Tag Archives: Lawfare

Nov 25 2025

Federal Judge Dismisses Cases Against James Comey and Letitia James


Posted originally on CTH on November 24, 2025 | Sundance 

U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie has dismissed the cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, under the grounds that U.S Attorney Lindsey Halligan was illegally appointed to the role of prosecutor when she secured the grand jury indictments. [SEE RULING HERE]

James Comey was charged with lying to and obstructing Congress, relating to his 2020 Senate testimony about the FBI’s investigation into President Trump and Russia. Letitia James was charged with bank fraud and making false statements.

WASHINGTON – […] U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie concluded that Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia violated laws that limit the ability of the Justice Department to install top prosecutors without Senate confirmation.

“Ms. Halligan has been unlawfully serving in that role since September 22, 2025,” Currie concluded in opinions simultaneously filed Monday in both cases. “All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment … constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside.”

However, Currie dismissed the cases “without prejudice.” That could allow prosecutors to attempt to obtain new grand jury indictments in each case. But Comey’s attorneys have already indicated that they will argue that he cannot be re-indicted because the statute of limitations in his case expired on Sept. 30. And Currie agreed that the deadline had passed without a valid indictment. (more)

Nov 22 2025

The Truth Has No Agenda – But, Perhaps It Started Out Like This…


Posted originally on CTH on November 21, 2025 | Sundance | 


You’ve seen me share this visible meme a few times; it always comes along when the predictable sunlight seems looming on the near horizon.  Something again to surface that will cause us to question our preconceptions.

Perhaps it started out like this…  This information, this description of events, situations, explanations of the background cannot be as described; yet, these Sundance citations make it difficult to refute, unnerving to dismiss; but it’s all just a little too disconcerting; but we’ll watch and see, making a mental note.

As time progresses, it is just like this; it is factually as presented. This journey toward the truth of the thing is messy, awkward, weird at times and quite strange to participate in.

Your friends and/or family end up in the same place you were.  As you share the information context, they too, just like you before, initially want to dismiss the truth of the thing – because to accept it breaks away from the comfortable places of prior context.  Like you, they too start to notice things.  They too pay attention.

The next time you converse, the prior dismissals are not as strong as before.  The awakening has enlarged as an outcome of rather unusual predictions, and the outcomes, uncomfortably, also seem to reconcile when the context you provide is considered.

The, “but it can’t be” response, is replaced with “how did you know?”  The awakening expands.

Perhaps for you, like me, like most of us, the seemingly uncomfortable place where information is absorbed with totally new contexts for understanding comes best in small digestible doses.  If so, that’s the healthy way.  I believe it is the best way to retain stability amid an increasingly unstable world.

At the end of most revelations of significant impact, there are people with motives and intentions that boil down to two priorities: influence and affluence.  Those who seek power value influence.  Those who seek personal financial gain value affluence.   These are the priorities we find at the heart of most control efforts.

The need for control is always a reaction to fear.

One of the most significant challenges when confronting corruption, is the need to initially ignore motives and stay focused on the demonstrable and proven citations that cannot be refuted.  Stable people are able to absorb consequential information and remain focused; the motives or understanding the ‘why’ factor is not as important as the reality of accepting the outcome.

Inside the institutions that make up Washington DC the psychology is fundamentally different from the rest of our nation.  The oft used phrases of “govt work”, when compared to the “private sector”, are more than just catch phrases.

Those who value equality in opportunity do not work long within the institutions of government.  Those who value equality in outcome make careers there.  When we send competent people to change the baseline for these institutions, the level of resistance is remarkable.

For career officials who operate within the institutions of DC government the introduction of competency, and/or the concept of accountability for corrupt activity, is against their interests.  This is not new for us to understand, but one facet of this dynamic must be emphasized. In almost every example, the mechanisms and standard operating procedure within the institution is corrupt; it’s not just a few people.

The fact of there being no apple only worms is problematic for a host of reasons.  However, when that DC reality applies to the justice system or the intelligence apparatus, the ramifications are exponentially worse.  It is those ramifications we are watching play out on almost every level daily.

I am often asked about “solutions” to these problems, and I often respond with an explanation that first the correct, factually accurate and proper context has to be accepted in order for any proposed solution to make sense.  The reason for this approach is that treatment for a symptom will not remedy the affliction if the root cause is not addressed.

In a real and contextual example, we ended up with Bill Barr as the Bondo and John Durham as the spray paint, but the rusted vehicle was never restored.  President Trump was lied to, manipulated into believing something akin to restoration was being done; but all of the conduct was purposefully negligent, willfully cunning and fraught with deception.

Attorney General Pam Bondi is Bill Barr all over again.

As Florida Attorney General, Pam Bondi conspired with racially motivated political activists to put a transparently innocent man into prison. A witness (specifically witness #8, Rachael Jeantel) was fabricated, quite literally fabricated.

Pam Bondi had specific and intentional awareness that witness #8 was fabricated, and she used the power of her office to influence pre-trial decisions, blocking the defense from questioning the two lawyers (Ben Crump and Daryl Parks) who manufactured the witness.

“Fearful of backlash from the Left, the state attorneys allowed the charade to proceed. For months, they did their best to hide Jeantel not only from the public but also from Zimmerman’s attorneys. Sensing something amiss, the defense attorneys asked to depose Crump. After a judge ruled against them, they appealed. In April 2013, Bondi put her thumb on the scale of justice and left fingerprints. She wrote a 41-page document arguing against the defense team’s request. Their request was denied.”

It’s not just what she did that predictably highlighted what type of U.S. Attorney General she would be, it’s bigger than that.

What type of moral character intentionally tries to help a friend (Ben Crump) by railroading an innocent man and taking away his freedom, all for political benefit? What type of moral character even has a person like Benjamin Crump as a friend?

Eventually you have to ask, what evil is behind eyes that would purposefully put an innocent man in prison, just to elevate their profile?

I asked that series of questions a year ago.

Those questions are not going to go away.

Attorney General Pam Bondi is not failing President Trump because she is incompetent.

AG Pam Bondi is not failing because she was always unqualified for the position.

Attorney General Pam Bondi is failing to hold corruption accountable because she intends to fail.

♦ Predicting Bondi Failure – HERE.

♦ Jack Cashill Notices the Same – HERE

♦ Rod Rosenstein’s Deputy Becomes Bondi Handler – HERE

♦ Susie Wiles and Pam Bondi Have the Same Intents – HERE

Nov 22 2025

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller Discusses the Consequences of Sedition


Posted originally on CTH on November 21, 2025 | Sundance 

Senator Elissa Slotkin (Mich), a former CIA analyst who worked in the State Department and Pentagon during the Obama administration, organized a viral video with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado.

The six congressional representatives directed their coordinated communication to members of the military and intelligence community. “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders … you must refuse illegal orders,” they asserted.

However, when questioned about what “illegal orders” President Trump has created, the six members are suddenly very quiet.  White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller responds:

.

Ultimately, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi could easily assign an FBI agent and U.S attorney to question the six members about the “illegal orders” they are telling the military and intelligence community to defy.

If Slotkin, Kelly and the rest cannot present evidence of an illegal order they are referring to, that would be a qualification that should presumably invoke a First Amendment defense claim, then charge them with simple sedition as defined in statute.

Nov 20 2025

Senate Passes Epstein “Shiny Thing” Bill, Sends It to President Trump’s Desk


Posted originally on CTH on November 19, 2025 | Sundance

The House version of the Thomas Massie ‘pay attention to me bill’ telling the DOJ to release the information about Jeffrey Epstein, unless it contains material related to national security of investigations, has now passed the Senate by unanimous consent and will now head to President Trump’s desk for his signature.

Trump will sign it, the Epstein ‘shiny thing’ law will go into effect, and the politicians will continue arguing about it and trying to attack the White House because they put the perpetual argument component into THE BILL:

[SOURCE pdf]

The bill is only six pages. I suggest you read it.

As you can see from the highlighted qualifiers above, those of you who enjoy the bread and circus distractions provided by the DC UniParty apparatus, will have at least another year to follow this story.  Have fun with it.

Meanwhile, Congress cannot find time to codify any executive orders that might save taxpayer money, secure the border, protect elections, tighten up immigration laws or expel criminal aliens….

…. But thanks to Ron DeSantis’s biggest supporter, Thomas Massie, you’ll always have Epstein.

Nov 18 2025

Magistrate Judge Positions Case Against James Comey for Almost Certain Dismissal


Posted originally on CTH on November 17, 2025 | Sundance

At this point, anyone who is left thinking James Comey will stand trial in DC is just pretending for their own agenda.  Unfortunately, the dismissal of the case against him is a foregone conclusion.

The DOJ Lawfare embeds purposefully dragged their heels toward the statute of limitations, AG Pam Bondi didn’t respond fast enough to the institutional stonewalling, and that set up Lindsey Halligan for an almost impossible task.

[SOURCE]

Former FBI Director James Comey was leaking information to the media through his friend and FBI Special Government Employee Daniel Richman. When Comey was fired in May 2017, he knew what his risks were. Comey hired Daniel Richman as his personal lawyer and legal counsel. Comey knew this would make targeting him for leaking to media more difficult.

Last month U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, the Biden appointee overseeing the criminal case against Comey, assigned magistrate judge William Fitzpatrick to review the issues surrounding potential violations of attorney-client privilege within the indictment.

Today Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick sides with the Comey defense and blasts the prosecution for violating attorney-client privilege. [SEE RULING HERE] In addition, Judge Fitzpatrick instructs the prosecution, Lindsey Halligan, to give the defense team all of the evidence used in the grand jury indictment.

Fitzpatrick is setting the stage to dismiss the charges. There’s zero doubt about it when you read the 24-page order.

It’s enough to make you blow a blood pressure cuff when you see a judge upholding the Fourth Amendment argument on James Comey’s behalf, considering the blatant Fourth Amendment violations that Comey conspired to violate within his fraudulent investigations of Carter Page and President Trump.

Seriously though, don’t waste any hopium on this case, and expect the judge to require the government to pay all of Comey’s legal fees.

We read enough of this stuff to see a Lawfare set up when it is visible.  The Lawfare crew has this case easily won. Judge Fitzpatrick gives the defense eleven points of process with which to file a motion to dismiss.

[COURT ORDER] – First, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the Richman Warrants were executed in a manner consistent with the Fourth Amendment and the orders of the issuing court.

Second, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government exceeded the scope of the Richman Warrants in 2019 and 2020 by seizing and preserving information that was beyond the scope of the warrants, that is, information that did not constitute evidence of violations of either 18 U.S.C. § 641 or § 793.

Third, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government had the lawful authority to search the Richman materials anew in 2025.

Fourth, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government’s 2025 seizure of the Richman materials included information beyond the scope of the original warrants.

Fifth, the nature and circumstances surrounding the government’s potential violations of the Fourth Amendment and court orders establish a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law.

Sixth, the facts provide a reasonable basis for the defense to show that they were prejudiced by the government’s use of the Richman materials in the grand jury, particularly if the government’s conduct was willful or reckless, given the centrality of these materials to the government’s presentation.

Seventh, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government took sufficient steps to avoid the collection and review of privileged materials, including the reasons why Mr. Comey was never afforded the opportunity to assert a privilege over his communications until after the indictment was obtained.

Eighth, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether privileged information was used, directly or indirectly, by the government to prepare and present its grand jury presentation. This is particularly troublesome because the government’s sole witness before the grand jury was exposed to a “limited overview” of privileged material shortly before he testified.

Ninth, the nature and circumstances surrounding the disclosure of potentially privileged information establish a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law. This is particularly significant because Agent-3, after having been exposed to potentially privileged information, chose to testify before the grand jury rather than separate himself from the investigation to contain any further exposure to privileged information and limit any prejudice to Mr. Comey.

Tenth, as discussed in Section IV above the prosecutor made statements to the grand jurors that could reasonably form the basis for the defense to challenge whether the grand jury proceedings were infected with constitutional error.

Eleventh, the grand jury transcript and recording likely do not reflect the full proceedings because, although it is clear that a second indictment was prepared and presented to the grand jury (ECF 3), the transcript and audio recording of the proceedings do not reflect any further communications after the grand jury began deliberating on the first indictment.

Collectively, the facts set forth herein and the particularized findings of the Court establish that “ground[s] may exist to dismiss the indictment because of a matter that occurred before the grand jury[.]” Rule 6(e)(3)(E)(ii). [more]

There are two tiers of justice.  The legal system is as rigged as the intelligence system.

It’s not Halligan’s fault; she tried.

Nov 14 2025

BBC Apologizes to President Trump for Second Time – States They Don’t See “Defamation Claim”


Posted originally on CTH on November 13, 2025 | Sundance

The BBC is apologizing again to President Trump after lawyers representing his interests sent a letter threatening legal action on his behalf.

The legal threats are about a spliced edit of Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, that appeared in the network’s program “Trump: A Second Chance?” In the edited clip, the president is framed to say “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you, and we fight. We fight like hell.”

However, in reality, those phrases were delivered almost an hour apart, and the footage omitted the part where President Trump tells supporters “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” The BBC responded to the first public criticism by stating:

BBC – “This programme was reviewed after criticism of how President Donald Trump’s 6th January 2021 speech was edited.

During that sequence, we showed excerpts taken from different parts of the speech. However, we accept that our edit unintentionally created the impression that we were showing a single continuous section of the speech, rather than excerpts from different points in the speech, and that this gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.

The BBC would like to apologise to President Trump for that error of judgement. This programme was not scheduled to be re-broadcast and will not be broadcast again in this form on any BBC platforms.” [SOURCE]

The BBC Media Center then posted a public notification following the letter received from President Trump’s legal team.

BBC – “Lawyers for the BBC have written to President Trump’s legal team in response to a letter received on Sunday.

“BBC Chair Samir Shah has separately sent a personal letter to the White House making clear to President Trump that he and the Corporation are sorry for the edit of the President’s speech on 6 January 2021, which featured in the programme.

“The BBC has no plans to rebroadcast the documentary ‘Trump: A Second Chance?’ on any BBC platforms.

“While the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited, we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim.” (read more)

Nov 14 2025

Emails Between Kathryn Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein Resurface – Highlighting Again, Zero Epstein Dirt on Trump


Posted originally on CTH on November 13, 2025 | Sundance 

In an effort to further create friction and division amid the base of support for President Trump, emails previously released to congress are resurfacing – including emails between Kathryn Ruemmler, Obama’s former White House Counsel, and Jeffrey Epstein.  The UniParty players are pushing this narrative hard.

However, in fact, this is an old story going back to 2023 when the connections between then CIA Director William Burns, Kathryn Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein were previously released to the public {SEE HERE}. However, amid the new effort to stir up friction, the Ruemmler-Epstein emails are being talked about again.  Example Below:

As noted before by the Wall Street Journal, “Kathryn Ruemmler, a White House counsel under President Barack Obama, had dozens of meetings with Epstein in the years after her White House service and before she became a top lawyer at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. He also planned for her to join a 2015 trip to Paris and a 2017 visit to Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean.”

The email above is from August 2018, approximately six months after Ruemmler, who represented former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, lied to Senate Judiciary Committee about Rice’s knowledge of the FBI opening an investigation of President Trump in 2016.

Wall Street Journal 2023 – […] The documents show that Epstein appeared to know some of his guests well. He asked for avocado sushi rolls to be on hand when meeting with Ms. Ruemmler, according to the documents. He visited apartments she was considering buying. In October 2014, Epstein knew her travel plans and told an assistant to look into her flight. “See if there is a first-class seat,” he wrote, “if so upgrade her.”

[…] Epstein and his staff discussed whether Ms. Ruemmler, now 52, would be uncomfortable with the presence of young women who worked as assistants and staffers at the townhouse, the documents show. Women emailed Epstein on two occasions to ask if they should avoid the home while Ms. Ruemmler was there. Epstein told one of the women he didn’t want her around, and another that it wasn’t a problem, the documents show.

Ms. Ruemmler didn’t see anything that would lead her to be concerned at the townhouse and didn’t express any concern, the Goldman spokesman said.

[…] Over the next few years, Ms. Ruemmler, then a partner specializing in white-collar defense at Latham & Watkins, had more than three dozen appointments with Epstein, including for lunches and dinners.

“In the normal course, Epstein also invited her to meetings and social gatherings, introduced her to other business contacts and made referrals,” the Goldman spokesman said. “It was the same kinds of contacts and engagements she had with other contacts and clients.” (source)

Beyond the friendly contact visible in the emails and dates of the Ruemmler-Epstein friendship, years before Donald Trump entered politics, is a transparently obvious issue the mainstream media intentionally omit.

If Epstein had any dirt on President Trump, Kathryn Ruemmler would be the primary person who would use that information against Donald Trump politically, especially because of Ruemmler’s relationship with President Obama and Susan Rice.  If there was anything against Trump in the Epstein mess, it would have been deployed to the benefit of Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Instead, Ruemmler took up a defensive position to cover up the trail of unlawful activity within the 2016 Spygate and Russiagate operations.  Ruemmler was Susan Rice’s personal lawyer at a key moment in the coverup operation.

Former FBI Director James Comey admitted to Congress, on March 20, 2017, that the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for over a year without informing the Gang of Eight.

Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become. In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight…. and Congress just brushed it off.

Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact, he said exactly the opposite.  He said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC).

The very direct and specific implication, the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor, and Comey could only “inform” the NSC through Susan Rice.

That Comey testimony is why Susan Rice’s attorney, then Katheryn Ruemmler, could never allow Rice to appear before a congressional inquiry.

Ruemmler lied!

Look at that highlighted box from Susan Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, and remember in his March 20, 2017, testimony Comey said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC).

FBI Director James Comey was protecting himself against fallout from the spygate surveillance of Trump, by leveraging his prior notification to the White House.  Comey was signaling, ‘You can’t get me for spying on Trump without getting Susan Rice and Barack Obama’, who knew about it.

Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?

The bottom line in this Epstein nonsense is that Kathryn Ruemmler had a long relationship with Jeffrey Epstein after his arrest for child sexploitation, and before the 2016 election, before the Trump targeting began and long before Spygate/Russiagate made headlines.

If Epstein had dirt on Trump, Ruemmler would have used it.

Nov 13 2025

Representative Austin Scott (GA) Blasts Senate Republicans for Paying Themselves Millions in Retroactive Penalties Within Hidden Clause in CR Bill


Posted originally on CTH on November 12, 2025 | Sundance 

Buried on page 217 of the Senate Continuing Resolution Bill [TEXT HERE], Republican Senators have inserted legislation to “retroactively” pay themselves $500,000 each for every line of communication, telephone record, email or other electronic communication, subpoenaed by the Jack Smith Special Counsel during the Arctic Frost investigation.

The payment is a penalty for retroactive subpoenas going back to January 1, 2022. The payment is at least $500,000 per phone line or email account. That means each Republican Senator is going to make millions from the subpoenas that Jack Smith previously used.

House Representative Austin Scott is not happy the Republican Senators slipped this into the bill. WATCH:

The Bill Text is Available Here – Starting on Page 217

[SOURCE pdf]

Nov 11 2025

Lawfare Embeds Quit DOJ Jobs as 30 Subpoenas Sent in FL-Based “Russiagate Conspiracy” Investigation


Posted originally on CTH on November 10, 2025 | Sundance

The story stems from MSNBC, but makes sense because Lawfare operatives are everywhere in the USAO’s offices around the country.  In South Florida the junior lawyers are quitting working for USAO Jason Reding Quiñones because the investigation itself is against their allies.

U.S Attorney Jason Quinones is reportedly putting together a larger Russiagate conspiracy investigation/case and has recently sent 30 grand jury subpoenas to the various Russiagate participants. Two junior attorneys within the office have refused to participate in the investigation.

(MSNBC) – The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida called a division-wide meeting on Monday afternoon, following the resignations of two prosecutors who were asked to take part in a vast “conspiracy” investigation into former intelligence and law enforcement officials, according to a source familiar with internal concerns among career prosecutors.

Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones called the impromptu meeting of the largest section in the criminal division — major crimes — a unit that includes two to three dozen career prosecutors. The source said it is unusual for an office’s top prosecutor to convene such a gathering.

“Everyone is on pins and needles,” the source told MSNBC, referring to prosecutors who fear being asked by the U.S. Attorney Reding Quiñones, or his leadership team, to work on a case that President Donald Trump has said should lead to the arrests of an expansive list of individuals, including former President Barack Obama and former CIA Director John Brennan.

The Justice Department approved at least 30 subpoenas on Friday, including for Brennan and former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

The official who signed at least some of the subpoenas is Executive Assistant United States Attorney Manolo Reboso, a source familiar with a number of the subpoenas issued so far told MSNBC. (read more)

It’s good that they quit.

That’s two less Lawfare suicide vests that can detonate inside the effort of the investigation.

Nov 10 2025

Sunday Talks: Devin Nunes Discusses Trump Media Company Targeted During “Arctic Frost” Operation


Posted originally on CTH on November 9, 2025 | Sundance 

CEO of Truth Social Devin Nunes appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss how the Trump Media Group was targeted by the Jack Smith operation and FBI Operation Arctic Frost.  In combination with the Arctic Frost targeting, JPMorgan Chase debanked the Trump Media Group (Truth Social) after receiving a subpoena from Jack Smith.

Devin Nunes is demanding answers into the collaboration between JPMorgan and the FBI specifically to target Truth Social at the time the larger tech industry was deplatforming, cancelling and targeting anyone -including us- who represented a counter information network to the 2020 election outcome.  This was part of a larger coordinated effort.

Nunes then follows up with a discussion of how former FBI Director James Comey specifically targeted Donald Trump in the 2016 election by aligning the FBI interests with the objectives of the Hillary Clinton campaign.  Additionally, Nunes and Bartiromo then extend the discussion to how the CIA led by John Brennan and the DNI led by James Clapper joined in collaboration with the FBI and Clinton campaign.  WATCH:

Thankfully, people in Washington DC are finally starting to realize the full scale of the Obama surveillance system. All of the evidence and datapoints -released and yet to surface- flow in one direction. Even the professionally reluctant are starting to admit.

What Obama, Biden, Comey, Crossfire Hurricane, Robert Mueller, Arctic Frost and Jack Smith were doing, was using their offices -and govt systems- to watch their opposition, spy on them, then take action based on the results.

From the perspective of Obama, Comey and Brennan, expanding Hillary Clinton’s Trump-Russia collusion narrative was the key element to hide the activity of the administration prior to the November 2016 election.  That’s the motive for the FBI and CIA to collaborate on the agenda after the shocking outcome of the 2016 election result; but pay close attention to the activity of the primary “at risk” official, James Comey.

From a risk management perspective, initially the surveillance and spying operation was a low-risk endeavor.  Obama held power and was going to hand off operations to Hillary. The Clinton administration would retain the officials who were doing the surveillance/spying, and no one would ever know.

Donald Trump was not expected to win the election.  When he did, all of the participants were suddenly at risk. President Obama and every member of his cabinet involved in the spying operations, then used Clinton’s “Russiagate” smear to cover up Obama’s “Spygate” activity.

The IRS was used to identify targets 2010 through 2012, until discovered in April ’12. Suddenly, President Obama has a problem. President Obama then sends his Chief of Staff, Jack Lew, to run the IRS and block discoveries around the IRS weaponization.

♦ From 2012 through April 2016, the Obama administration was spying on their political opposition using the FBI to conduct surveillance through their access to the NSA database.

♦ In April 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted by the NSA compliance officer who noted the uptick in database access activity by the FBI searching the Republican primary candidate field.

♦ Post April 2016, the Obama administration had a problem. Enter FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane,” July 2016, in an effort to remove the political risk.

♦ October 2016, the FBI rushes a FISA application through the FISC, circumventing the missing ‘Woods File’, with the Chris Steele dossier as evidence.

♦ October 2016, NSA Director Rogers sends the first official notification of the FBI using the NSA database to the oversight body, the FISA Court.

♦ December 2016, worried about Trump now discovering the NSA database spying, the Obama administration wraps the Clinton smear into official policy, blaming the Russians and validating Crossfire Hurricane. That’s where the Intelligence Community Assessment becomes critical.

♦ May 2017, needing to extend the coverup of the FBI activity, special counsel Robert Mueller then takes over Crossfire Hurricane. All FBI evidence and personnel transfers to Mueller.

♦ April 2019, Robert Mueller operation wraps up, prior activity coverup shifts to Impeachment process.

♦ July 2019, John Durham kicks in extending DOJ/FBI control through 2020 election.

♦ Fall 2020, mail-in ballots triggered to facilitate 2020 election outcome.

♦ January 2021, FBI triggers unofficial Operation Arctic Frost, targeting Trump supporters and 2020 election researchers. FBI again using NSA database search queries to identify targeting.

♦ March 2021, unofficial FBI Arctic Frost results fed to J6 Committee and DHS. TSA trigger “Quiet Skies” targeting via results from Arctic Frost.

♦ August 2022, FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago to retrieve any evidence Donald Trump might have of FBI spying and surveillance activity.

♦ September 2023, Jack Smith targets congressional members who had contact with President Trump.

It’s one long continuum of coverup activity within Main Justice and the FBI, supported by all other various agencies who operate in support.

What are they covering up? The 2012 through 2016 political spying operation within the Obama administration, as carried out by the same Main Justice and FBI operations.