Tag Archives: Lawfare

Dec 25 2025

John Brennan’s Lawfare Lawyers Are Revealing More Than They Intend


Posted originally on CTH on December 24, 2025 | Sundance 

As we noted yesterday, lawyers representing former CIA Director John Brennan are sending proactive letters to the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida {SEE HERE}.  However, some of the information included in the letters intended to be exculpatory is actually damning against their defense position.

You have to go deep in the weeds to see it, but if you understand the details of the events, the information being revealed by Brennan’s lawyers is the opposite of helpful to his case.  As an example, there is a citation included in a footnote of the December 22, 2025, [fn #20 page 6] letter that links to a March 31, 2022, letter sent to John Durham.

Here’s page 6 of the 2025 letter.

Compare the underlined section to the 2022 letter sent to John Durham.

In 2025, Brennan is telling the Florida court the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) conclusion was confirmed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller in a “very serious review.”  However, in 2022 Brennan told John Durham that Robert Mueller never interviewed him or offered an assessment of the ICA; Mueller just regurgitated it.

So, which is it?

These contradictions are throughout both of the letters when you compare them side-by-side.  In 2022, former CIA Director John Brennan was trying to escape the Durham review.  In 2025, Brennan is trying to escape a grand jury review.

[We are aware that the U.S Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Jason Reding Quiñones, has access to the CTH public library of research into all of these historic events.]

There are other citations in the 2022 letter that are certainly worth reviewing, because the legally binding statements made by John Brennan at the time have been shown to be false in 2025.

Another of the claims, in the 2022 letter to John Durham, highlights why it was critical for the CIA to assist in the capture and arrest of Julian Assange in 2019.

[SOURCE – Page 7]

The lawyers representing John Brennan in the above 2022 letter apparently did not know the DNC emails were provably not hacked by Russia, unless they are claiming that Seth Rich (DNC staff) and Julian Assange (Wikileaks) were working for the Russian government.

John Brennan asserts a “definitive determination” that Russia was involved in the theft of the DNC emails, and across the intelligence community that determination was “unanimous.”  That assertion, by Brennan, underpinning the “Russian interference narrative”, opens up the entire DNC email issue for Jason Quiñones to explore.

The DNC hired Crowdstrike to investigate the leak/hack; the James Comey FBI never looked at the DNC servers; and Crowdstrike told the Senate there was no evidence of a hack or outside intrusion.  Perhaps Quiñones will finally highlight these contradictions and get to the bottom of it? Because, after all, this is part of Brennan’s ICA defense.

What Brennan did not realize we would discover when he wrote the letter in 2022:

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 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 2016/2017 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.

Oh look, there’s another trail for U.S Attorney Jason Quiñones to follow.

What would Julia Gurganus and Eric Ciaramella have to say about putting the ICA together?

Merry Christmas!

U.S Attorney Jason Quinones

Dec 23 2025

John Brennan Lawyers Confirm Their Client is a “Target” of a Grand Jury Investigation


Posted originally on CTH on December 23, 2025 | Sundance

Lawfare lawyer Kenneth Wainstein representing former CIA Director John Brennan confirmed in a proactive litigation letter to Chief Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga of the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida, their client is a “target” of a grand jury investigation.

The word “target” is important here, because the letter specifically outlines how Brennan has received subpoenas for documents and information surrounding his construct of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment.

The letter notes that prosecutors from the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Jason Reding Quiñones, have advised Mr. Brennan that he is “a target” of a grand jury investigation.

[SOURCE]

The letter by is by Mr. Kenneth Wainstein, a partner in Mayer/Brown law firm, Washington DC, who served in the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush and Joseph R. Biden Jr., and he describes a “concocted case” and “politically motivated and fact-free criminal investigation.”

Wainstein is seeking proactive intervention by Chief Judge Altonaga to block U.S. Attorney Quinones from seeking jurisdiction in the Fort Pierce Division, the court with jurisdiction over the Mar-a-Lago raid, led by Judge Aileen Cannon.

I strongly urge everyone interested to READ THE ENTIRE LETTER to understand why I shared prior warnings about the nonsense ramblings of perhaps well-intentioned voices who will create problems for this case against Brennan if it is to continue.

Pay attention to the footnotes being cited by Brennan’s lawyers as they begin to pull in some of the commentary by voices who have publicly given opinion about the overall Trump targeting operation.  Mike Davis name appears frequently in this letter, as the Brennan defense team begins to frame the conspiratorial nature of some claims against their client.

In essence, the Brennan legal team are attempting to refute the evidence by pointing to the blanket of some crazy commentary that covers it. This is exactly what I have been cautioning about {SEE HERE}.

U.S Attorney Quinones already faces an uphill battle, because John Durham already reviewed the ICA origination as part of his investigation – but Durham never prosecuted anyone inside government.

This year, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a tranche of background information, [114 pages of information], showing how the Obama administration intentionally and with great purpose fabricated the Russia election interference story. DNI Tulsi Gabbard Press Release Here – Files Containing Evidence Here

What the evidence shows is a focused targeting operation intended to fabricate a false premise by the United States Intelligence Community, centered around a fraudulent CIA analysis (ICA) led by John Brennan, and organized through the Office of former DNI James Clapper.  The op was green-lighted by Barack Obama as a way to impede the agenda of incoming President Donald Trump.  All three branches of government eventually collaborated on the scheme.

Lawyers for John Brennan are now seeking to proactively undermine the grand jury proceedings and influence the venue where any investigation and review might be taking place.  [pdf, Page 9] 

In addition to sending the letter to the Southern District of Florida, John Brennan also sent the letter to the New York Times to help him frame a media defense.

[…] Pursuing the case in Fort Pierce, Fla., would draw jurors from a more conservative area than the District of Columbia and put it under Judge Cannon, who showed Mr. Trump unusual favor during the documents investigation. In particular, Mike Davis, an influential former Republican Senate staff aide and friend of Mr. Reding Quiñones, has pushed the idea of a Fort Pierce grand jury, warning Mr. Trump’s adversaries to “lawyer up.” (read more)

Dec 18 2025

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino Confirms His Resignation – Will Be Leaving FBI in January


Posted originally on CTH on December 17, 2025 | Sundance 

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino confirms via his X account, that he will be leaving the FBI in January.

[SOURCE]

This announcement does not come as a surprise to those follow the details of corrupt systems closely and who have watched the scale of the problems surface through the years.

The problems within the FBI as an institution are systemic.  Both Kash Patel and Dan Bongino faced a monumental challenge in trying to get their arms around the scale of the problem within the institution.  There is no apple, only worms.

Any type of institutional confrontation at this scale can only succeed if the problems are first admitted. Bongino faced a big challenge with Director Patel refusing to accept institutional corruption was the biggest issue.  You cannot correct problems of great consequence until you admit the core of the problem.  No admission was made. The problems remain.

Inasmuch as we all wanted Dan Bongino to succeed, we must also admit to ourselves he did not possess sufficient skills that neuter the attack vectors that would be exploited against him.  Training that skillset first starts with an inward conversation.

Easily identified attack vectors are mechanisms deployed by those who retain corrupt activity within the institution.

We knew from the outset the corrupt FBI actors would seek to remain in control by manipulating the leadership Trump dispatched to confront them.

Kash Patel’s primary attack vector comes as an outcome of his ego, desire for affluence and delusions of grandeur.

Dan Bongino’s attack vector was/is his emotional need to be liked and appreciated by his audience.  As a broadcast personality an internal codependency heading is good for business.  However, in an institutional leadership position that same a codependency mindset is the opposite of the skillset needed to confront a corrupt audience.

Emotional dependency, definitions of self-worth determined by an external audience, creates vulnerability.  Corrupt FBI actors know how to exploit a personality that needs to be liked (Bongino), and corrupt FBI actors know how to exploit a personality that assigns value to the indulgences of position (Patel).  This was the non-pretending baseline for easy to predict failure.

Former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz held a worldview that was counter to the perspective of President Trump. He did possess the skillset; he just held the wrong mindset.  For Dan Bongino it was the opposite. Bongino holds the same mindset as President Trump, he just didn’t have the skillset.

Misaligned outlook or misaligned skillsets, when combined with easily identifiable attack vectors, creates manipulative opportunities for those who intend to continue corrupt endeavors within big institutional systems.

We wish Dan Bongino all the best as he returns to private life.

We will continue praying for Mr Bongino’s physical and emotional health, and we sincerely thank him for his efforts.

Dec 16 2025

JD Vance Points Out the Consequence of the Senate “Blue Slip” Veto of Judicial Nominees


Posted originally on CTH on December 15, 2025 | Sundance 

The blue slip process has been a part of the Senate’s judicial nomination procedure since at least 1917. When a President nominates an individual for a U.S. circuit or district court judgeship, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee sends a blue slip —a form colored blue— to the two Senators representing the nominee’s home state. This form allows the Senators to express their opinions about the nominee.

Positive Response: If a home-state Senator has no objections, they return the blue slip with a positive response, indicating support for the nominee. Negative Response or Withholding: If a Senator objects, they may either return the slip with a negative response or choose not to return it at all. In both cases, this is treated as a lack of support for the nominee, which halts the nomination process.

JD Vance notes this process is being used to manipulate the appointments of Judges in leftist states.  This creates a dual justice system; one of the core issues within our extremely divided nation.

[SOURCE]

JD Vance is not wrong.  However, as with all things corrupted within the state of our Republic, if the blue slip process is removed the next leftist President can corrupt the judiciary within Republican states.

Of course, all of this is an outcome of the 17th Amendment, which stopped the state legislatures from having control over their senators.  Under the original constitutional framework, the Senate was designed to represent the interests of the state, as the Senators were appointed by state legislature, not popular votes.  The Sea Island assembly destroyed this cornerstone when they triggered the 17th Amendment.

Repeal the 17th Amendment, and just about everything in federal government changes.

Machiavelli said, “It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”  A prescient and oft repeated quote that is pertinent to the situation.

When our founders created the system of government for our constitutional republic, they built in layers of protection from federal control over the lives of people in the states.  Over time, those protections have been eroded as the federal bureaucracy has seized power.  One of the biggest changes that led to the creation of the permanent political class was the 17th Amendment.

Our founders created a system where Senators were appointed by the state legislatures.  In this original system, the Senate was bound by obligation to look out for the best interests of their specific states.  Under the ‘advise and consent‘ rules of Senate confirmation for executive branch appointments, the intent was to ensure the presidential appointee -who would now carry out regulatory activity- would not undermine the independent position of the states.

The nucleus of corruption amid every element of the federal institutions of government is the United States Senate.   The U.S. Senate, also known as the “upper chamber,” is the single most powerful elected element in modern federal government.

The Intelligence Branch is the most powerful branch of government.  However, the U.S. Senate is the most powerful assembly of federally elected officials.  We pretend the IC branch doesn’t exist; that’s part of our problem.  At least we admit the Senate exists.

All other elected federal corruption is dependent on a corrupt and ineffective Senate.  If we correct the problems with the Senate, and reconnect the representation within the chamber to the state-level legislative bodies, we will then see immediate change.  However, there would be ZERO institutional allies in this effort.

When the 17th Amendment (direct voting for Senators) took the place of state appointments, the perspective of ‘advise and consent’ changed.  The Senate was now in the position of ensuring the presidential appointee did not undermine the power of the permanent bureaucracy, which is the root of power for the upper-chamber.

Senate committees, Homeland Security, Judiciary, Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Relations, etc. now consists of members who carry an imbalanced level of power within government.  The Senate now controls who will be in charge of executive branch agencies like the DOJ, DHS, FBI, CIA, ODNI, DoD, State Dept and NSA, from the position of their own power and control in Washington DC.

In essence, the 17th Amendment flipped the intent of the constitution from protecting the individual states to protecting the federal government.

Almost every source of federal issue: ex. spending, intervention and foreign assistance, conflict with the states, burdensome regulation, surveillance and spying on American citizens, the two-tiered justice system and the erosion of liberty & individual rights (see COVID examples), can be sourced back to the problem created by the 17th Amendment.

Because of the scale of their power, the Senate will not give up control easily; and every institution of society and government will actively work to block/stop We The People from taking back control of the upper chamber.  Every entity from Wall Street to multinational corporations, big tech, banks, foreign governments and world organizations would align against us.   When you truly understand the epicenter of the corruption, then you are able to see the tentacles extending from it.

It would be easy to say “repeal the 17th Amendment;“ it is ‘another kettle of fish’ entirely to walk through the process to make that happen.  Yes, ultimately, we do need a full repeal of the 17th Amendment and return the selection of the senators from each state with a nomination and appointment process within the state legislature.  [Common Explainer Here]

Seventeenth Amendment- “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.” (link)

Prior to the 17th Amendment, there was significant state level corruption as business interests, and Senate candidates worked in power groups with party officials to attain the position.  Politicians seeking Senate seats began campaigning for state legislative candidates in order to assemble support.

The state legislative races then became a process of influence amid powerful interests seeking to support their Senate candidate.   Get the right people in the State legislature, and you can get the Senator appointed.

Those state-level entities, bankers, wealthy people of influence, later became the permanent K-Street lobbying groups once the 17th Amendment was ratified. In essence, they just shifted the location of their influence operation from the state to an office in Washington DC.   [Those same power groups, albeit much larger, now write the physical legislation we see in congress.]  Additionally, prior to the 17th Amendment, there were issues of vacancies in federal senate seats as state legislatures could not agree on an individual Senator.

The biggest issue following the passage of the 17th Amendment became Senators who were no longer representing the interests of their state.  Instead, they were representing the interests of the power elite groups who were helping them fund the mechanisms of their re-election efforts.

A Senator only needs to run for re-election every six years.  The 17th Amendment is the only amendment that changed the structure of the Congress, as it was written by the founders.

Over time, the Senate chamber itself began using their advice and consent authority to control the executive and judicial branch.  The origination of a nomination now holds the question: “Can this person pass the Senate confirmation process?”

The Senate now abuses this power to ensure no one challenges them.  Additionally, the Senate began using their oversight capacity to control elements within the executive branch and judicial branch.   The full scope of that issue in modern form is OUTLINED HERE – which is the cornerstone of the Intelligence Branch of Government.

If we could repeal the 17th Amendment and return the selection to the state legislature, you can see where the background work of Tactical Civics and Extreme Federalism begin to take on importance.   [NOTE: Within the repeal effort, we would need to include a recall process for states to reach out and yank back their Senator if they go astray; the ability to recall was missing in the original construct of the framers; it would need to be added.]

◊ PATH ONE is the primary platform of the presidential candidate…. a visible and emphasized mandate that includes: “vote me into office and you are voting to repeal the 17th Amendment “.  This specific election issue would need to be the #1 priority of the candidate and spoken at every event.

This approach gives a presidential candidate the mandate to demand congress to act if he won the 2024 election.  We need a warrior of epic strength, resolve and fortitude.

◊ PATH TWO is the parallel path built along with the election platform path and put into place in the event that Congress refused to accept the mandate.

Obviously, this would be an ugly battle.   The second path is a convention of states. 

The ‘convention of states‘ would need to be detailed, strategically planned, and the future schedule determined during the GOP convention preceding the November election (assuming the right candidate wins).   That way, if Congress refuses to act on their own, within say the first 100 days of the new administration, the state legislatures will then assemble a convention for the singular and limited purpose of one action item: “repeal the 17th Amendment “.  That’s it. Full Stop.  Nothing more. Nothing else entertained.

There is a lot more to this, and a lot more to cover in discussion of this.  However, this is the path that can resolve most of the issues we face with an out-of-control federal government.   The shift in power would kneecap the Intelligence Branch of Government by re-instituting genuine oversight and control. A repeal of the 17th Amendment stops Senators from campaigning, needing to raise money and puts them directly into the accountability position as a steward for the interests of their state.

The people within each state would then have a mechanism to address any negative federal action by contacting their state legislative representative.  In a worst-case scenario, a rogue Senator could be removed within days if they support any federal legislative activity that is not in alignment with the state interest.  This approach also wipes out most of the power amid the Senate Majority Leader, as he/she could also be recalled by the state and would be less likely to work against the interests of the majority in the chamber.

The House of Representatives was created to be the voice of the people, ie, “The Peoples’ House.”  However, the U.S. Senate was structurally created to be the place where state government had representation in the federal government decision-making.  The 17th Amendment completely removed state representation, and we have been in an escalating battle over state’s rights ever since.

Overlay that DC structural issue with the fact that almost all of the bureaucracy created by this skewed DC system is now in place to defend itself from any outside effort to change it, and you get this UniParty problem that Donald Trump fully exposed.

Repeal the 17th Amendment, and we would see the most significant restoration of freedom, liberty and social balance in our lifetime.

Dec 12 2025

President Trump Grants Tina Peters Pardon, However State Officials Call Pardon Invalid


Posted originally on CTH on December 11, 2025 | Sundance 

Tina Peters is a gold star mom who was a former Mesa County, Colorado, clerk during the 2020 election.

Mrs Peters, age 70, is serving a nine-year prison sentence in Colorado state prison after her politically motivated conviction for attempting to influence a public servant and criminal impersonation for aiding an unauthorized person in copying voting-machine hard-drive data during a 2021 software update.

Mrs. Peters and her lawyers have repeatedly stated she was attempting to preserve evidence of false voter data in the Colorado 2020 election. The judge who sentenced Peters stated she had white “privilege” in delivering the exceptionally harsh sentence.

Today President Trump pardoned Tina Peters, but state officials and Colorado Governor Jared Polis say the pardon is invalid because Mrs. Peters was convicted of a state crime, out of the reach of a presidential pardon.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “For years, Democrats ignored Violent and Vicious Crime of all shapes, sizes, colors, and types. Violent Criminals who should have been locked up were allowed to attack again. Democrats were also far too happy to let in the worst from the worst countries so they could rip off American Taxpayers. Democrats only think there is one crime – Not voting for them!

Instead of protecting Americans and their Tax Dollars, Democrats chose instead to prosecute anyone they can find that wanted Safe and Secure Elections. Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our Elections were Fair and Honest. Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the “crime” of demanding Honest Elections. Today I am granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!” (read more)

Unfortunately, Colorado Governor Jared Polis is extremely opposed to President Trump and anything he represents, immediately rejecting the pardon [SOURCE] and confirming that Mrs Peters will remain in state prison.

Dec 6 2025

CNN Reports J6 Pipe Bomb Suspect as Trump Supporter Angered by Stolen Election


Posted originally on CTH on December 6, 2025 | Sundance

You know a deep state cover-story operation is underway when Natasha Bertrand and Evan Perez are pushing the narrative.

The narrative is laughable, claiming the 30-year-old black North Virgina resident, working for a bail bond company that supports illegal aliens, whose father previously sued the Trump administration and claims racism against their company opposition, is a Trump supporter.

Alas, that’s the story -according to FBI people familiar with the matter- and CNN are sticking to it.

(VIA CNN) – During interviews with the FBI, the suspect arrested in the pipe bomb probe told investigators that he believed the 2020 election was stolen, providing perhaps the first indication of a possible motive for the bombs placed near the DNC and RNC headquarters, people briefed on the matter told CNN. (read more)

If you are to believe this narrative and simultaneously overlay the indictment evidence, the pipe bomber had remarkable predictive abilities in purchasing the explosive components for his devices before the 2020 election took place.  Somehow, according to CNN, Brian Cole Jr knew the 2020 election would be “stolen” and was prepared for the outcome.

Ridiculous, all of it.

Meanwhile, Brian Cole Jr’s grandmother, Loretta, tells an entirely different story.

(Via Daily Mail) – […] ‘He’s not politically affiliated with anything,’ the grandmother told the Daily Mail during an interview at her home in Gainesville, Virginia. ‘He has no social media contacts. He’s never online going back and forth with politics or anything like that. He says he don’t like either party.

‘He’s borderline autistic,’ she added. ‘He’s slow. He may be 30, but he’s got the mind of a 16-year-old. That’s why we’re thinking – What the hell? What’s going on?’

[…] ‘We’re terrified,’ she said. ‘They say they’ve got all this evidence. Whatever happened, we’ve still got to fight it. We have to figure out what to do.’

She said she had no idea her grandson may have been gathering parts for months to build the bombs from area businesses, stored them in the home, then allegedly tried to carry out a terrorist attack.

Cole was charged with laying explosives outside the Democratic and Republican National Committee headquarters, which did not detonate.

She said she doesn’t believe the charges.

‘This young man is very calm and quiet,’ she said. ‘He just stays to himself. Nobody bothers him because he doesn’t bother anybody.

‘He doesn’t have a girlfriend,’ she added. ‘That’s how slow he is. He’s just off in a little world on his own. He stays downstairs and he used to be with his dog all the time.’

‘That’s why everything is so messed up with us because he’s a good kid,’ she said. ‘If you knew him, you would say that he couldn’t have done it.’

‘And if he did, it was just him trying to prove a point or whatever,’ she continued. ‘He probably doesn’t even know the magnitude of what he’s done, if he did it.’

‘He’s a data entry clerk in the office and answers the phones,’ she said. ‘He’s right in the reception area up front. We have a business, so we have to put him to work. And he understands that. He’s good with data entry.’

‘All I can tell you is I love my grandson,’ she said. ‘He’s not a bad kid and he’s not affiliated with any gangs or anything like that. He’s not a political anarchist, or whatever they’re calling him. People could pull unnamed sources out of the sky. I don’t believe that. I don’t know.’ (read more)

I personally am not ascribing operational motive (or outcome) to the intents of either Kash Patel or Dan Bongino because as I have said from the outset of their selection, neither of these two men have the intellectual or discernment skillset needed to confront the corrupt institutional intent of the FBI as an organization.

Both Dan and Kash have easily identifiable ‘attack vectors’ which can be exploited by those skilled in the dark arts of manipulation.  Kash’s open weakness is his ego and lust for lifestyle, Bongino’s open emotional weakness is his need to be cherished and appreciated.  Both mindsets are easily influenced by those who know how to do such things.

Was/is Brian Cole Jr a patsy or was he a secretly hiding from his family a high functioning intellectual skillset capable of strategic thinking, foresight and developing covert plans.  Something just doesn’t add up.

The media’s need to ascribe a pro-Trump spin to the motives and intents is typical of their fake news status, pumping toxic fuel into the minds of those who genuinely believe some form of credibility in DC reporting still exists.  When CNN pushes a narrative the domestic Intelligence Community is generally behind it.

♦ The overall FBI angle is EXTREMELY SKETCHY (noted in Fox video below) as the “new FBI” investigative unit simply used Brian Cole’s cell phone and geolocation as part of the evidence against him.  This cell phone geolocation and ID are exactly what all of the J6 pipe bomb researchers have been shouting about for five years.

For five years the FBI couldn’t exploit the cell phone use for identification, then suddenly they were able to exploit the cell phone use for identification.  Something doesn’t add up here and is really hinky, despite Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino claiming the FBI’s investigative efforts were excellent.

Nov 25 2025

Pentagon Says It’s Investigating Senator Mark Kelly


Posted originally on CTH on November 24, 2025 | Sundance

This could potentially be very good news; however, the battle between where we are today and where we would need to be in order to address unlawful sedition criminally is very far apart.  Let’s hope the Pentagon and DOJ can harden up and start to take down these political bad actors.

In a social media post Monday, the Pentagon said it received complaints over former U.S. Navy Captain Mark Kelly’s efforts to undermine President Trump and destabilize the U.S. government.

[SOURCE]

The pentagon saying they received, “serious allegations of misconduct” against him, and “a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.”

WASHINGTON DC – […] Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared the Pentagon’s post and referred to the lawmakers as the “Seditious Six.” Noting that five of the six lawmakers do not fall under the Pentagon’s jurisdiction, he added that Kelly does.

[SOURCE] 

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.