Arriving at Joint Base Andrews President Trump delivers remarks to the press pool about the ongoing fiasco with an unnamed hearsay “whistleblower” and the political use of a constructed controversy.  [Video Below, Transcript ADDED]

“I just watched a little of the news on TV. It’s a disgrace.” – “It’s Adam Schiff making up stories.” – “Democrats are going lose the election and they know it. That’s why they are doing it.” – “It should never be allowed.” – “I have to put up with Adam Schiff on an absolutely perfect phone call with the new president of Ukraine. That was a perfect call.” – “But Adam Schiff doesn’t talk about Joe Biden and his son walking away with millions of dollars from Ukraine, and then millions of dollars from China.”…

.

[Transcript] THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. I just watched a little bit of this on television. It’s a disgrace to our country. It’s another witch hunt. Here we go again. It’s Adam Schiff and his crew making up stories and sitting there like pious whatever you want to call them. It’s just a — really, it’s a disgrace.

It’s a terrible thing for our country. They can’t do any work. They’re frozen — the Democrats. They’re going to lose the election; they know it. That’s why they’re doing it. And it should never be allowed, what’s happened to this President.

And despite that, I think I’ve done just about more than any President in his first two and a half years in office. If you look, I think you’ll see very few could compete with the things we’ve done for our military, for the economy. We have the best economy anywhere in the world, by far. We’ve rebuilt our military. We’ve done so many things that are so incredible with tax cuts and regulations. And I have to put up with Adam Schiff on a per- — on an absolutely perfect phone call to the new President of Ukraine. That was a perfect call.

But Adam Schiff doesn’t talk about Joe Biden and his son walking away with millions of dollars from Ukraine, and then millions of dollars from China. Walking away — in a quick meeting, walking away with millions of dollars. He doesn’t talk about Joe Biden firing a prosecutor, and if that prosecutor is not fired, he’s not going to give him money from the United States of America. They don’t talk about that.

My call was perfect. The President, yesterday, of Ukraine said there was no pressure put on him whatsoever. None whatsoever. And he said it loud and clear for the press. What these guys are doing — Democrats — are doing to this country is a disgrace and it shouldn’t be allowed. There should be a way of stopping it — maybe legally, through the courts. But they’re going to tie up our country. We can’t talk about gun regulation. We can’t talk about anything because, frankly, they’re so tied up. They’re so screwed up, nothing gets done –except for when I do it.

I’m using Mexico to protect our border because the Democrats won’t change loopholes and asylum. When you think of that — and I want to — I’ll tell you, I want to thank Mexico. Twenty-seven thousand soldiers they have. But think of how bad that is — think of it — where we use Mexico because the Democrats won’t fix our broken immigration system. We need their votes. If we don’t get their votes, we can’t do it.

And the Republicans are all onboard. They want to fix it, but the Democrats won’t do it. They don’t want to talk about infrastructure. They don’t want to talk about lowering drug prices. They don’t want to talk about anything because they’re fixated on this. And Nancy Pelosi has been hijacked by the radical left, and everybody knows it.

Thank you.

If you have read any of the documents that came from Fusion-GPS, Nellie Ohr and Christopher Steele, you will likely find an amazing amount of similarity to the format and writing in this “whistleblower” complaint.

It was obviously written by a Lawfare member.

The complaint is the same structure as the Steele Dossier.  No direct knowledge; no direct evidence to the claims; second-hand gossip, rumors from people who might have known another person to have overheard something, mixed with prior media reports to narrate a story as told by the author. Here is the complaint:

.

The complaint is based on the July 25th phone call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy of Ukraine.  Here’s the transcript of that call:

.

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) is Michael K Atkinson.  ICIG Atkinson is the official who accepted the ridiculous premise of a hearsay ‘whistle-blower‘ complaint; an intelligence whistleblower who was “blowing-the-whistle” based on second hand information of a phone call without any direct personal knowledge, ie ‘hearsay‘.

Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.

If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.

Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.

Atkinson’s conflict-of-self-interest, and/or possible blackmail upon him by deep state actors who most certainly know his compromise, likely influenced his approach to this whistleblower complaint.   That would explain why the Dept. of Justice Office of Legal Counsel so strongly rebuked Atkinson’s interpretation of his responsibility with the complaint.

In the Justice Department’s OLC opinion, they point out that Atkinson’s internal justification for accepting the whistleblower complaint was poor legal judgement.  [See Here]  I would say Atkinson’s decision is directly related to his own risk exposure:

.

You know the Democrats had a pre-planned strategy to use the “whistleblower” complaint, because Adam Schiff has the production scheduled for 9:00am public hearing today.

Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire is appearing before the House Intelligence Committee to face lawmakers’ questions about his handling of the hearsay whistleblower complaint relating to a phone call between President Donald Trump and the president of Ukraine.  The transcript of the non-controversial call was released yesterday.

Lawmakers also received their copy of the 6-page complaint Wednesday afternoon after criticizing the White House and Department of Justice for complying with Office of Legal Counsel guidance and handling recommendations. The declassified complaint, consisting of hearsay and political media spin, is expected to be released to the public today.

C-Span Livestream Link – PBS Livestream Link – CBS Livestream Link

.

.

In the Justice Department’s OLC opinion, they point out that ICIG Atkinson’s internal justification for even accepting the whistleblower complaint was poor legal judgement.  [See Here]  I would say Atkinson’s decision is directly related to his own risk exposure:

.

According to the latest reports, the mysterious second-hand whistleblower was motivated by documented political bias against President Trump as discovered by the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael K Atkinson.

This information will likely be released tomorrow in combination with the transcript of the phone call between President Trump and President Zelensky:

Additionally, the New York Times is confirming that White House lawyers are trying urgently to clear a path to push the Whistleblower into the arms of the politically weaponized House and Senate intelligence committees:

White House and intelligence officials are working out a deal to allow the whistle-blower who filed an explosive complaint about President Trump to speak with congressional investigators.

[…] The director of national intelligence is also expected to release a redacted version of the whistle-blower’s complaint in coming days, people familiar with the situation said. (more)

Fox News’ Ed Henry has this:

It might be worth re-visiting President Trump’s earlier warning to the media when he was first hit with questions about the issue:

[Interview Transcript]

Q Mr. President, do you want to address this whistleblower story, sir?

Q Will you be asking — will you be asking —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Wait a moment, please.

Q Do you want to address this whistleblower story?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: What story?

Q The whistleblower, whether it was (inaudible)?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It’s a ridiculous story. It’s a partisan whistleblower. Shouldn’t even have information. I’ve had conversations with many leaders. They’re always appropriate. I think Scott can tell you that. Always appropriate. At the highest level, always appropriate. And anything I do, I fight for this country. I fight so strongly for this country. It’s just another political hack job.

Q Mr. President, on that point, did you discuss Joe Biden, his son, or his family with the leader of Ukraine?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It doesn’t matter what I discuss. But I will say this: Somebody ought to look into Joe Biden’s statement, because it was disgraceful, where he talked about billions of dollars that he’s not giving to a certain country unless a certain prosecutor is taken off the case.

So, somebody ought to look into that. And you wouldn’t, because he’s a Democrat. And the Fake News doesn’t look into things like that. It’s a disgrace.

But I had a great conversation with numerous people. I don’t even know exactly who you’re talking about, but I had a great conversation with numerous people — numerous leaders. And I always look for the conversation that’s going to help the United States the most. That’s very important.

Q Mr. President, do you know the identity of the whistleblower? Do you know the identity of the whistleblower?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I don’t know the identity of the whistleblower. I just hear it’s a partisan person, meaning it comes out from another party. But I don’t have any idea. But I can say it was a totally appropriate conversation. It was actually a beautiful conversation.

And this is no different than — you know, the press has had a very bad week with Justice Kavanaugh and all of those ridiculous charges and all of the mistakes made at the New York Times and other places. You’ve had a very bad week. And this will be better than all of them. This is another one. So keep — so keep — so keep playing it up, because you’re going to look really bad when it falls. You know, I guess I’m about — I guess I’m about 22 and 0, and I’ll keep it that way.

Q Did you mention Joe Biden during the conversation though, Mr. President?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I don’t want to talk about any conversation, other than to say — other than to say: great conversation, totally appropriate conversation, couldn’t have been better. And keep asking questions and build it up as big as possible so you can have a bigger downfall.

Q Mr. President, on the whistleblower, have you read the complaint? Have you read the complaint of the —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, I haven’t. It’s — it’s —

Q Who in your White House has?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I just tell you, it is — everybody has read it and they laugh at it. And it’s another —

Q But you haven’t read it?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It’s another media disaster. The media has lost so much credibility in this country. Our media has become the laughingstock of the world.

When you look at what they did to Justice Kavanaugh and so many other things last week, I think this is one of the worst weeks in the history of the fake news media. You have been wrong on so many things and this one will be — I wouldn’t say it will top the list, because I think you can’t do worse than some of the stories you missed over the last week or two, but the media of our country is laughed at all over the world now. You’re a joke.

Okay, what else?

Q Mr. President, (inaudible) clarify: When you talk about the conversation that you —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Which conservation?

Q Well, we’re trying to figure out what conversation you’re —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, figure it out. You’re supposed to be the media. Figure it out.

Q July 25th? Was it July 25th?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It was — which conversation?

Q Was it July 25th, with the President of Ukraine?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I really don’t know. I don’t know.

Q Should Congress see the complaint and the transcript of your call to clear any confusion?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: There is nothing. It’s nothing.

Q Should Congress see it?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: There’s nothing.

[Transcript]

Today Nancy Pelosi made an announcement with forethought, optical planning, teleprompter script, and a presentation intended to look serious.  But what she announced was simply a continuation of the status quo wrapped up in newly packaged lingo.

Pelosi stated she was herewith announcing an “official impeachment inquiry“. Everything remains ‘as is’, albeit with enhanced optics and new titles for the narrative engineers.

The Democrat stage managers forgot the trumpets…

Essentially she announced House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler will continue doing what House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler was already doing; only now House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, will start doing what he was doing with a new lingo.

There is not one thing different from today than yesterday, except the optics and new language to help the media hype something that doesn’t exist.   Speaker Pelosi did not announce her intent to hold a house vote to authorize an impeachment investigation; she didn’t even mention the word vote at all.   In essence what Speaker Pelosi has done is just satiate her base of Democrats with the fancy optics of something that doesn’t exist.

What’s the difference from Nadler’s “impeachment inquiry” yesterday, and Pelosi’s “official impeachment inquiry” today?…  Nothing.

The constitution provides for the formal process to initiate articles of impeachment for a sitting president.  The constitutional process begins with a vote in the House of Representatives to launch an impeachment investigation by House Committees.  However, Pelosi doesn’t want to hold a vote to start the process…. so she’s just modifying the language of the status quo and instead of the House voting to authorize an “impeachment investigation”, Pelosi announces an arbitrary “impeachment inquiry” by fiat.

It’s silly.

It’s the goofiest thing in modern politics.

It would be laughable if a sizable portion of the country, driven mostly by insufferable media presentations, didn’t actually believe something new just happened.

Feel free to modify the popcorn to “official popcorn”.

.

In a stunning and very rare move today Federal Judge Anthony J Trenga has thrown out the conviction of a Mike Flynn’s partner Bijan Rafiekian (Flynn Intel Group) and granted the defendants’ motion to acquit.  [Hat Tip to Techno-Fog for the ruling]

This is a huge blow to the DOJ-NSD who framed their special counsel case on sketchy FARA violations and bamboozled the jury with dubious legal theories.  This type of intervention by a federal judge is very rare.  Here’s the ruling:

.

Highlights below:

“The evidence was insufficient as a matter of law for the jury to convict Rafiekian on either count”

The Government “failed to offer substantial evidence” that Rafiekian acted as an agent of a foreign government”

“There is no substantial evidence” that he agreed to cooperate subject to the direction/control of Turkey; no evidence of any implied agreement w/ Turkey.

“There is no evidence of discussions or suggestions, let alone an agreement, express or implied, to either avoid filing under FARA or to cause the filing of a false FARA registration statement.”

On General Flynn and the alleged FARA conspiracy: The government told the Court that “Flynn was not a member of the alleged conspiracy.”

“The evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to sustain either of Rafiekian’s convictions, and the Motion for Acquittal is therefore GRANTED. Should the Court’s judgment of acquittal be later vacated/reversed… the motion for New Trial is conditionally granted”

The DOJ/NSD has been using sketchy FARA (Sec. 951) designations to construct legal arguments within their FISA applications.

The DOJ National Security Division have been using FARA, accusing people of being “agents of a foreign power”,  in order to conduct political surveillance.

Sound familiar?

It should: