Posted originally on CTH on February 11, 2026 | Sundance
I said Monday on Twitter: “Seriously. Correct me if I’m wrong. For more than a decade we have known that billionaire Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the originating money man behind Jeffrey Epstein.
This should not be some kind of revelation, as it was widely discussed by those who researched Epstein over a decade ago. Wexner’s money was the originating capital for what would later become Epstein’s influence empire.
Additionally, and again, stop me if this old news is incorrect, well over a decade ago it became openly known that the “PINK” brand of Victoria’s Secret was specifically created due to the sexuality of young girls becoming part of the marketing influence of Epstein.
Wexner created the original VS girls, and the influence of Epstein (underage sexual perversions) then led to the adding of the VS “PINK” sub-brand.
Are we supposed to understand this is all new information? Honest question. No snark. I’m just confused by this sudden newness of it. We been knew.”
Full 2001 VH1 segment, glorifying Jeffrey Epstein while showing Epstein's allegiance with Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey.
They also point out he has his own chemistry lab in the basement and world class scientists which he pays "20 Million dollars a year to perform WHATEVER… pic.twitter.com/JVXVrdubo0
The above VH1 segment was from 2007; however, even ten years prior to that it was commonly known that Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the source of most of Jeffrey Epstein’s start-up finances. The resulting social network was fraught with sexual weirdos, and the VS brand alignment just fit with the club.
Suddenly, Representative Thomas Massie, a Sea Island asset if ever there was one, is proclaiming the Epstein file information outlining the relationship with Wexner is new information, stunning in scope and worthy of extraordinary time to explore. It’s all weird.
🚨🇺🇸 REP MASSIE NAMES LES WEXNER AS CO CONSPIRATOR IN THE EPSTEIN FILES
Massie confirmed the “well known retired CEO” previously blacked out and labeled a co conspirator is none other than Victoria’s Secret founder Les Wexner. pic.twitter.com/lWId4H9TFZhttps://t.co/6YmH1NaeWL
VIA NBC – […] The newly released version of the 2019 document shows eight people are listed as co-conspirators, including four whose names are not redacted: Wexner, the former CEO of Victoria’s Secret, Lesley Groff, Epstein’s longtime secretary, the late modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, and Ghislaine Maxwell, the only person who was charged in connection with Epstein. She was convicted of sex trafficking charges and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.
Four other names on the document are still redacted. It’s unclear who those people are but prosecutors have said that Epstein used women he preyed on as recruiters. A separate document dated August 2019 indicated that some of the others were victims as well, and had been cooperating with investigators.
A Wexner legal representative said in a statement to NBC News Tuesday that “The Assistant U.S. Attorney told Mr. Wexner’s legal counsel in 2019 that Mr. Wexner was neither a co-conspirator nor target in any respect. Mr. Wexner cooperated fully by providing background information on Epstein and was never contacted again.”
Wexner had a long relationship with Epstein that dated back to the 1980s, and hired him to manage his personal finances. He’s said he cut ties to Epstein after he was accused of sexually abusing minors in Florida. It was after that Wexner said he “discovered that he had misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family.”
Wexner’s name was also mentioned in a July 2019 FBI email about possible co-conspirators that was made public as part of the DOJ release. Another August 2019 FBI email said there was “limited evidence regarding his involvement.”
He is scheduled to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee next week. (more)
The first time I heard the information about Wexner and Epstein was sometime in the mid 1990’s. It was well known.
There is a lot of horrible, creepy and perverted stuff in the Epstein file releases that is factually new information. However, the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Les Wexner is not new. Perverse, yes -as it was even then; but not new. There were even documentaries about it, one of them I think was called “Angels and Demons“.
Posted originally on CTH on February 10, 2026 | Sundance
Representative Ilhan Omar is one of the most sanctimonious corrupt Democrats in congress, and she’s loud and proud about it because she understands how to engage in financial fraud safely. Just do what everyone else is doing but do it bigger, that way there’s no way her peers can approach it.
Someone in DC gave House Oversight Chairman James Comer the familiar tap on the shoulder and told him they don’t investigate their own Uniparty tribe. So, Comer drops his planned review of Omar’s corruption and shifts it to the ethics team.
BREAKING: James Comer says the House Ethics Committee will take over the investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar after a massive spike in her net worth was flagged in financial disclosures:
“We’ve been informed in the last few hours that the Ethics Committee is probably going to have… pic.twitter.com/YIO1DkOr91
A game of pretending is needed in order to retain the illusion of the Potemkin Village of DC. A construct manufactured by the power structure that exists behind the puppet show, with the full intention to distract us. Pretending is what gives rise to a Florida governor on a 2022 ‘book tour’ run for a 2024 campaign that everyone denied was going to happen. Pretending is also what kicks the can of accountability away until it can be buried.
Pretending is needed in order to convince the audience Republicans will make a difference, or the black eye doesn’t hurt and look he bought me flowers. Perhaps some reminders and clarifications of the real game inside DC politics are needed. After all, while all these chaff and countermeasures are replaying their familiar tunes, CTH is actually trying to accomplish something by destroying some IC silos.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, hereafter called the House Oversight Committee or HOC, has a very specific function in DC circles that too few understand. Once again, let us be clear while trying to explain decades of false information founded upon arcane legislative outlooks.
Understanding the DC game of Chaff and Countermeasures…. A “Countermeasure” is a measure or action taken to counter or offset a preceding one.
Politically speaking, the deployment of countermeasures is a well-used tactic by professional politicians in Washington DC to counter incoming public inquiry and protect themselves from anger expressed by the electorate. The Republican leadership are very skilled in the management of “chaff” (outrage), and “countermeasures” (the distraction).
Within Washington DC, the HOC has a very specific and unique function. What Fox News is to corporate conservative punditry, so too is the HOC to the same DC system of pretending. The House Oversight Committee is the “Chaff and Countermeasures” committee.
The HOC operates for both parties with the same mission.
The House Oversight Committee was/is created by the House legislative leadership to make money for the party in control of the Chair. When the House Speaker is notified of a DC corruption issue, inside his/her office they will often be heard saying, “give it to oversight.” The intent of that instruction is to give the issue to the HOC, so they can hold hearings, create soundbites and fundraise from the issue.
Making money for the party in control of the Chair is the primary function of the House Oversight Committee. The HOC does not exist to create accountability or oversight; the HOC exists to exploit the issue for fundraising and satiate the base voters of the party in control of the Chair.
The HOC presents the illusion of accountability by constructing soundbites and member performances which are then broadcast on television for appearances to the voting audience. It is essentially theater.
The HOC is a “general oversight’ committee, not a committee of “specific jurisdiction.” Thus, the HOC is the vehicle where Democrats and Republicans publicly display their political initiatives, frame their narratives and then broadcast them on MSNBC, CNN (Democrats) or FOX NEWS (Republicans).
Depending on the issues at hand, the HOC committee members are generally those performance actors best known to the audience of both parties. This is not accidental; this is by design. Again, for emphasis, I am only talking about the HOC, a “generalized oversight” committee. Only this specific committee has this specific mission.
A hot button topic enters the committee ecosphere. Specifically trained staffers and performance artists, uniquely qualified to put on theatrical productions (both parties), are then deployed to assist the representatives in creating the soundbites that hopefully will go viral and assist them with fundraising and opportunities to say, “here’s what we are doing.” Outlining this construct is not an exhibition in cynicism; this is the reality of what the HOC is designed and created to do.
When you see the HOC performing at their best, you will see lots of soundbites created.
The Chair of the HOC is always part of the House Speaker’s close inner circle. From that association you will discover by training, by habit, and by consequence, the HOC framework is developed to sustain the process itself as an end result. The questioning is the sum total of all accountabilities. The performance is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire.
Oversight, in the HOC framework of narrative creation, has evolved into reveling in the endless process (a fundraising proposition) and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter, and never actually applies accountability toward what might be discovered. This is why you end up with high blood pressure, frustrated with the questions not asked, and throwing bricks at the screen or monitors when viewing.
The point of HOC hearings is to create what are now described as “viral moments” that can be used to generate money.
The second, and lesser objective, is to give the illusion of accountability while not actually ever holding anyone or anything accountable. See prior HOC reference points like Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, the Twitter File review or the Joe/Hunter Biden crime syndicate investigation.
If you watch the HOC through the prism of expecting some form of accountability for the violations of law, you will be frustrated and disappointed. However, if you watch the HOC through the prism of how well the members will do at raising money from their performances, then you can evaluate the effectiveness – the proverbial winning and losing.
The HOC is designed by House leadership to perform the same basic function for both Democrats and Republicans. The HOC committee assignments are selected based on the theatrical skills of each representative. This is not to say the motives of the members are sullied or impure, it is simply to point out the motive of the committee itself is to generate fundraising from the skillsets of the members on the committee.
Once you fully grasp what the intent of the House Oversight Committee is about, and once you drop the expectation that any accountability in oversight is the intent, then you can watch the performances through the entertainment prism of partisan politics and genuinely enjoy them – or hate them.
The HOC is called the “Chaff and Countermeasures” Committee, because that’s essentially what the committee does. It gives the appearance of targeting, steering the target to a controlled destination, and then distracting the audience from the outcome of accountability.
If sunlight is achieved, meaning the Mainstream Media cannot ignore the issue as presented and questioned, and if the general public become more familiar with the controversial subject matter or topic at hand, and if the party of the Chair can fundraise from the issue, then the committee has succeeded. However, if you are looking for something to change as an outcome of any HOC investigation or hearing, you will be perpetually disappointed.
There seems to be a willful blindness on the part of the American people, a chosen refusal to acknowledge the implications of the unAmerican and unConstititional behaviors, actions and outcomes we are being served on a daily basis. It can no longer be presumed to be a matter of “I can’t see what’s happening”, because a whole lot of normal Americans really are clean and articulate.
“I can’t see it” just doesn’t cut it.
NONSENSE! Most people can see it. Most are just choosing to reconcile the irreconcilable because it is more comforting to ignore the truth of it. Just be honest, for many people avoidance has become a survival mechanism.
It’s more along the lines of “I see what’s happening, but it’s scary and complicated and confusing, and if I admit that I see it, I will become responsible in a way that I am not if I keep pretending I can’t see it or hear it or maybe I don’t understand it.”
Cue the audio visual. Do you remember the Awan Brothers scandal?
The political system in Washington DC has become so massive it is now capable of protecting itself. Any attempt to reduce the influence, scope or size of the system is considered a risk. The system is, in essence, protecting itself. Deep State is self-aware. NOTE 07:43 (just hit play)
Whether it’s John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Kevin McCarthy or Mike Johnson, leadership’s Lucy has unlimited footballs.
Whether it’s the Awan Brothers, the Huma Abedin laptop, the Clinton’s private servers, the Hunter Biden laptop, the Mark Warner/James Wolfe leak of classified information, the activity of CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella in the impeachment, the many aspects to Mary McCord, or the leaking of the Dobbs decision by Sheldon Snook, all of these things are very public, very visible and very well known. Yet did you see a single satellite truck in front of their house or a microphone in their face asking questions?
Nope. DC runs this game of pretending and all the media play the game.
The fourth estate (media) has long ago collapsed.
Now, the choices are ours.
Personally, I will not pretend, and I know most of you also refuse.
If we keep assembling enough people to stop pretending, then what happens?
Allison Gill is an ally of the Lawfare network and recently sat down for an interview with NSA whistleblower attorney Andrew Bakaj; the same attorney used by former CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.
This interview appears to be taking place after Bakaj revised his statements to The Guardian forcing them to rewrite the central claim of the leak he provided. The Guardian rewrote their article removing the key claim within the intelligence intercept that a foreign intelligence person was in contact with a person close to President Donald Trump.
The revision now states:
[…] “The Guardian reported earlier on Saturday that the phone conversation was between a person associated with foreign intelligence and a person close to Trump, based on Bakaj’s recollection of the complaint, which he confirmed over multiple calls. However, after publication, Bakaj said he misspoke.
He clarified his understanding of the complaint in a statement: “The NSA picked up a phone call between two members of foreign intelligence involving someone close to the Trump White House,” he said. “The NSA does not monitor individuals without a reason.” {citation}
This is not a small “revision,” it is essentially a rewrite of the central component to the whistleblower complaint. As it is now clarified two foreign people were intercepted talking about a person who knows Donald Trump. This could be any two foreign people gossiping or talking about anyone who is in the orbit of Donald Trump. That explains why intelligence analysts reviewed the NSA intercept, disregarded it and said it is hearsay likely just ‘gossip” according to New York Times reporting.
However, that said, Andrew Bakaj then appears on a podcast with Allison Gill during their effort to put traction to the claims, and Bakaj repeats the false statement. See video at 7:45:
…”So, in the spring of last year there was intelligence that was gathered by an agency that captured, um, activity that was being conducted by someone close to the President.”…
This is the same lie the whistleblower’s attorney Andrew Bakaj told The Guardian; that someone close to the president was a participant in the “activity.” This is demonstrably false through all other reporting.
The complaint alleges two foreign individuals were intercepted talking to each other about a person who Bakaj defines as close to the president, on the subject of Iran.
It could simply be two Germans or Israelis talking about Iran and wondering what Devin Nunes thinks about it.
The entire predicate claim is silly. Foreign officials and foreign intelligence officials talk to each other all the time about Trump and or his people.
This complaint is a fabrication, and the fact that the NSA Whistleblower included the TSSCI material in the complaint, literally outlining who was intercepted talking, is the reason why the complaint could not be shared or circulated without careful guidance by the DNI.
The whistleblower did this on purpose. If the whistleblower wanted to share his complaint with more people, he could have just avoided including the TSSCI aspect.
This is intelligence community Lawfare in action.
Dear Chairman @SenTomCotton , please call @AndrewBakaj to appear before the Gang of Eight, preferably with his client, play this video, ask him if what he says at the prompt is true? When he says, "no" refer him to the DOJ for prosecution and dismiss the complaint. 👇
Posted originally on CTH on February 8, 2026 | Sundance
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice-Chairman, Mark Warner, a man of exceptionally dubious intelligence, appears on Face the Nation for a pre-scripted interview with CBS’s Margaret Brennan. The video and transcript are below.
From his position on the SSCI, Senator Warner was one of the key players in the deployment of the Intelligence Community against President Trump’s first term in office, including his background conversations with Chris Steele and his leaking of the Carter Page FISA warrant to promote the Trump-Russia conspiracy claim and stimulate the appointment of a DOJ special counsel.
Within President Trump’s second term in office, Warner’s primary concern is having a Director of National Intelligence (DNI) who doesn’t conform to the goals and objectives of the Fourth Branch of government, the intelligence apparatus. In reality, DNI Tulsi Gabbard appears to be methodically taking apart the intelligence community weaponization system. This, when combined with Gabbard’s review of election integrity issues, has triggered the deep concern of Warner, one of the IC’s primary enablers. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to ‘Face the Nation.’ We begin this morning with the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia’s Mark Warner. Good to have you here.
SEN. MARK WARNER: Thank you, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to talk about elections and security. Back on January 28, the FBI went to Fulton County, Georgia and seized ballots and 2020 voting records linked to the presidential election. The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, then was spotted outside the elections office, and she argued that her presence there had been personally requested by the president of the United States, and she had broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate and analyze intelligence related to election security. What would justify her involvement? Is there any foreign nexus that you have been informed of?
SEN. WARNER: We have not been informed of any foreign nexus. The job of the director of national intelligence is to be outward facing about foreigners, not about Americans, and remember, many of the reforms that were put in place actually took place after the Watergate scandal under President Nixon, where a president was directly involved in certain domestic criminal activities and appeared with the Watergate break-in. And my fear in this case is it almost seems Nixonian. If the president asked Gabbard to show up down in Georgia on a domestic political investigation- first of all, how would he know about the search warrant even being issued? That’s not his job. And then to have the irector of national intelligence down there, which is totally against her rules, unless there is a foreign nexus, and she has not indicated any foreign nexus to us to date.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There’s been no communication with the committee whatsoever on this issue?
SEN. WARNER: We have asked. We then subsequently found that this was not the first time she was involved in domestic activities. She went down and seized some voting machines in Puerto Rico earlier in the year. Again, we had no knowledge of that. And then the question of what she was doing in Georgia. There’s been three or four different stories since it broke. First, she said the president asked, then the president said he didn’t ask her. Then he said it was Pam Bondi, the attorney general. So we don’t have the slightest idea other than the fact that the whole thing stinks to high heaven, and the fact is, Donald Trump cannot get over the fact that he lost Georgia in 2020 that he lost the election in 2020. My fear is now he sees the political winds turning against him, and he’s going to try to interfere in the 2026 election, something a year ago I didn’t think would be possible.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s a tremendous statement. But just to clarify here, it was Reuters that first reported that Gabbard went to Puerto Rico back in the spring to seize voting machines. Was Congress informed at all? Did you learn about it in the press?
SEN. WARNER: I believe the first we ever heard about this was from the press itself.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Wow. So the- you’ve laid out that the intelligence agencies usually focus overseas, but the White House is arguing that the director was there for good reason, and that federal law, they argue, assigns a DNI statutory responsibility to lead counter intelligence matters related to election security, election voting system risk, software, voter registration databases. You’re concerned, but are your fellow Republicans on the committee concerned?
SEN. WARNER: Here’s the ironic thing, Margaret, many of the protections for our election system were put in place during the first Trump administration. We set up CISA, the cybersecurity agency, to help work with state and local elections. There was an FBI center set up for foreign malign influence, foreign influence. And then we put into law something called the Foreign Malign Influence Center at the Director of National Intelligence office. All of those entities have been basically disbanded. CISA cut by a third. The FBI center cut back. The ODNI center cut back, which we think is, frankly, counter to the law. But it all- in terms the ODNI has to be involved, of foreign involvement, there has been no evidence of that to date.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Where is Chair Cotton on this, though?
SEN. WARNER: We have jointly been making sure that we get updates on election security, and I think we see more of that to come, because this is critical. And my concern is that when we see artificial intelligence tools and others- it was almost child’s play. What happened in 2016 China, Russia, Iran others could be interfering. We’ve not seen evidence to date. Gabbard, if she’s got any evidence, should have provided it to the Congress. I think this was an effort where Donald Trump can’t get over the fact that he lost Georgia so obsessed. And it begs the question is, what was Gabbard doing there? And it frankly, begs the question is- question is, why was the president even aware of this investigation before the search warrant was issued?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we would, we would love to put those questions to the director, and have asked to do so. But now that you are here, can you just button this up for me? Because we’re talking about 2020, and that’s what Fulton County. The focus was about but you also said, you think in 2026 there’s an effort to interfere. What evidence do you have of that?
SEN. WARNER: This was what I’m seeing from the president’s own comments about nationalizing elections and putting Republicans in charge, counter to the constitution. We’ve seen these activities in Georgia, where could there be some effort that suddenly gives him an excuse to try to take some of these federalization efforts we’ve seen ICE. We focused a lot of this activity on ICE in terms of they’re going rogue in Minneapolis. But there is a very real threat, without reforms at ICE, that you could have ICE patrols around polling stations, and people would say, “well, why would that matter?” If they’re all American citizens–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Noncitizens cannot vote.
SEN. WARNER: –Because we’ve seen ice discriminate against Latinos families. We’ve seen as well mixed families where someone may be legal and others not. And candidly, you don’t need to do a lot to discourage people from voting, and we’ve more recently seen ICE starting to use technology where they can get information about Americans. Recently, there was an individual in Minnesota that got denied a global entry card to get through TSA quicker because he or she appeared at a protest rally. Do we really want ICE having that information?–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that what DHS said?
SEN. WARNER: Hypothetically- that was what happened in Minnesota. Hypothetically, if ICE is getting information, and you’ve got an unpaid parking ticket, would you go vote if you’ve got an unpaid parking ticket, thinking that an ICE patrol might be at a polling station, this is uncharted territory, and yet you’ve got the president’s own words, in many ways, raising concerns, because he says, well, gosh, we Republicans ought to take over elections in 15 states.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re going to talk about some of that and the operations at the local level with David Becker, our elections expert ahead in the show, and the immigration reform. But I want to ask you about what’s going on with Director Gabbard, because there was a whistleblower who filed a complaint against her personally and offered to come to Congress to share the information. According to the attorney for this whistleblower, this is about a complaint that two inspectors general, one of them Biden-era, concluded had a non-credible nature. You’ve viewed a redacted version of the complaint as I understand it. Do you accept their conclusions?
SEN. WARNER: Well, first of all, the previous Inspector General, who’d been a long term professional, viewed it as credible. The new–
MARGARET BRENNAN: — Which of the two complaints?
SEN. WARNER: The original- I can’t talk about the contents of the complaint. I’m old fashioned. It’s classified, and the complaint is so redacted, it’s hard to get to the bottom up, I got additional questions. My concern- what the director did, is that this information was not relayed to Congress. There is a process, and we didn’t even- we, and I mean, we the Gang of Eight, didn’t even hear about the complaint until November. We only saw it in February, and we’ve got this complete contradiction where the then lawyer for Director Gabbard said she shared the responsibility she had to share this with Congress in June, the legal responsibility. She later stated that she was not aware of her responsibility. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse if you’re the Director of National Intelligence.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, as I understand it, because when it’s deemed non-credible, it is not necessarily an urgent concern that would —
SEN. WARNER : — There was a ruling of urgency by the first inspector general. That was contradicted by the Trump Inspector General, but the process was still ongoing. The fact that this sat out there for 6,7,8 months now, and we are only seeing it now, raises huge concerns in and of itself.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Well, I know you said you will not share what the intercept and the intelligence was about, or the complaint itself, but CBS has been told by a senior intelligence official the whistleblower complaint included reference to an intelligence intercept between two foreign nationals in which they mentioned someone close to President Donald Trump. US intelligence did not verify whether the conversation itself was more than just gossip. Will you be able to speak to the whistleblower? Will you be able to see this underlying intelligence?
SEN. WARNER: My understanding is the whistleblower has been waiting for guidance, legal guidance, on how to approach the committee.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Does the whistleblower still work for the US government?
SEN. WARNER: I don’t have any idea.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Will you be able to view the intelligence, the intercept itself that she’s accused of not sharing?
SEN. WARNER: My question is- we are trying to get both the redactions and the underlying intelligence, and that’s- that is in process. I’m not going to talk to the content itself, but this whole question, remember, this whistleblower came forward in May. It’s now February of the following year, and we’re still asking questions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Tom Cotton, the chair, says he’s- he’s comfortable with- with the process to date, but on the–
SEN. WARNER: — I’m- I’m not comfortable with the process, the timing, and I can’t make a judgment about the credibility or the veracity, because it’s been so heavily redacted.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the director is frustrated with you personally and issued this really long blistering statement saying you’ve repeatedly lied to the American people, that the media also lies, and that that she never had the whistleblower complaint in her possession and saw it for the first time two weeks ago. I guess, the actual hard copy. So, do you care to respond to this accusation that you were lying?
SEN. WARNER: I would respond that I do not believe that Director Gabbard is competent for her position. I don’t believe that she is making America safer by not following the rules and procedures on getting whistleblower complaints to the Congress in a timely fashion. I believe she has been totally inappropriate showing up on a domestic criminal investigation in Georgia around voting machines. I think she has not been appropriate or competent in terms of, frankly, cutting back on investigations into foreign malign influence, literally dismembering the foreign line influence center that’s at the Director of National Intelligence, and we are going to agree to disagree about who’s telling the truth, and I believe her own general counsel, who’s now her deputy general counsel, testified this week that he shared with Director Gabbard, in June her legal obligations.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the NSA has released a statement saying that they are abiding by the law. We do invite Director Gabbard on this program. Before I let you go, I have to ask you about Iran. There have been a number of think tanks who have published photos of what they believe is evidence of Iran reconstituting and rebuilding its nuclear program that the US bombed eight months ago. Are they rebuilding?
SEN. WARNER: When we struck Iranians nuclear capabilities, our military did a great job. It was not totally obliterated. So, that standard that the President himself set and Iran has been indicated in public documents, is trying to reconstitute. What I fear is that we don’t have the ability to bring the full power of pressure against Iran. A few weeks back, when the Iranian people bravely were in the streets, and there might have been a moment, we couldn’t strike, because the aircraft carrier that was usually in the Mediterranean was off the coast of Venezuela, doing the blockade there. On top of that- on top of that as well, we were unable to bring the full force of pressure of our allies in Europe against Iran, because at that very same moment, President Trump was disrupting NATO with his Greenland play. We are stronger when we use our allies, when we have our full military capabilities in region, and that military is getting stretched, as good as we are, as the President gets engaged in activities all over the world.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You support the diplomacy underway now?
SEN. WARNER: I support the diplomacy. Absolutely.
MARGARET BRENNAN: All right. Senator. Mark Warner, thank you for your time today, Face the Nation will be back in one minute. Stay with us.
Posted originally on CTH on February 7, 2026 | Sundance
The reenergized Lyndon LaRouche team is very excited to see the Epstein file information creating great problems for Great Britian, British politicians, the London financial network and all of the people in the financial power structures of the United Kingdom.
LaRouche/Promethean’s Barbara Boyd outlines the delicious controversy surrounding British Prime Minister Keir Starmer against the background of his appointment of Lord Peter Mandelson as US Ambassador with all the ties to Jeffrey Epstein now in the headlines. Boyd reviews the links between Epstein and the U.K financial scandals, while President Trump continues promoting a revitalized American industrial economy.
Mrs Boyd then highlights the actions of the London elites calling upon U.K intelligence operative Christopher Steele who tries to cloud the British problem with Epstein by tying it all to Russia. Finally, Boyd underscores the significance of the President Trump’s economic policy in countering decades of financial abuses from the U.K and European Union.
Posted originally on CTH on February 7, 2026 | Sundance
The attempted framing of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard continues with senate intelligence committee Mark Warner and/or his collaborating whistleblower attorney Andrew Bakaj (also Ciaramella’s attorney) leaking details to the British intelligence services and their preferred media outlet The Guardian.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard has responded to the ongoing nonsense but first let’s review the newly disclosed details for some interesting information.
The UK Guardian now shares the agency for the “whistleblower” as the NSA, likely an NSA contractor, and the basic details of an intercepted phone call which the contractor deemed “unusual”. I’ll pull citations from the article.
SUMMARY VERSION: In/around March of 2025 an NSA contractor “detected evidence of an unusual phone call between an individual associated with foreign intelligence and a person close to Donald Trump, according to Whistleblower attorney, Andrew Bakaj.” The NSA contractor then wrote up a report and gave it to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard. DNI Gabbard then took the report to Trump’s chief of staff, Susie Wiles.
One day after meeting Wiles, Gabbard told the NSA not to publish the intelligence report. Instead, she instructed NSA officials to transmit the highly classified details directly to her office. (Guardian citation)
The NSA whistleblower was upset that DNI Gabbard didn’t share the report with others and filed a whistleblower complaint on April 17, 2025, with the Intelligence Community Inspector General. Within the complaint the NSA whistleblower included the details of the phone call leading to the complaint being labeled Top Secret Compartmented Information (TSCI classification). This format of including TSCI material complicates how the complaint can be reviewed. This looks like it was done on purpose.
Because the complaint contained TSCI material, it could not follow ordinary whistleblower pathways toward congress.
(Guardian) […] Acting inspector general Tamara A Johnson dismissed the complaint at the end of a 14-day review period, writing in a 6 June letter addressed to the whistleblower that “the Inspector General could not determine if the allegations appear credible”. The letter stipulated that the whistleblower could take their concerns to Congress, only after receiving DNI guidance on how to proceed, given the highly sensitive nature of the complaint. (citation)
The inclusion of the TSCI material, the ‘highly sensitive‘ part, creates a conflict within the process. [The TSCI material is the name of the individual associated with foreign intelligence, and the name of the person close to President Trump.]
The NSA whistleblower complaint is against DNI Gabbard, but any complaint containing TSCI material must carry guidance from DNI Gabbard for further sharing. The NSA whistleblower likely intended to create this problem as part of the scheme to set up the events.
(Guardian) […] The contents of the whistleblower complaint are still largely unknown. Bakaj, the whistleblower’s attorney, said that Gabbard’s office had redacted much of the complaint that was released to intelligence committee members on Tuesday, citing executive privilege.
“I don’t know the contents of the complaint, but by exercising executive privilege they are flagging that it involves presidential action,” he said.
On 3 February, Bakaj again requested guidance from Gabbard’s office about how to share the whistleblower’s full report while taking appropriate precautions.
“As you are well aware, our client’s disclosure directly impacts our national security and the American people,” Bakaj wrote. “This means that our client’s complete whistleblower disclosure must be transmitted to Congress, and that we, as their counsel, speak with members and cleared staff.”
Bakaj said that the DNI’s office did not respond to his letter by its Friday deadline. He plans to contact members of the Senate and House intelligence committees on Monday to schedule an unclassified briefing on Gabbard’s conduct and the “underlying intelligence concerns”.
Members of the gang of eight have contacted the NSA to request the underlying intelligence that the whistleblower says Gabbard blocked, according to staff in Warner’s office. (more)
NOTE: At this point I’m more interested in the name of this NSA contractor who is listening to the phone calls of foreign intelligence and the Trump administration. Much like the heavily protected Eric Ciaramella (2019 effort), this NSA contractor likely carries similar motivations. Both Ciaramella and this “whistleblower” are using the same lawyer, Andrew Bakaj.
Regardless, DNI Tulsi Gabbard responded today via her X account:
“Senator Mark Warner and his friends in the Propaganda Media have repeatedly lied to the American people that I or the ODNI “hid” a whistleblower complaint in a safe for eight months. This is a blatant lie.
The truth:
– I am not now, nor have I ever been, in possession or control of the Whistleblower’s complaint, so I obviously could not have “hidden” it in a safe. Biden-era IC Inspector General Tamara Johnson was in possession of and responsible for securing the complaint for months.
– The first time I saw the whistleblower complaint was 2 weeks ago when I had to review it to provide guidance on how it should be securely shared with Congress.
– As Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Warner knows very well that whistleblower complaints that contain highly classified and compartmented intelligence—even if they contain baseless allegations like this one—must be secured in a safe, which the Biden-era Inspector General Tamara Johnson did and her successor, Inspector General Chris Fox, continued to do. After IC Inspector General Fox hand-delivered the complaint to the Gang of 8, the complaint was returned to a safe where it remains, consistent with any information of such sensitivity.
– Either Senator Warner knows these facts and is intentionally lying to the American people, or he doesn’t have a clue how these things work and is therefore not qualified to be in the U.S. Senate—and certainly not the Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Here is a detailed chronology of the situation:
– June 2025, I became aware that a whistleblower made a complaint against me that after further investigation, neither Biden-era IC Inspector General Tamara Johnson nor current IC Inspector General Chris Fox found the complaint to be credible.
– The complaint required special handling and storage in a safe because the complainant chose to include highly sensitive information within the complaint itself rather than referencing the sensitive reporting and leaving the complaint at a lower level of classification.
– Security standards for complaints that include such sensitive intelligence required the Inspector General to keep the complaint and the intelligence referenced secured in a safe from the time the complaint was made, until now.
– In June 2025 after Biden-era Inspector General Tamara Johnson completed her review of the complaint, no further oversight or investigative activity took place.
– Biden-era Inspector General Johnson had communicated with me directly throughout the course of her investigation into this complaint, yet neither she nor anyone from her office informed me that the Whistleblower chose to send the complaint to Congress which would require me to issue security instructions.
– When a complaint is not found to be credible, there is no timeline under the law for the provision of security guidance. The “21 day” requirement that Senator Warner alleges I did not comply with, only applies when a complaint is determined by the Inspector General to be both urgent AND apparently credible. That was NOT the case here.
– I was made aware of the need to provide security guidance by IC Inspector General Chris Fox on December 4, 2025, which he detailed in his letter to Congress.
– I took immediate action to provide the security guidance to the Intelligence Community Inspector General who then shared the complaint and referenced intelligence with relevant members of Congress last week.
Senator Warner’s decision to spread lies and baseless accusations over the months for political gain, undermines our national security and is a disservice to the American people and the Intelligence Community.” {source}
This multi-layered IC operation against Tulsi Gabbard is transparent in its political motivations. However, at the end of the day the dynamic is really remarkable when you cut through the fog and see it for what it is. The Intelligence Community (Fourth Branch) is listening to the conversations of the Trump administration, conducting full spectrum surveillance and looking for anything the IC can exploit to retain their status and power.
For additional perspective, put this IC effort into context looking at it through the separation of powers.
Every element of the Executive Branch is President Donald Trump:
An NSA contractor working for Donald Trump intercepted a phone call between a foreign intelligence person and a person working for Donald Trump. That contractor, working for Trump, then shared the intercept with the ODNI, who also works for Trump. The DNI, working for Trump, then informed the chief of staff to Donald Trump, and later secured the intercept.
The NSA contractor, who works for Trump, was angered by the DNI who works for Trump, and filed a complaint against the DNI because she didn’t share their intercept with other people who do not work for Trump.
That’s the current state of the Intelligence Community within the U.S. govt.
Again, I will repeat…. Until the Trump administration puts full sunlight on the intelligence community operations; which includes retrieving, declassifying and sharing the sealed secret transcript of former ICIG Michael Atkinson; the various intelligence officials who are comfortable weaponizing their positions will continue trying to manipulate American politics. They are continually using the same playbook.
Posted originally on CTH on February 6, 2026 | Sundance
Flying to Palm Beach for the weekend, President Trump held a press availability and answered multiple questions aboard Airforce One. One of the reporters from the Washington Post claims to know the thinking of the MAGA base more than President Trump. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on February 6, 2026 | Sundance
A lesser-known member of Ansar al Sharia, the Islamic group who conducted the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi Libya, Zubayar Al-Bakoush, was captured and indicted by federal law enforcement. Attorney General Pam Bondi made the announcement earlier today.
Bakoush is labeled as a leading ‘facilitator’, essentially a ground planner of Ansar al Sharia during the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glenn Doherty. He was charged in an eight-count indictment unsealed today in U.S. District Court on multiple terrorism and murder counts. AG Pam Bondi made the announcement.
CTH followed the events closely, conducted a two-year research effort and then subsequently published the full story Benghazi Brief [SEE HERE]. Domestically, Barack Obama, Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Mike Morrell and James Comey participated in the coverup.
•Conspiracy to Provide Material Support and Resources to Terrorists Resulting in Death •Providing Material Support and Resources to Terrorists Resulting in Death •Murder of an Internationally Protected Person •Murder of a United States National Outside of the United States (Two Counts) •Attempted Murder of a United States National Outside of the United States •Arson and Placing Lives in Jeopardy Within the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States and Attempting to Do the Same •Maliciously Destroying and Injuring Property and Placing Lives in Jeopardy within the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States and Attempting to Do the Same
The charges stem from the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission and nearby CIA Annex that killed Ambassador Stevens and U.S. government personnel Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty.
According to the indictment, Bakoush was a member of Ansar Al Sharia (AAS), an Islamist extremist militia in Benghazi, which had the goal of establishing Sharia law in Libya.
On the evening of Sept. 11, 2012, a group of more than 20 heavily armed men – including Bakoush assembled outside the main gate of the U.S Special Mission in Benghazi. They were armed with assault rifles, other firearms, and explosive devices. At about 9:45 p.m., the group of armed men violently breached the main gate of the Mission. Upon entry, the men fanned out across the Mission complex, setting fires to building within the Mission compound.
When the attackers could not gain entry to the secure area of Villa C, the Ambassador’s residence, they set fire to it. Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith suffocated from the thick, black smoke that enveloped the residence. Diplomatic Security Services (DSS) Special Agent Scott Wickland, who had tried to guide Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith to safety, was injured and repeatedly took small arms fire while trying to rescue the two Americans.
The extremist group also attacked the Quick Reaction Force building, which was occupied by local Libyans serving as guards for the Mission.
About 10 p.m., Bakoush entered the Mission compound with other conspirators, and conducted surveillance of the Tactical Operation Center and the Villa. After Bakoush attempted to gain entry to vehicles belonging to Mission staff, he and his co-conspirators temporarily retreated to an area just outside the Mission.
About 11:15 p.m., conspirators assembled outside the southern gate and launched a second violent attack on the Mission using AK-type assault rifles, grenades, and rocket-propelled grenades. After 30 minutes, the group entered the compound and plundered the Mission’s office of documents, maps, and computers containing sensitive information about the location of the CIA Annex.
At 12:30 a.m., conspirators attacked the Annex with small arms, assault rifles, and rocket-propelled grenades.
Following the attack at the Mission, in the early hours of September 12, 2012, the violence continued at the CIA Annex, first with gunfire and then with a precision mortar attack. While defending the Annex, Mr. Woods, Mr. Doherty, DSS Special Agent David Ubben, and CIA security specialist Mark Tiegen were hit by a precision mortar attack, leading to the deaths of Mr. Woods and Mr. Doherty. Special Agent Ubben and Mr. Tiegen were seriously wounded but survived.
The Department of Justice previously charged and convicted two leaders in the Benghazi attack on federal terrorism charges and other offenses. Ahmed Abu Khatallah, aka Ahmed Mukatallah was sentenced in June 2018 to 22 years in prison and resentenced in September 2024 to 28 years in prison. Mustafa al-Imam was sentenced in January 2020 to nearly 20 years. (SOURCE)
Posted originally on CTH on February 5, 2026 | Sundance
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman, Tom Cotton, outlines via his X account that he has reviewed the intelligence community whistleblower complaint being used in a ridiculous effort to impeach DNI Tulsi Gabbard and finds it “not credible.”
The entire construct of this CIA-NIC ‘whistleblower’ operation is transparent. We have outlined the basic parameters of the entire fiasco {GO DEEP}. The intelligence community/Lawfare operation is a replay of the 2019 intelligence community/Lawfare operation used to frame Donald Trump during the 2019 impeachment effort.
Even setting aside the insufferable politics of it all, our national enemies must be laughing at us and how easy it is to identify the background of the super-secret, classified and “highly sensitive” national security information regarding Venezuela that underpins the baseline for the CIA-NIC effort.
If a simple website can put it together, then certainly our enemies know our own intelligence community is leveraging the rules and regulations around CIA assets to frame domestic political lawfare operations.
It is stunningly embarrassing on a national level.
Dear Senator Tom Cotton, you are Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. You are a member of the Gang of Eight. You have all the clearances.
Please take a few hours and go to the House Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) scif; sit down with the October 2019 deposition from ICIG Michael Atkinson and read it.
Access should not be a problem with HPSCI Chairman, Representative Rick Crawford, also being a fellow Arkansan.
Read how then ICIG Atkinson gained authority to change the CIA whistleblower rules to facilitate the false claim by CIA National Intelligence Council, Russia desk analyst Eric Ciaramella.
Look at how Ciaramella coordinated with then HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff, while former AAG of the NSD, Mary McCord, was working as staff on the background structure of the Trump impeachment operation.
Remind yourself of the context. In 2019, ICIG Atkinson was Mary’s former office counsel in the NSD (2016). They worked together on the Trump surveillance in 2016 (Page FISA) and then again in 2019 on the pathway to create an anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint.
What you will notice from that 2019 deposition is the similarity to the whistleblower complaint pathway and IC operation you just reviewed today.
Ciaramella was one of the key authors of the 2017 ICA from his office desk inside the CIA (per Brennan’s instructions to the NIC). Ciaramella was also the anonymous CIA whistleblower in the Trump impeachment 2019. See the issue?
Then ask yourself, if we the ordinary American people can see this stuff and put it together… then what exactly does that say about the SSCI role in oversight?
Posted originally on CTH on January 30, 2026 | Sundance
Apparently, the Senate and House intelligence committees are very concerned about what Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is doing. Almost every tweet from Senator Mark Warner in the past 48 hours has been about DNI Tulsi Gabbard.
What seems to worry them the most is that they don’t know exactly what she is doing. Triggered by Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, the Democrats are now demanding Director Gabbard tell them her intentions and her itinerary so they can monitor her activity. Tulsi Gabbard continues to review internal government activity without consulting them.
“Director Gabbard recognizes that election security is essential for the integrity of our republic and our nation’s security. As DNI, she has a vital role in identifying vulnerabilities in our critical infrastructure and protecting against exploitation,” a DNI spokesperson noted. “We know through intelligence and public reporting that electronic voting systems have been and are vulnerable to exploitation. President Trump’s directive to secure our elections was clear, and DNI Gabbard has and will continue to take actions within her authorities, alongside our interagency partners, to support ensuring the integrity of our elections,” the DNI spokesperson said.
We will continue to take actions alongside our interagency partners @FBI@TheJusticeDept to support ensuring the integrity of our elections.@DAGToddBlanche: “[@DNIGabbard] is an extraordinarily important part of this administration…we coordinate everything as a group…her… pic.twitter.com/NOVat3Z5Gg
Thursday evening while attending the premier of ‘Melania’ at the Kennedy Center, President Trump said, “you’re going to see some interesting things happening. They’ve been trying to get there for a long time.”
[…] “[Tulsi Gabbard] has begun studying information about voting machines, analyzed data from swing states and pursued theories that President Trump has promoted to claim the 2020 election was unfairly taken from him, the officials said, particularly on foreign government interference.
She has regularly briefed Trump and chief of staff Susie Wiles about her inquiry in recent months along with others involved in the investigation. Those include senior Justice Department officials, Trump’s outside ally and lawyer Cleta Mitchell and Kurt Olsen, a lawyer who pushed claims in 2020 that the election was stolen and joined the administration as a special government employee.
Gabbard has consulted with others in the intelligence community about claims of foreign interference in the 2020 election, the officials said, though she hasn’t provided the public with new evidence of it.
She is expected to prepare a report on her work, the people said. The administration has discussed executive orders on voting ahead of the midterm elections, two of the officials said.
[…] Democrats criticized Gabbard’s election effort. “Either Director Gabbard believes there was a legitimate foreign intelligence nexus—in which case she is in clear violation of her obligation under the law to keep the intelligence committees ‘fully and currently informed’ of relevant national security concerns—or she is once again demonstrating her utter lack of fitness for the office,” said Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the intelligence committee. (more – paywall)
There are a lot of interconnected aspects to all of this, many circle around the Intelligence Community’s prior and current involvement in various operations against the interests of the Office of the President.
As noted by Paul Sperry: “In a letter, ex-CIA chief John Brennan’s lawyer said his client has “complied” w/ a fed grand jury subpoena seeking, among other things, materials related to his role in creation of the Obama-ordered ICA on Russia + Trump covering the period from July 1, 2016 to Feb 28, 2017.”
Most people are not aware how the 2016/2017 CIA work product known as the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) ties directly into the 2019 impeachment effort against President Trump for the Ukraine phone call with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
A key architect of the 2017 ICA was a CIA analyst on Russian issues named Eric Ciaramella. The anonymous CIA whistleblower who facilitated the 2019 impeachment effort was the same Eric Ciaramella.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard previously released information showing how the 2017 ICA was fraudulently constructed, and now DNI Gabbard has reviewed the transcribed testimony of former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, where he described how he gained authority to change the CIA rules to permit Ciaramella to remain anonymous in 2019. All of this ties together.
[VIA Politico] – […] Sen. Mark Warner, (D-Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, argued on X Wednesday that there “are only two explanations” for Gabbard’s presence in the raid.
“Either Director Gabbard believes there was a legitimate foreign intelligence nexus — in which case she is in clear violation of her obligation under the law to keep the intelligence committees ‘fully and currently informed’ of relevant national security concerns — or she is once again demonstrating her utter lack of fitness for the office that she holds by injecting the nonpartisan intelligence community she is supposed to be leading into a domestic political stunt designed to legitimize conspiracy theories that undermine our democracy,” he wrote.
Warner and House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) wrote to Gabbard Thursday to request briefings for both panels about the legal basis, scope, and justification of her participation in the raid. (more)
DNI Tulsi Gabbard continues to work on behalf of the American people; that seems to have triggered Senator Mark Warner.
The need for control is a reaction to fear.
ps. We have not heard much about the 2026 FISA-702 reauthorization, yet.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 