Tag Archives: Lawfare

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.

Nov 10 2025

White House NEC Director Kevin Hassett Discusses Government Shutdown – Democrats Baiting Trump to Violate the Law – Video and Transcript


Posted originally on CTH on November 9, 2025 | Sundance

White House Economic Council Director, Kevin Hassett, is a straight shooter; he calls things as they are, not as many would pretend them to be.

On the issue of court orders demanding various cabinet secretaries spend money to fund the government, Director Hassett correctly reframes the issue around the law of federal spending that says money not appropriated for that expenditure cannot be spent. The Supreme Court will strike down, as they already have, any order not grounded in the law around government spending.

Hassett correctly warns that any cabinet agency who attempts to comply with a district or circuit court order, is running the risk of having a lawsuit filed against them for spending non-appropriated funds. This could be part of the reason why Democrats are purposefully not reopening government, to force the Trump administration into a catch-22 legally where they are going to violate the law either way.

Margaret Brennan stands jaw agape at the Machiavellian approach that Director Hassett outlines, “surely they would never do that” she proclaims. In response Hassett reminds Brennan that such Lawfare strategies are indeed part of the larger stop Trump movement. Video and Transcript Below.

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We begin this morning with the Director of the White House National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett. This is now the longest shutdown in American history. The treasury secretary told us two weeks ago November 15 was the hard stop for any paychecks going to US troops. Does that remain the point of exhaustion?

KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: Right, I think that- that’s about the right number. And the problem is that under the law, we’re not allowed to spend money that hasn’t been appropriated. And there is a law, the Antideficiency Act, that says that if a government official spends money that isn’t appropriated by Congress, which will only happen if the Democrats vote to open up the government, then you could even have criminal penalties. And so people are very carefully studying the law and trying to get as much money out the door as is legal. And we’re very glad that we found a way to get a lot of the SNAP money out, but it’s really pushing the boundaries of the law, which is why the Supreme Court had to take that ruling from Rhode Island and put it on hold.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Until the lower court rules–

HASSETT: Until the lower court goes back and comes up with a legal justification for what they said, because there probably isn’t one, sadly, which is why we have to get this government open. I mean, the fact is Goldman Sachs, they have a top economic team, and they’re estimating that we’ve already knocked about 1.5% off of GDP. I think that number is probably low if we keep going even a couple more weeks, because there’s going to be a massive amount of air disruption, especially around the holidays. And one of these things every now and then when we’re talking economics, you and I, we talk about seasonal adjustments and things like that. But the fact is that Thanksgiving, that Thanksgiving time, is one of the hottest times of the year for the economy. It’s Black Friday, you know, and all that kind of stuff. And if people aren’t traveling at that moment, then we really could be looking at a negative quarter for the fourth quarter.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Which is significantly disruptive to the president’s agenda. But to the point you were just making about food stamps, and we saw this Friday, a temporary stay by the Supreme Court that would block full food stamp benefits pending the lower court decision. The administration’s argument, as you just referenced there, was that it would be illegal to move around funding and to tap the Section 32 account at the USDA. But why not do this as a short term patchwork solution? Because you have found ways with the military pay to stretch things out. Why prioritize in that case and not do so with food?

HASSETT: Well, the president’s job, and all of our jobs, is to uphold the law. And when- I’m not a lawyer, but when the lawyers tell us–

[CROSSTALK STARTS]

MARGARET BRENNAN: But are–

HASSETT: what we can do–

MARGARET BRENNAN: — that wasn’t done with the military.

HASSETT: But, but, but yeah, I think that the military is different because of the commander-in-chief stuff. But the legal analysis suggests that we’re doing everything by the book, and then stretching things as much as we can, and basically trying to keep people from committing crimes. Which you know, you know about- in the season of lawfare, if you are a cabinet secretary and you spend money that’s not appropriated for that purpose in your cabinet, then they can come back and they can take you to court.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you’re also making a political bet that Democrats aren’t going to challenge paying the military. Do you really think Democrats would challenge and take to court paying people for their food stamp benefits?

HASSETT: Let’s just say that we’ve seen Democrats–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –if, if Congress is going to fund it, when the shut- shutdown ends?

HASSETT: We- we’ve seen Democrats take to court people that- on really, really poor charges, and so I think they’re likely to do anything.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, it seems a political calculation is the point.

HASSETT: Well, we, we don’t have a political calculation. Our calculation is to get the government open, to get the food stamps to people, and to get people to be paid, 750,000 government workers aren’t getting paid right now. I know you’re talking to the Governor of Maryland in a minute. I’m sure his people are really hurting. Let’s just get the government open, and then let’s talk about things like the healthcare premiums, but do that through regular order.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, it sounds like you are saying the position is the same, open the government, then we’ll talk about healthcare. But the president, just in the past 36 hours, has put out a number of social media posts. It sounds sort of like he’s proposing something in regard to health insurance payments. He said, I’m recommended- to Senate Republicans that hundreds of billions of dollars currently being sent to money-sucking insurance companies to save bad healthcare provided by Obamacare now be sent to the people so they can purchase their own much better healthcare. He also said they should terminate Obamacare. What does this alternative system look like? Because the entire standoff is about healthcare right now.

HASSETT: Right. Well, the president is, you know, a beautiful tactician, a beautiful negotiator–

MARGARET BRENNAN: This is an off–

HASSETT: –And this is- you know, what he said, he’s brainstorming and trying to help the Senate come up with a deal that can get the government open. And one of the things you could do is conservatives believe that they don’t want the government to micromanage people’s lives. And you know, everybody believes that people should have healthcare, and so why not take the people who have higher healthcare premiums and just mail them a check and let them decide? The reason why it could have an effect is that there are multiple tiers under the Affordable Care Act of different types of insurance, and it could be that people would rather have the money and go from like, you know, this kind of plan to that kind of plan and save themselves a little bit. And so that’s, that’s, you know, basically giving the people an opportunity to make more choices than the government usually lets them.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Is this the Senator Cassidy proposal?

HASSETT: I’m sure that Senator Cassidy and President Trump talked about it, but whether he agrees with everything that Cassidy- I haven’t talked to him about it yet.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, does the Republican leader in the Senate accept–

HASSETT: –The president–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –this proposal?–

HASSETT: — the president started this idea yesterday, I don’t think that it’s been discussed widely in the Senate yet.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the president–

HASSETT: It’s the weekend.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –The Senate’s in session this weekend–

HASSETT: –Yes, the Senate is in session this weekend and we are–

MARGARET BRENNAN: because they’re trying to end the shutdown–

HASSETT: –And here I am.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But this is not the Republican Party’s position.

HASSETT: As of right now, it’s not the Senate position, but the president thought it was something they should think about.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, he seems to be negotiating before the government’s open.

HASSETT: He’s talking to his colleagues in the Senate on the Republican side.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you would agree that there does need to be a deal on healthcare, that healthcare costs are too high.

HASSETT: Well, I think that if you look at the Affordable Care Act, these premiums weren’t made permanent by the Democrats during the COVID emergency because they’re worried about the budgetary costs. And so if you look at the premium increases, they don’t affect most people below two times the poverty line, three times the poverty line. But there are a lot of senior citizens that are above, like, around four times the poverty level, which with a husband and wife team would be about 120,000, that are seeing really big premium increases. And I think that everybody’s going to want to think about what the next step for that would be, because are seeing- again most people aren’t seeing much of an increase at all, but the maximum increases you’re seeing could be up to about $500 a month for seniors who have really costly plans.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The president has also been talking about affordability, and our CBS polling shows the president’s approval rating on the economy has dipped to 38%, the lowest of this term. 75% of those polled say he’s not focusing enough on lowering prices, but the president said this week Democrats are making it up and quote, “every price is down.” I’m sure you know the Consumer Price Index showed grocery prices are up nearly 3%, in September from a year ago.

HASSETT: –well–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Do you dispute that?

HASSETT: Well, actually, let’s go through the facts, right? Inflation went up about 5% under President Biden. In President Trump’s first eight or nine months, depending where we get the last number, it’s up 2.7%. One of the big things that’s hurting affordability is mortgages. The interest rate went up by about 4%.

MARGARET BRENNAN: This is grocery prices–

HASSETT: –No, grocery prices are actually down significantly under Trump. But here’s the thing–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –but depends on which–

HASSETT: Let me– I’ll just make a point.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay.

HASSETT: That if you look at the real reduction in spending power for Americans under Joe Biden, then it went down about $3,000 because we had up to 9% inflation, and then they went to the grocery store, they couldn’t buy the things they’re used to buying. The real spending power, adjusted for inflation, under President Trump has gone up about $1,200 so far this year. $1,200 is not $3,000, and so people are right to feel stretched, but we’re making progress. And if you look at all the positive things about the economy, industrial production just about at an all time high, capital spending about at an all time high, GDP growth right now about 4%, then that shows that the income growth that we need to get more affordability is on the path to happening. And the bottom line is that the last Consumer Price Index surprised down. It was lower than expected, and it would have been even lower because there was a refinery shutdown that caused it to go slightly higher. So we see inflation under control and the economy booming, but we understand 100% why people are still hurting, because we haven’t made up all the room that was lost under Joe Biden.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So are you comfortable with 3% inflation?

HASSETT: I’m comfortable with 2% inflation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So no, you’re not happy where things are now.

HASSETT: Well, they got to go down a little bit more, but there- but the point is that inflation is like the Queen Mary, my friend Alan Greenspan used to say, so when you go from almost 4% that we had in January down to the mid twos, then that’s a trajectory that usually has momentum.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the St. Louis Fed found tariffs account for half a percentage point of the annual inflation rate. How much do you think the tariffs are hiking prices?

HASSETT: You know, there’s a couple of papers out there that say that prices went up by between two tenths and five tenths. And the thing to remember, if those papers are true, is that that’s a level adjust, because the tariff goes in, and then the tariff is just there, so it doesn’t affect inflation in the future. It would be a one time level adjust. Our estimates at CEA are much closer to zero, and it’s all based on modeling and assumptions about elasticities and things. But for the most part, the one way you can see it is you could look at the price of imported goods, and the price of imported goods, CEA put a report out, has actually been declining under tariffs. Because what happens is that the Chinese want to sell us lots of stuff, and there’s a tariff, so they cut their prices so that they can still have a larger market share in the US.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Kevin Hassett, always good to have you here. Of course, we have to leave it there for now. We’ll be right back in a minute. Stay with us.

[END TRANSCRIPT]

Nov 9 2025

Blaze Journalist Steve Baker Identifies January 6 Pipe Bomber as Former Capitol Police Officer Shauni Kerkhoff


Posted originally on CTH on November 8, 2025 | Sundance 


According to Steve Baker at Blaze News, Shauni Kerkhoff (27), a former Capitol Police Officer, was the J6 pipe bomber.

Kerkhoff “was a Capitol Police officer for four and a half years, left the department in mid-2021 for a security detail at the Central Intelligence Agency.” … “Kerkhoff was born in November 1993 in Hamilton, Ohio, the youngest of three daughters of Brandt James Kerkhoff and the former Patricia Marie Hennin.” [Full Story Here]

Among the evidence, the FBI tracked a DC Metrorail SmarTrip card used by the pipe-bomb suspect to an Air Force civilian employee, that employee lived next door to Shauni Kerkhoff.

Ms Kerkhoff was never questioned by the FBI.

[Full Story at Blaze HERE]

Nov 8 2025

REPORT: Three Russiagate Grand Jury Subpoenas Sent Today, Brennan, Page and Strzok – Up to 30 Subpoenas Pending


Posted originally on CTH on November 7, 2025 | Sundance

Fox News is reporting that three grand jury subpoenas were issued today for John Brennan, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

Brennan was the former CIA Director during Russiagate, who created the fraudulent Intelligence Community Assessment.  Strzok was the lead FBI counterintelligence agent in charge of Crossfire Hurricane, and Page was the former DOJ lawyer assigned to FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.  Strzok and Page worked both the Clinton email investigation and the Trump-Russia investigation.

Fox News also reports that up to 30 grand jury subpoenas are anticipated to be served on former government officials involved in “Spygate” and/or “Russiagate.” [SEE FOX REPORT HERE]

There has been a tremendous amount of external pressure being applied, and thankfully this year a significant amount of key internal pressure has joined that effort.  For the issues surrounding former CIA Director John Brennan, Fox News is citing a declassified “Annex A” of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which highlights John Brennan including the Steele Dossier in the ICA at the request of former FBI Director James Comey.

Apparently, according to Fox News, the most significant citation against Brennan is an issue we outlined at CTH five years ago [SEE HERE] when we wrote about Annex-A and the implications therein.  President Trump was still in office in 2020 when Annex-A was released. The good news is that Annex-A found its way into evidence that a prosecutor can present to a grand jury.

The outcome of a grand jury subpoena means the primary Russiagate officials will have to lawyer up, spend money and go plead the 5th amendment, the most likely outcome.

From my frame of reference, the evidence against the targets clearly exists and does not need them to make any admissions or denials.  However, putting them on record in court individually, possibly compelled to testify or invoke the 5th, would perhaps narrow down their options if they were eventually indicted and face a criminal trial.

EXCLUSIVE: A federal grand jury has subpoenaed former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, among others as part of the Justice Department’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, Fox News Digital has learned.

Sources told Fox News Digital Brennan; Strzok, the FBI’s former deputy assistant director of counterintelligence; and Page, a former FBI lawyer, were served with federal subpoenas on Friday.

Law enforcement sources told Fox News Digital that up to 30 subpoenas will be issued in the coming days relating to the investigation.

The grand jury is out of the Southern District of Florida. U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida Jason Reding Quiñones is supervising the probe. Fox News Digital first reported this summer that Brennan was under criminal investigation.

[…] As for the criminal investigation into Brennan, CIA Director John Ratcliffe referred evidence of wrongdoing by Brennan to FBI Director Kash Patel for potential prosecution, DOJ sources told Fox News Digital.

[…] But back in June 2020, Ratcliffe, while serving as director of national intelligence, declassified a footnote of the 2017 ICA, which revealed that the reporting of Trump dossier author Christopher Steele had only “limited corroboration” regarding whether then-President-elect Trump “knowingly worked with Russian officials to bolster his chances of beating” Hillary Clinton and other claims.

[…] The footnote, also known as “Annex A” of the 2017 ICA, exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital in June 2020, spanned less than two pages and detailed reporting by Steele, the former British spy who authored the unverified anti-Trump dossier — a document that helped serve as the basis for controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants obtained against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. (read more)

I also find it interesting they begin with “Russiagate”, and I wonder if they will find the “Spygate” that preceded it {GO DEEP}.

Then again, I am thankful for the change and recognize Spygate might just be a little too uncomfy for those who seek to retain continuity of government.

Nov 7 2025

Fox News Says Justice Dept About to Issue Subpoenas to John Brennan from DC and FL Grand Juries


Posted originally on CTH on November 6, 2025 | Sundance

I would not get too spun up about this yet because investigators and reviewers in/around Washington DC, have a ton of catching up to do on the material evidence against former CIA Director John Brennan.

Additionally, there is an institutional aversion to targeting anything to do with the CIA because the information needed for most direct evidence is behind a legislative authorized locked door.

FBI building, left – Main Justice (DOJ) building on right

That said, Fox News is reporting that a grand jury in DC and/or FL is potentially going to be used to issue subpoenas against John Brennan.

The primary issue surrounds Brennan telling congress in 2023 the “Steele Dossier” was not used in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), and current DNI Tulsi Gabbard releasing evidence proving it was.

(Fox News) – Justice Department officials in Miami and Washington, D.C., are actively preparing to issue several grand jury subpoenas relating to an investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan, Fox News has learned.

U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Jason Reding Quiñones is supervising the probe; Fox News is told.

Last month, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, referred Brennan to the DOJ, saying that the former CIA chief “willfully and intentionally” made false statements to Congress.

Jordan accused Brennan of lying in his 2023 Judiciary Committee testimony by denying that the CIA used the Steele dossier in prepping the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) on Russian election interference, and falsely claiming the CIA opposed including the dossier. (more)

President Trump’s January Executive Order says in part, “The Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the heads of the appropriate departments and agencies within the Intelligence Community, shall take all appropriate action to review the activities of the Intelligence Community over the last 4 years and identify any instances where the Intelligence Community’s conduct appears to have been contrary to the purposes and policies of this order, and prepare a report to be submitted to the President, through the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and the National Security Advisor, with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions to be taken to fulfill the purposes and policies of this order.”  {source}

DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been working on this for nine months.

Tulsi Gabbard retrieved and released a host of documents relating to the fraudulent ICA construct, including the use of the Steele Dossier.  Gabbard also declassified and released the email from former DNI James Clapper who was pressuring NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers to go along with the team goal, and blame Russia:

“Understand your concern. It is essential that we (CIA/NSA/FBI/ODNI) be on the same page, and are all supportive of the report -in the highest tradition of “That’s OUR story, and we’re stickin’ to it.”  This evening CIA has provided to the NIC the complete draft generated by the ad hoc fusion cell. We will facilitate as much mutual transparency as possible as we complete the report, but, more time is not negotiable. We may have to compromise our “normal” modalities, since we must do this on such a compressed schedule.  This is one project that has to be a team sport.”

DNI James Clapper, December 22, 2016

Remember, on July 20, 2025, DNI Tulsi Gabbard gave this interview.  Within the interview, Tulsi Gabbard emphasizes how important it is for the people who engaged in a treasonous conspiracy to be held accountable.  Gabbard notes there are now whistleblowers from within the IC agencies who have come forward to discuss how the intelligence apparatus was intentionally weaponized.

In her opinion as expressed, there is enough direct evidence now available to the Dept of Justice to begin criminal indictments against all of the participants.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard outlines how the documents released show how the Obama administration actively engaged the Intelligence Community to fabricate a false and malicious conspiracy against the incoming Trump administration.

I like how within the interview Director Gabbard emphasizes within her role she is able to reach into each of the eighteen intelligence agencies and extract documents that pertain to singular issues, in this case the role of Russia in the 2016 election.  This cross-silo investigative ability is why the DNI office is so important to revealing information from within individual silos.

Nov 6 2025

The Hidden Transcript of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson Testimony Is the Key to Reveal CIA Targeting of President Donald Trump


Posted originally on CTH on November 5, 2025 | Sundance |

In December of 2016, President Obama turned to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan with a request to change the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) and blame the Russians for election interference in the prior presidential election. Brennan gave the task of assembling the fraudulent intel to a CIA analyst named Julia Gurganus.

Subsequently, inside the CIA the National Intelligence Council (NIC) and the Directorate of Analysis began working on a pretext that would create the impression for the misleading Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) as demanded by Obama, Clapper and Brennan; ultimately it was constructed by Julia Gurganus.

Inside the National Intelligence Council, one of the key figures who helped create the ICA fabrication was a CIA analyst named Eric Ciaramella.

You might remember the name Eric Ciaramella from the 2019 impeachment effort against President Trump.  However, in 2016 Eric Ciaramella was a CIA deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia on the CIA’s National Intelligence Council at the time the fraudulent Intelligence Community Assessment was created.

♦ The key point to remember here is that Eric Ciaramella was one of the fabricators of the fraudulent ICA; constructed late December 2016 and presented in January 2017 as part of the foundation for the Trump-Russia narrative.

Earlier this year, DNI Tulsi Gabbard began to drill down onto the issue of the fraudulent ICA and how it was constructed.  Current CIA analysts within the former National Intelligence Council (NIC) and CIA Directorate of Analysis began to notice Tulsi was going to declassify background documents, including the two-year House Intelligence Committee report revealing the fraud.  Tulsi Gabbard became a target.

Julia Gurganus was an active government employee at the time Tulsi Gabbard began making inquiries.  The CIA (NIC) changed the status of Julia Gurganus in June 2025 to that of a “covert” operative, in an effort to protect Gurganus.

The CIA changed the status of Julia Gurganus in June 2025, reclassifying her as ‘covert’, specifically because of the ODNI’s intent to reveal the fraud within the 2016 Russia election investigation.  This, the CIA thought, would forcibly stop DNI Gabbard from exposing Ms. Gurganus and taking action.  The 2025 CIA effort did not work.

In late July of this year, DNI Gabbard released the CIA intelligence information that was used in constructing the fraudulent ICA. On July 23rd, Tulsi Gabbard held a press conference alongside Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and outlined the issues.

In August 2025, DNI Gabbard then declassified and released the CIA work product, and then later removed Julia Gurganus security clearance.

The CIA embeds at the NIC and directorate of analysis were furious, and subsequently leaked a false story to the Wall Street Journal saying DNI Gabbard had compromised a covert CIA operative working in government – a familiar ploy that had worked for them in the past.  However, this time it did not work, because her work history clearly showed Julia Gurganus was a known CIA employee.

♦ Key point:  Julia Gurganus and Eric Ciaramella both worked on behalf of CIA Director John Brennan to fabricate the fraudulent ICA in 2016. Gurganus was still a CIA employee in August of this year.

Back to Ciaramella…

In 2019 National Security Council (NSC) member Alexander Vindman also responsible for Ukraine, Russia Eurasia affairs, told CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella a fictional narrative about President Trump pressuring Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to provide dirt on Joe Biden in advance of the 2020 election.

Eric Ciaramella then became an “anonymous whistleblower” within the CIA to reveal the story and set up the predicate for the first Trump impeachment effort in late 2019.  You might remember the name, because during the impeachment effort anyone who mentioned Eric Ciaramella on social media had their information deleted, and they were blocked from their accounts.

Facebook, Google, META, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter all deleted any mention of Eric Ciaramella as the anonymous whistleblower, and banned any account that posted the name.  However, something else was always sketchy about this.

As the story was told, Ciaramella blew the whistle to Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson. It was further said that Atkinson “changed the CIA whistleblower rules” to permit an “anonymous” allegation; thereby protecting Eric Ciaramella.

Knowing, in hindsight, that CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella was one of the main people who constructed the 2016 fraudulent ICA, suddenly the motive to make him “anonymous” a few years later in 2019 for another stop-Trump effort makes sense.

Until today, the commonly accepted narrative was that ICIG Atkinson changed the CIA rules arbitrarily.  This is the main narrative as pushed by the media, allowed to permeate by the larger Intelligence Community, and supported by the willful blindness of a complicit Congress.

It never made sense how an IC Inspector General, especially one that involves review of CIA employees/operations, could make such a substantive change in rules for an agency that is opaque by design. There is just no way any IG can make that kind of decision about the CIA without the Director, the Deputy Director and CIA General Counsel being involved.

Someone in DNI or CIA leadership had to sign off on allowing ICIG Atkinson to change the rules and permit a complaint by Eric Ciaramella being turned into an “anonymous complaint.”

♦ Now, things are going to start getting a little dark here, because the implications are serious, and the aspect of ICIG Atkinson’s testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) being sealed is a little more than alarming when you consider what they were trying to do – impeach a sitting USA President on a fabricated issue.  Some context is needed.

Inspectors General do not operate in a vacuum.  They are authorized to conduct investigative oversight, as an outcome of permissions from the cabinet agency heads themselves.  The ICIG office, formerly headed by Michael Atkinson, falls under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence.

As the Inspector General of the Dept of Justice does not operate without the expressed permission of the U.S. Attorney General, so too is it required for the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community to have permission to operate in CIA functions with the expressed permission of the CIA Director.

To give you an example: You might remember when President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder created the Dept of Justice National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), they did not permit the DOJ Inspector General to have any oversight or review.

The 2009-2017 public reasoning was “national security interests,” as the DOJ-NSD was in charge of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISC) operations as well as Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) reviews and investigations.  The factual, evidence-based reason was the DOJ-NSD running political surveillance operations using FISA and FARA as weaponized targeting mechanisms to keep track of their political opposition, ie Lawfare. [But that’s another story]

In fact, in 2015 the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for the DOJ, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight and it was Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.

You see, the Department of Justice’s own Inspector General (Michael Horowitz who opened a January 2017 investigation into the 2016 politicization of the FBI and DOJ) was not allowed to investigate anything that happened within the NSD agency of the Department of Justice. See the ‘useful arrangement‘?  Yeah, Funny that.

It was not until 2018, when the OIG was tasked by then Attorney General Jeff Sessions and President Trump to look into the fraudulent FISA application used against Carter Page, when the OIG was finally given authority to review activity within the Dept of Justice National Security Division.

♦ The two key points here are: #1) ICIG Michael Atkinson does not make unilateral decisions to change the internal rules within the CIA, without the expressed permission of the CIA Director, CIA Deputy Director and CIA General Counsel. #2) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) would also know of the changed rules and arrangement therein.

At the time of the impeachment allegation and investigation by the House (Aug to Dec 18, 2019), the CIA Director was Gina Haspel (May 21, 2018, to January 20, 2021). The CIA Deputy Director was Vaughn Bishop, and the CIA General Counsel was Courtney Simmons Elwood.  In addition, the Acting DNI was Joseph Maguire.

We can reasonably be certain that CIA General Counsel Courtney Elwood and Acting DNI Joseph Maguire did not sign-off on changing the CIA rules permitting an anonymous whistleblower, because published media reports at the time outline both offices as NOT supporting the effort of ICIG Atkinson.

In fact, as the story is told (and investigatively affirmed) CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella was frustrated because he talked to CIA General Counsel Elwood about the leak from Alexander Vindman, and Elwood did not respond to his claims.

Instead, of following chain-of-command, CIA Analyst Ciaramella went to the House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, and relayed the story as told to him by Vindman.  The 2019 conversation between Ciaramella, the CIA analyst who previously fabricated the fraudulent Russia ICA in 2017, and Adam Schiff who fraudulently pushed the Trump-Russia narrative in 2017, took place prior to the CIA whistleblower complaint being filed.

Now we get to the crux of the story.

♦ On October 4, 2019, ICIG Michael Atkinson gave closed-door testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) as part of their impeachment investigation.  One of the key questions to Atkinson surrounded the authority of his office changing the CIA whistleblower rules that permitted Eric Ciaramella to remain anonymous.

That Atkinson testimony was then “classified” and sealed under the auspices of “national security” by HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff, the same guy who Ciaramella talked to before filing the complaint.

If congress, or more importantly the American public, had known CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella was both the key author of the fraudulent 2016 ICA and the later 2019 CIA complaint, it’s doubtful any impeachment effort would have moved forward.

From within the CIA, Eric Ciaramella was the impeachment narrative creator and the Russian interference narrative creator.  In short, a political fabricator of intelligence within the CIA.

Again, ICIG Atkinson could not change the ‘whistleblower’ regulations on his own.  Someone had to sign-off on that, giving him the authority. Additionally, Atkinson a former legal counsel to the Deputy Asst Attorney General within the DOJ-NSD, is not going to go out on such a limb without a cya to protect himself.

The only person likely to give that authority within the structures and confines that operate inside our government was then CIA Director, Gina Haspel.  The Deputy CIA Director is not going to make that kind of a decision, especially given the circumstances, and the CIA General Counsel was not touching it.

That outline of events means the 2016/2017 CIA ‘stop-Trump’ operation under CIA Director John Brennan, was effectively continued by CIA Director Gina Haspel in 2019/2020.

[SIDENOTE: Now, does the 2020 CIA operation known as the “51 Intelligence Experts’ who denied the Hunter Biden laptop story take on context?  Now does the recent reaction, the angry outburst by former CIA Director John Brennan about the ICA construct take on some context?]

This is where doors slam and DC officials run out of the room.

This is where ‘pretending not to know‘ takes on another meaning entirely.

♦ IMPLICATIONS: CIA Director Gina Haspel had no way to know if the 2019 impeachment of President Trump was going to be successful.  Just as the ICIG needed a CYA to protect himself, so too would Director Haspel want a legal defense mechanism in case the entire fiasco blew up.  Enter the only oversight agency that can provide Haspel cover, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Underneath all of these machinations, there’s no other way for Director Haspel to protect herself other than to use the primary mechanism within the functions of IC oversight, inform the SSCI chair and vice-chair of her changed rule guidance to ICIG Atkinson.  That Occam’s Razor scenario puts SSCI chairman ¹Richard Burr and SSCI vice-chair Mark Warner in the silo-system loop.  If things blew up, Haspel could always defend herself by pointing to her informing the mechanism for CIA oversight, the SSCI.

• DNI Dan Coats resigned from office when the Trump impeachment effort was announced, August 2019.

• Acting DNI Joseph Maguire was appointed by President Trump to replace Dan Coats.

• Following the impeachment trial, President Donald Trump was acquitted by the Senate on February 5th, 2020.

• On Feb 20, 2020, President Trump replaced acting DNI Joseph Maguire with acting DNI Ric Grenell.

• On February 28, 2020, President Trump nominated John Ratcliffe to be DNI.

• Ratcliffe was confirmed May 26, 2020, and took office.

Before the impeachment effort began, Congressman John Ratcliffe was President Trump’s first choice to replace outgoing DNI Dan Coats in 2019. However, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said they would not confirm John Ratcliffe.  President Trump was forced to appoint “acting DNIs.”

Somehow, within an unexplained reversal, after the impeachment effort ended, the SSCI had a change of position and agreed to confirm John Ratcliffe.

As the fully confirmed DNI, in 2020 John Ratcliffe would have full control of the ICIG, including an understanding of what took place within the CIA that led to the change in protocol creating the “anonymous whistleblower” complaint: the impeachment origination.

As Chair of the SSCI in 2019, it is highly likely that CIA Director Gina Haspel informed Richard Burr of the change in protocol creating the “anonymous whistleblower” complaint: the impeachment origination.  ¹Richard Burr was replaced by Marco Rubio in May 2020.

John Ratcliffe is now CIA Director.  Marco Rubio is now National Security Advisor.

The transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson’s testimony remains sealed.

The truth has no agenda.

We have one ally.

I’m doing all I can…

Nov 6 2025

Full Audio: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments Surrounding Presidential Tariff Authority


Posted originally on CTH on November 5, 2025 | Sundance

Today, the Dept of Justice Solicitor General Dean John Sauer provided oral arguments to the Supreme Court in support of President Donald Trump’s tariff authority. The issue at the heart of the matter is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which grants the president the power to levy tariffs.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, leaned heavily on the argument that tariffs are taxes against the American people, and all taxes must come from Congress.  The ‘tariffs are taxes’ argument seems to be the linchpin for the leftists on the court and the Gorsuch ‘conservatives’.

Solicitor Sauer countered the IEEPA tariffs are “regulations” against foreign imported goods. “The power to impose tariffs is a core application of the power to regulate foreign commerce, which is what the phrase ‘regular importation of commerce’ in IEEPA naturally evokes,” Sauer said.

The full audio of the arguments is provided below. (I’m working on the transcript). WATCH (prompted):

.

It’s not as easy, Chief Justice Roberts said, to simply frame a tariff as a tax – a power reserved to Congress.  “It implicates, very directly, the president’s foreign affairs power,” said Roberts, who is a key vote to watch in the case.

Trump’s tariffs, Roberts said, were “quite effective” in achieving the president’s particular objective.  That position is closely aligned with the administration’s position that a president has broad power in the context of foreign affairs.

The court is expected to hand down a decision by the end of June – or potentially sooner.

Nov 4 2025

DOJ Responds to Comey Motion to Dismiss – Provides Attachments of Extensive use of Daniel Richman to Leak and Shape Media


Posted originally on CTH on November 3, 2025 | Sundance |

USAO Lindsey Halligan has responded to James Comey’s motion to dismiss the charges against him in a lengthy response and multiple attachment filing [Full COURT FILE HERE] – [Response MOTION HERE].

In addition to refuting the effort by Comey’s lawyers to challenge the appointment of USAO Halligan [See Response Here], the USAO office also provides evidence of James Comey’s extensive use of Daniel Richman to act as a cut out for leaks and communications with the media [Attachments HERE].

Beginning on January 2, 2015, James Comey hired Daniel Richman to be his conduit to the media for all things around the Clinton investigation.  Exhibit #3 highlights Richman emails to Office of Legal Counsel, Patrick Findlay, to begin the process of officially working for Comey as a special government employee. [Attachment #3 HERE].

There are multiple exhibits highlighting emails between James Comey (aka Reinhold Niebuhr7) and Daniel Richman [HERE-4 and HERE-5 and HERE-6 and HERE-7] proving the former FBI director did intentionally direct Daniel Richman to contact media persons on his behalf and leak investigative background information, or instruct them on information, James Comey provided. The evidence on this issue is overwhelming.

Daniel Richman, working directly on the instructions of James Comey, worked closely with New York Times journalist Mike Schmidt, husband of MSNBC’s Nicole Wallace, to publish material [ex. Exhibit #8].  Richman then coordinated the FBI director’s message with dozens of national journalists, writing the scripts for them to publish on behalf of James Comey [ex Exhibit #9].   Again, the evidence on this collaborative endeavor is overwhelming.

Interestingly, [Govt Exhibit #12] is the criminal complaint stemming from the FBI investigation which began on July 21, 2025.   The investigative summary notes the purposeful use of Room #9582 at FBI headquarters, intended to destroy classified evidence concealed in five burn bags.

[SOURCE Exhibit #12, page 2]

I’m still reviewing the information.

More to come…

Nov 3 2025

President Trump Outlines Stakes in Next Week SCOTUS Tariff Case


Posted originally on CTH on November 2, 2025 | Sundance | 

President Trump posted the importance of the Supreme Court case to support presidential authority on Tariffs.

The heart of the argument really is the “trillions at stake” aspect we have discussed on these pages for the past ten years.  If the institutions of our government factually want to dispatch President Trump and diminish the American middle-class, the Supreme Court will support the multinational corporations and Wall Street in decision to remove presidential tariff authority.

[Via Truth Social] – “Next week’s Case on Tariffs is one of the most important in the History of the Country. If a President is not allowed to use Tariffs, we will be at a major disadvantage against all other Countries throughout the World, especially the “Majors.” In a true sense, we would be defenseless! Tariffs have brought us Great Wealth and National Security in the nine months that I have had the Honor to serve as President. The Stock Market has hit All Time Highs many times during my short time in Office, with virtually No Inflation, and National Security that is second to none.

Our recent successful negotiation with China, and many others, put us in a strong position only because we had Tariffs with which to negotiate fair and sustainable Deals. If a President was not able to quickly and nimbly use the power of Tariffs, we would be defenseless, leading perhaps even to the ruination of our Nation. The only people fighting us are Foreign Countries who for years have taken advantage of us, those who hate our Country and, the Democrats, because our numbers are insurmountably good.

I will not be going to the Court on Wednesday in that I do not want to distract from the importance of this Decision. It will be, in my opinion, one of the most important and consequential Decisions ever made by the United States Supreme Court. If we win, we will be the Richest, Most Secure Country anywhere in the World, BY FAR. If we lose, our Country could be reduced to almost Third World status — Pray to God that that doesn’t happen!”

President Donald J Trump – Nov 02, 2025, 6:54 PM

Nov 3 2025

Senator Eric Schmitt Outlines What He Wants to See Next Following Initial “Arctic Frost” Information


Posted originally on CTH on November 2, 2025 | Sundance

Nine sitting U.S. Senators, dozens of President Trump’s staff and thousands of Americans were targeted as part of the FBI investigation known as “Arctic Frost.”  Senator Eric Schmitt, a former attorney general from Missouri, outlines his perspective on what should happen next.

The information to congress about the Arctic Frost investigation is coming from FBI whistleblowers, not from Director Kash Patel or Deputy Director Dan Bongino, and the depth of the targeting evidence held within the FBI is apparently hidden from leadership review – or they would be releasing it.  So, Senator Eric Schmitt wants to extract all of the pertinent information from inside the DOJ and FBI and then launch congressional Watergate style hearings about it.  WATCH:

.