month, October 21, 2016, they used the dossier as evidence to support a Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant against former Trump campaign aide, Carter Page.
The FBI offered Chris Steele $1 million to ‘prove it.’ Chris Steele could not ‘prove it.’ The FBI used the dossier anyway to get the warrant.
The details provided by Durham proved the researched outline we delivered in 2018.
The FBI knew the Steele dossier was junk, yet they used it in lieu of the mandatory ‘Woods File’ to seek an all-inclusive secret search warrant against the Trump campaign. Carter Page was a tool for the fraudulent search warrant, the FBI knew Carter Page from previous work he had done for them as an informant. However, to get the warrant they needed to accuse Page of being an asset of a foreign government – so they did. The Steele Dossier was used as manufactured evidence to support the FISA application.
The FBI goal was to create a legal mechanism putting everyone in/around Donald Trump under surveillance. This was the “insurance policy” as described by FBI agent Peter Strzok.
The FBI had been conducting unlawful political surveillance against Donald Trump throughout the 2016 campaign, the FISA warrant was used as the legal basis to make the previous and future surveillance legal.
The FBI knew the dossier was junk, the FBI didn’t care – they needed it to create a fraudulent search warrant.
The FBI knew Carter Page was not a Russian asset, the FBI didn’t care – they needed him to get to Trump.
The FBI goal was always to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump.
(Via CNN) – Shortly before the 2016 election, the FBI offered retired British spy Christopher Steele “up to $1 million” to prove the explosive allegations in his dossier about Donald Trump, a senior FBI analyst testified Tuesday.
The cash offer was made during an October 2016 meeting between Steele and several top FBI officials who were trying to corroborate Steele’s claims that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to win the election.
FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified that Steele never got the money because he could not “prove the allegations.”
Auten also said Steele refused to provide the names of any of his sources during that meeting, and that Steele didn’t give the FBI anything during that meeting that corroborated the claims in his explosive dossier.
Auten was testifying at the criminal trial of Igor Danchenko, a primary source for Steele’s dossier, who is being prosecuted by special counsel John Durham. Danchenko has pleaded not guilty to lying to the FBI.
CNN previously reported that the FBI reimbursed some expenses for Steele, who had been an FBI informant.
Durham, a Trump-era prosecutor who is looking for misconduct in the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation, has used some of the proceedings Tuesday to criticize the FBI’s handling of some of the early steps in the Russia probe. Durham handled many of the in-court arguments on Tuesday and personally questioned Auten on the witness stand – a rare move for a special counsel and former US attorney. (read more)
Offering $1 million to a source to provide evidence is not a decision made by a supervisory special agent.
The authorization to spend up to $1 million for evidence is a decision made by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI.
October 2016: FBI Director James Comey, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe
Follow the timeline:
Steele offered $1 million to prove the dossier in early October 2016. He cannot.
FBI uses dossier in late October for a FISA warrant against Trump campaign.
Dossier source Igor Danchenko interviewed by FBI in January 2017. Tells FBI dossier is junk.
The FBI then interviews Carter Page five times, March 9, 10, 16, 30 and 31, 2017.
The FBI then hired Danchenko in March 2017, just before renewing the FISA they now know is based on junk.
April 2, 2017, the FBI renew the FISA warrant for the 2nd time.
May 2017 Robert Mueller appointed to cover up all of the DOJ/FBI corruption that existed in the Trump targeting.
June 2017 Robert Mueller interviews Danchenko, then Mueller renews the FISA.
February 2019, Bill Barr enters as Attorney General.
April 2019 Robert Mueller completes investigation.
May 2019, Bill Barr appoints Durham just to look into things. Immediately then begs Trump not to declassify any documents. Trump writes executive order giving Bill Barr ability to review and declassify documents.
October 2020, Bill Barr officially (and quietly), makes John Durham a special counsel. We don’t find out until December (after the Nov. election).
October 2020, FBI drops Igor Danchenko as paid informant.
Put it all together and you see the continuum.
(1) Donald Trump was being targeted by a corrupt DOJ and FBI. (2) Robert Mueller was installed in May 2017 to cover up the targeting. (3) When Mueller is nearing his completion, Bill Barr steps in to mitigate institutional damage from 1 and 2. (4) Barr maintains damage control and installs Durham. (5) Durham takes over the coverup operation from October 2020 (Danchenko safe to exit) through today.
Main Justice kept a bag over Danchenko until they needed a scapegoat, created by Durham, to sell a narrative that Main Justice was duped.
John Durham charged Danchenko (working outside govt) with lying to the FBI while simultaneously avoiding drawing attention to the FBI/DOJ officials (inside govt) who knew Danchenko was lying and were willfully blind to it in order to continue attacking and investigating President Donald Trump.
James Comey, Robert Mueller, Bill Barr, John Durham, the Mar-a-Lago raid… it’s all one long continuum of the same targeting and coverup operation.
Bill Barr was the Bondo application, and John Durham was the spray paint.
FBI Director Kash Patel sends John Solomon a declassified whistleblower report, showing how a prior House Intelligence Committee staffer blew the whistle on then HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff, who was giving the staff instructions to leak fabricated intelligence reports on Trump-Russia to smear President Donald Trump in 2017 and 2018.
According to the release {SEE HERE}, the FBI eventually received and investigated the whistleblower claims; then in 2023, sent the information to the Merrick Garland/Lisa Monaco DOJ, who took no action because the claim was now beyond the statute of limitations.
Read those dates carefully, because what this report from Kash Patel and John Solomon actually outlines is something we have all been very frustrated with.
As Solomon now notes, … “The alleged leaks fall outside the statute of limitations for prosecution on most legal theories, but the revelations nevertheless come at a sensitive time for Schiff“.. At the time of the Whistleblower report, the information to the FBI and DOJ would have been evidence that could have prosecuted Adam Schiff. However, now the information is limited to just providing I-told-you-so’s.
There are a couple of really frustrating aspects to this, and the pattern is transparently obvious.
The FBI and DOJ from 2017 to 2023, under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden’s administration, played the silo game of control of evidence. They did nothing with the evidence until the statute of limitations had tolled, which then provides Main Justice with the justification for doing nothing.
In 2025, understanding the public is insanely frustrated with the lack of accountability, the pretending game is now deployed by the FBI under Kash Patel, through John Solomon, to the broadcast venue of Sean Hannity. At the end of this clickbait circle-jerk is nothing. Again, no accountability, but a bunch of controlled information operatives saying, “Well, let’s see what the DOJ does with this now.”
A pox on all their houses.
There is no doubt in my mind this is a clear example of why the DC system uses special counsels (Mueller, Durham, et al) purposefully to create “ongoing investigations” as capture nets for information/evidence control.
“It’s under investigation, and we don’t speak about ongoing investigations.”
In real time, from 2019 to 2020, I was providing this type of evidence from within the silo system to John Durham and Bill Aldenberg who were designated information managers.
In my naiveté’, as I initially opened these doors, I thought some form of accountability would be possible, because the evidence was direct, irrefutable and without denial. However, once Aldenberg and Durham clearly said they could only act on evidence they ‘discovered’ themselves, and they could not act on evidence provided by “others” because that would make the “evidence political,” I quickly realized this was all going to amount to nothing.
Now, we are looking in hindsight at evidence from inside the system, provided to these investigators by participants inside the system, yet they also did nothing with it at the time it held value.
So, here’s the basic construct of how the DC game is played.
Evidence delivered from outside DC cannot be used by those who are charged with investigating corruption within DC. Evidence delivered from inside DC, goes into the system of “ongoing investigations” (special counsels) until its usefulness is exhausted by the clock-ticking. If the risk of accountability remains, the special counsels are extended until that accountability clock has expired.
Once the accountability clock has expired, if another party comes along (Kash) and releases that evidence (Solomon), the value only exists insofar as it generates clickbait income (Just News), column inches and punditry talking points (Sean Hannity) for the DC proletariat.
The Patel’s, Bondi’s, Solomon’s and Hannity’s then play this game of pretend. Packaging the corruption evidence as accountability hopium and selling it to the addicted battered conservatives.
Insert vote. Pull lever. Get hopium pellet.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Who is continuing to buy this game?
FBI Director Kash Patel sends John Solomon a declassified whistleblower report, showing how a prior House Intelligence Committee staffer blew the whistle on then HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff, who was giving the staff instructions to leak fabricated intelligence reports on Trump-Russia to smear President Donald Trump in 2017 and 2018.
According to the release {SEE HERE}, the FBI eventually received and investigated the whistleblower claims; then in 2023, sent the information to the Merrick Garland/Lisa Monaco DOJ, who took no action because the claim was now beyond the statute of limitations.
Read those dates carefully, because what this report from Kash Patel and John Solomon actually outlines is something we have all been very frustrated with.
As Solomon now notes, … “The alleged leaks fall outside the statute of limitations for prosecution on most legal theories, but the revelations nevertheless come at a sensitive time for Schiff“.. At the time of the Whistleblower report, the information to the FBI and DOJ would have been evidence that could have prosecuted Adam Schiff. However, now the information is limited to just providing I-told-you-so’s.
There are a couple of really frustrating aspects to this, and the pattern is transparently obvious.
The FBI and DOJ from 2017 to 2023, under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden’s administration, played the silo game of control of evidence. They did nothing with the evidence until the statute of limitations had tolled, which then provides Main Justice with the justification for doing nothing.
In 2025, understanding the public is insanely frustrated with the lack of accountability, the pretending game is now deployed by the FBI under Kash Patel, through John Solomon, to the broadcast venue of Sean Hannity. At the end of this clickbait circle-jerk is nothing. Again, no accountability, but a bunch of controlled information operatives saying, “Well, let’s see what the DOJ does with this now.”
A pox on all their houses.
There is no doubt in my mind this is a clear example of why the DC system uses special counsels (Mueller, Durham, et al) purposefully to create “ongoing investigations” as capture nets for information/evidence control.
“It’s under investigation, and we don’t speak about ongoing investigations.”
In real time, from 2019 to 2020, I was providing this type of evidence from within the silo system to John Durham and Bill Aldenberg who were designated information managers.
In my naiveté’, as I initially opened these doors, I thought some form of accountability would be possible, because the evidence was direct, irrefutable and without denial. However, once Aldenberg and Durham clearly said they could only act on evidence they ‘discovered’ themselves, and they could not act on evidence provided by “others” because that would make the “evidence political,” I quickly realized this was all going to amount to nothing.
Now, we are looking in hindsight at evidence from inside the system, provided to these investigators by participants inside the system, yet they also did nothing with it at the time it held value.
So, here’s the basic construct of how the DC game is played.
Evidence delivered from outside DC cannot be used by those who are charged with investigating corruption within DC. Evidence delivered from inside DC, goes into the system of “ongoing investigations” (special counsels) until its usefulness is exhausted by the clock-ticking. If the risk of accountability remains, the special counsels are extended until that accountability clock has expired.
Once the accountability clock has expired, if another party comes along (Kash) and releases that evidence (Solomon), the value only exists insofar as it generates clickbait income (Just News), column inches and punditry talking points (Sean Hannity) for the DC proletariat.
The Patel’s, Bondi’s, Solomon’s and Hannity’s then play this game of pretend. Packaging the corruption evidence as accountability hopium and selling it to the addicted battered conservatives.
Posted originally on CTH on August 10, 2025 | Sundance
Vice President JD Vance appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss current geopolitical events around the Ukraine-Russia conflict and the Israel-Gaza conflict.
In the second segment of the interview (11:00 point), Vice President Vance gives his opinion on the Russiagate documents. Vance notes that he supports indictments as the IC and Clinton campaign violated multiple laws. Vance then discusses the latest information about using tariffs as leverage for America-First policy.
Vance dodges the question about running for President with Marco Rubio in 2028 and notes the leaks about the administration officials meeting for a discussion on Epstein was ‘fake news’. Then, in a remarkable moment, Vance begins to talk about Artificial Intelligence from the perspective of his worrying about “the surveillance state” and the “invasions of privacy” that come with AI. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on August 9, 2025 | Sundance
Insiders within the Intelligence Community (IC), and specifically ongoing operators within the CIA, are targeting Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.
The least understood issue right now, is how isolated and alone Tulsi Gabbard is on her mission to bring sunlight to the Intelligence Community weaponization and corruption.
…”There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things”…
The IC uses various media leaks and narrative engineers as the tools against their enemy; in this case DNI Tulsi Gabbard.
The most common arrow in their manipulative quiver is the term “sources and methods.” The Washington Post notes how the Intelligence Community is upset about DNI Tulsi Gabbard compromising their ‘sources and methods’ by releasing the House Intelligence Report that deconstructed the Russiagate Intelligence Community Assessment.
What has them so upset is Tulsi’s release of the House Intel report. This is the report that drove the FBI to raid Mar-a-Lago in an effort to retrieve it from Trump. This is the report that outlines how the CIA fabricated the Russiagate claims. Tulsi is being targeted for releasing this specific report. That tells you how important it is to the CIA.
WASHINGTON DC – […] The document that Gabbard ordered released on July 23 is a 46-page report stemming from a review begun in 2017 by majority Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee. It takes issue with U.S. intelligence agencies’ finding earlier that year that Russian President Vladimir Putin developed a preference for Trump over Democrat Hillary Clinton and aspired to help him win the election.
[…] The House report is the most sensitive document the Trump administration has yet released, and details of how its publication occurred have not been previously reported.
[…] The document contains multiple references to CIA human sources reporting on Putin’s plans. Such sources are among the agency’s most closely guarded secrets. After the report was completed in 2020, it was considered so sensitive that it remained in storage at the CIA rather than on Capitol Hill.
[…] as the Trump administration prepared to release the report publicly, there were multiple versions of it circulating, some with more redactions to protect sensitive information, current and former U.S. officials said. Gabbard, who has led the administration’s effort to relitigate the 2016 campaign, pushed to release as much as possible, they said.
“CIA put forward their proposed redactions and edits to the document,” said a person familiar with the process. Gabbard “has greater declassification authority than all other intelligence elements and is not required to get their approval prior to release.”
Trump then approved the publication of the version from Gabbard’s office “with minimal redactions and no edits,” this person said.
[…] It is unclear exactly how Trump gave his approval, or if he examined the competing versions of the House report beforehand. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. (READ MORE)
The HPSCI report release is what is driving the CIA bananas.
Despite efforts by Donald Trump to declassify the HPSCI report before leaving office, the CIA never released it. No one except the internal Intelligence Community (CIA/DNI) had seen the HPSCI report until Tulsi Gabbard released it on July 22nd. This is a key point, because the HPSCI report touches on all of the other declassified evidence recently released.
The authors of the HPSCI report had reviewed all of the same information John Durham reviewed. The HPSCI report walks through the entire construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment ordered by President Obama on December 6, 2016.
Arguably, because of the underlying evidence reviewed to produce it, the HPSCI report is the most critical of the declassified release in the last few months. The HPSCI report walks through the timeline, as the ICA was created between early to late December 2016.
Do NOT forget. Tulsi Gabbard is essentially all alone on this mission of sunlight.
Tulsi’s isolation is the one issue people do not quite seem to understand.
Pam Bondi (AG) isn’t with her. Director Kash Patel (FBI) and Director John Ratcliffe (CIA) are not with her. Susie Wiles (CoS) is not with her. In all of these efforts DNI Tulsi Gabbard is all alone.
The Israel-First media and activist group is also aligned against her.
If you doubt that’s the scenario, show me a single voice from inside the administration who stood up to (even gently) defend her when Tulsi was attacked about her position on the Iran nuclear capabilities.
Tulsi is all alone. She is all alone on this mission and even physically all alone when on task within the administration. Watch for it and you can clearly see it. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it.
This is not about President Trump per se’. The Office of the President is not a significant participant at the moment, and those who control power within the Oval Office keep Tulsi isolated and away from the President. However, if DNI Tulsi Gabbard turns against Palantir, she will be removed. Full stop.
We saw those Palantir boundary rails surface when DNI Gabbard was not fully behind the bombing of Iran.
People argue against the power of the ODNI, saying the office is a functionary only. These are historically old arguments by people who do not fully understand the nature of the silo system.
Yes, this is the typical viewpoint; however, readers on these pages will note that I have said repeatedly for years now, the DNI position can be used for powerfully good purposes.
The DNI can look at anything in Washington DC. Anything, inside any silo.
As noted by the angered WaPo, “Gabbard has greater declassification authority than all other intelligence elements and is not required to get their approval prior to release.”
The DNI can look at anything in any silo and put sunlight upon it. Yet, people claim the DNI has no power. lol
Posted originally on CTH on August 8, 2025 | Sundance
I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is the second outline.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.
On March 2, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from all issues around Trump-Russia.
On March 16, 2017, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes held a press conference to share stunning information he just reviewed at the White House Secure Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF). Nunes reviewed an Obama-era Presidential Daily Brief (PDB).
We do not know the date on the PDB; however, we do know the reason for Nunes’ shock. Within the PDB, Devin Nunes read clear evidence the Obama administration was conducting an investigation against Donald Trump. Prior to this March 16 date, the FBI/DOJ were denying President Trump was the target of an investigation.
Four days later, on March 20, 2017, James Comey made the first public admission that President Trump was under FBI investigation. However, it is the activity between March 16th and March 20th that provided the biggest storyline about criminal conduct within the Russiagate operation.
March 2017 was the key month when Russiagate political operatives were trying to get a special counsel appointed to control the investigation of Trump. Media reports were full of leaks, rumors and accusations of Trump-Russia. Following Nunes presser, on March 16th, the effort went into overdrive.
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice-Chairman Mark Warner had requested to see the rumored FISA application against an unknown Trump campaign official. On March 17th, one day after the Nunes press conference, the Carter Page FISA application was delivered by Washington Field Office Supervisory Special Agent, Brian Dugan, to the Senate basement SCIF for Senator Warner to read and return.
The Carter Page FISA application was received by SSCI Security Director James Wolfe on March 17th and prepared for Vice-Chairman Warner to review.
To gain momentum for the objective of a special counsel, Senator Warner instructed Senate Security Director James Wolfe to leak the 82-page FISA application. Wolfe took 82 pictures of the “Read and Return” document.
Later that evening, Wolfe sent the 82 images to journalist Ali Watkins using an encrypted messaging app. Ms. Watkins then shared the FISA content with her peers and used the information to leverage a top-tier job at the New York Times.
From the perspective of FBI Director James Comey, his previously denied investigation of Trump was now in the media. Three days later, March 20, 2017, FBI Director James Comey publicly admitted the Trump-Russia investigation for the first time.
The media were off to the races talking about FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign and using the leaked FISA as evidence of the ongoing investigation, later known as Crossfire Hurricane.
At the time of the Mark Warner/James Wolfe leak, no one outside the DOJ-FBI and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) had ever seen a FISA application. Heck, in 2017 through early 2018, it was considered a classified intelligence breech to even discuss the FISA process, the procedures or the court itself. People forget that.
The 2017 leaking of the FISA application was the biggest national security breach in years, perhaps seconded only to the 2017 leaking of the TSCI transcript from National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s call with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, given to the Washington Post by the FBI a month earlier.
The Wolfe indictment [SEE HERE] describes FBI investigators informing Mr. Wolfe in October of 2017 about their investigation of national security leaks. In December of 2017, Mr. Wolfe was confronted with evidence of his leaking to journalists including a woman then working for the New York Times named Ali Watkins, with whom he was having a sexual relationship – implied as a possible quid-pro-quo.
Wolfe left the SSCI quietly in mid-December 2017 and resigned shortly thereafter. No one, outside of the principal characters involved, knew about the investigation until six months later, June 2018, when the indictment is made public.
WASHINGTON—Members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have been notified they may be asked for testimony as part of the criminal trial of a veteran Senate staffer accused of lying to the FBI while working for the panel.
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.
If senators declined to appear voluntarily for either a deposition or at trial, they could be subpoenaed. That action that could spark a legal battle over a constitutional provision that gives lawmakers certain immunity and privilege for actions undertaken as part of their official duties, as well as over how much national security information can be disclosed in open court. (read more)
Following the threat by Wolfe’s lawyers, the U.S. Attorney in DC, Jessie Liu, dropped the charges of leaking the FISA. However, during the sentencing phase of the plea agreement, the FBI filed an attachment to the DOJ sentencing request and they forever noted Wolfe specifically leaked the FISA.
Senator Mark Warner directed Senate Security Director James Wolfe to leak the Carter Page FISA warrant to media source Ali Watkins on March 17, 2017.
The FBI caught Wolfe, in part by using Mark Warner’s text messages as intercepted.
Who did the FBI then tell about the security compromise?
The Chair and Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Who was the Vice Chair?
Mark Warner.
See the problem?
There is no doubt it was the FISA application that James Wolfe leaked.
Who was asking for leniency for James Wolfe?
Judge Ketanji Brown-Jackson presided over the Wolfe case. Yes, the same Ketanji Brown-Jackson who was installed on the Supreme Court via a lengthy operation during the Biden administration {GO DEEP}.
There is no statute of limitations against leaking Top Secret Compartmented Intelligence.
Immunize James Wolfe. Immunize Ali Watkins. Question FBI Supervisory Special Agent Brian Dugan as a witness. Question former USAO Jessie Liu as a witness. Question former SSCI Chairman Richard Burr.
Target SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner
This one also nets the Robert Mueller special counsel because ultimately FBI SSA Dugan had to run the evidence through the Russiagate stakeholders, and that’s how the Mark Warner text messages were made public.
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 