IRS Asks People to Return Stimulus Checks Sent to the Deceased

The US Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced that they have issued over $267 billion worth of economic impact payments over the past two months. Yet, many of those funds were distributed to people who passed away and the government is now asking the people to correct their mistake. As I mentioned at the beginning of May, my family received a check that was made out to my mother who has passed away. The check was even marked “DECD.” Tens of thousands of other checks were distributed and clearly written to deceased individuals.

Now, the IRS wants the money back. As I have stated countless times, the government is incapable of running something as trivial as a bubblegum machine. The government will never admit to their mistakes, and always expects the people to take blame and responsibility.

If you received a check for a deceased relative, here are the steps you must take as noted on the IRS’ website.

If the payment was a paper check:

  1. Write “Void” in the endorsement section on the back of the check.
  2. Mail the voided Treasury check immediately to the appropriate IRS location listed below.
  3. Don’t staple, bend, or paper clip the check.
  4. Include a brief explanation stating the reason for returning the check.

If the payment was a paper check and you have cashed it, or if the payment was a direct deposit:

  1. Submit a personal check, money order, etc., immediately to the appropriate IRS location listed below.
  2. Write on the check/money order made payable to “U.S. Treasury” and write 2020EIP, and the taxpayer identification number (social security number, or individual taxpayer identification number) of the recipient of the check.
  3. Include a brief explanation of the reason for returning the EIP.

Immunity Must Be Overruled for Police & Prosecutors to Save Everyone


Once upon a time, we use to live in an honorable society. All systems move toward corruption and they inevitably move to protect their own agents. Ben Franklin wanted to create a legal system based upon the Scottish model where judges were nominated by lawyers and not politicians. He lost that argument and we have been paying dearly ever since. People see these protests and blame the blacks. They are ignorant of what is taking place in our legal system. It is not just about the blacks. The entire system has become so corrupt and this is why the United States has more people in prison than any other nation in the world including Russia. If you simply drive on federal property and forget your drivers’ license, you must serve 30 days in prison. A prosecutor will not get credit for a conviction in the Feds UNLESS you go to prison! Does that mean that Americans are the worst criminals on the planet? Or simply does it mean that it is time to change the system.

Proprietorial abuse is NOT limited to blacks. New York City specializes in prosecuting anyone who competes against the New York bankers. When I asked a lawyer why no New York banker has EVER been criminally prosecuted, he laughed and said, “You don’t shit where you eat!”

This was the prosecutor on my case — Richard D. Owens. We are heading into a civil war because the Supreme Court has held that prosecutors can do anything whatsoever. They can even knowingly seek the death penalty for people they know are innocent because the government should always be above the law.

In my case, under the direction of Owens, they seized Princeton Economics solely because my lawyers gave them one week to return the money they stole or we would file suit, which would end the takeover of Republic National Bank by HSBC.

They seized everything when we were NEVER in default and our clients were supporting us against the banks. The bank was illegally trading in or accounts and tried to claim that their own staff was assisting me from hiding losses they created. The problem was that we bought portfolios, but we were not managing them. We had to repay the note regardless of the performance. The allegation made no sense. We had issued notes buying the portfolios at their original cost with generally 10 years to repay covering their losses which were about 40%.

When the prosecutors finally figured out that the bank lied, they summoned me to a private reverse proffer session where Richard D. Owens admitted they knew I had never stolen anything. Yet he added, they would not drop the charges. They wanted me to plead to a conspiracy with Edmond Safra who was dead. I refused. To prevent me from helping our clients in suing the banks, they then imposed a gag order on me to prevent me from assisting my clients for LIFE!.

They used the charge of contempt without any description of a crime or any specific order to produce anything to purge the contempt, which is unconstitutional, but law means nothing in New York City. Clients even offered to put up the $1.3 million in cash to end the contempt and the court denied it, resulting in my lawyers simply saying this was just to prevent a trial making it impossible to produce anything. This was all just to protect the bank.

What is blatantly obvious is that $1 billion in our notes were sold to the bank to hide our profit. HSBC then redeemed our notes for $606 million, pocketing about $400 profit in foreign exchange so they could hide that from the public.

Because of this immunity that the Supreme Court has bestowed on police and prosecutors, there is ABSOLUTELY nothing you can do to defend yourself whatsoever regardless of your race, religion, or gender. Equal protection of the law does not exist! They are above the law and police have been abusing their position routinely. A friend who knew someone involved at HSBC commented it was a deal “too good to pass up,” which has always stuck in my throat wondering how much was paid back in bribes. Any of the major firms that compete against the bankers in New York are charged in New York, destroyed, and their bones are picked over by the New York bankers – i.e. Drexel Burnham (Philadelphia) and REVCO (Chicago). When a New Yorker is involved, MF Global, they are never charged.

Until the Supreme Court abolishes this unreasonable immunity, why should we ever expect this tension to subside?  The protests are far better off in front of the Supreme Court for until that law is changed, there will NEVER be any reform. They have charged the three officers involved in Floyd’s death. That will not create lasting reform until the law no longer protects them.

Supreme Court is Once Again Inspiring Civil War

Raxe Riot-Detroit_1967


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, I find it really amazing how you have forecast politics, markets, war, disease, and even said in 2014 race riots would return. I understand it is not you personally. What do you see from here with these riots even taking place in London?


ANSWER: Civil Unrest has been taking place for a very long time. If you step back and correlate it to the economy, you will notice that it rises when people start to struggle. The race riots right now would NOT takes place has we also accelerated the unemployment dramatically to where there are officially 40 million people who have lost their jobs. There have been plenty of deaths inflected by police since 2014. This would have normally peaked out by 2018, but the economic conditions show this cycle will continue into 2027 if the Supreme Court does not overrule its previous decisions.

On May 25, Minneapolis, Minnesota police officers arrested George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, after a deli employee called 911, accusing him of buying cigarettes with a counterfeit $20 bill. Seventeen minutes after the first squad car arrived at the scene, Mr. Floyd was unconscious and pinned beneath three police officers, showing no signs of life.

The death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police has re-energized a national debate over misconduct by law enforcement officials that the Supreme Court may be poised to enter. Both the left and the right finally agree on one thing – qualified immunity for government officials is unsupported by the Constitution and was even one of the express complaints in the Declaration of Independence:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

There can be no equal protect of the law as long as an government employee is above the law. Both prosecutors and police should be held to the same standards as any citizen. Until that happens, then the Supreme Court has placed the nation is jeopardy of civil war. There are plenty of good police, but they will be gunned down because of the abuses of the bad ones. Protecting bad prosecutors and police puts at risk others in the same field and the nation itself.

To understand Shakespeare’s famous line “the first thing we do let’s kill all the lawyers” must be understood in its context. Private citizens were not allowed to hire lawyers – only the king. So this saying comes from a tax rebellion where the “lawyers” were the king’s prosecutors who were seizing people’s property (farms and houses) because they were unable to pay his taxes. Prosecutors are by no means trustworthy simply because they hold that position. They are human just like police and have knowing prosecuted people wrongfully for political purposes.

If the Supreme Court does not ABOLISH all immunity for prosecutors and police, they will lead the country into civil war just as the Dread Scott decisions did in 1860 holding black were not covered by the Constitution in a stupid attempt to defuse the rising tension between North and South.

While looting is wrong, if the underlying legality is not changed, this is going to get far worse.

Flynn’s Attorney, Sidney Powell, Responds to Latest Brief by Judge Emmet Sullivan…

Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell calls-in to FBN with Lou Dobbs to discuss the latest filings in the case against her client.   WATCH/LISTEN:

U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco Responds to DC District Court – Refutes Arguments Presented by Flynn Judge Emmet Sullivan…

The DOJ has responded to the DC District Court invitation to file a brief in support of intervention by the appellate court. [pdf available here] In an unusual move the response from the Department of Justice comes directly from the office of the United States Solicitor General, Noel Francisco.

The DOJ points out the Judge has no standing to violate Article II and Article III of the U.S. Constitution in an effort to anoint himself as prosecutor, judge and jury of a criminal case outside of his judicial authority. “The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes,” Francisco argues.

Additionally, rules of criminal procedure “do not authorize a court to stand in the way of a dismissal the defendant does not oppose, and any other reading would violate both Article II and Article III” the DOJ writes.

Here’s the Full Brief:


AG Bill Barr Releases Statement on Riots and Domestic Terrorism: “violence instigated by Antifa is domestic terrorism”……

U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr releases the following statement today:

…”The violence instigated and carried out by Antifa and other similar groups in connection with the rioting is domestic terrorism and will be treated accordingly”…

“With the rioting that is occurring in many of our cities around the country, the voices of peaceful and legitimate protests have been hijacked by violent radical elements. Groups of outside radicals and agitators are exploiting the situation to pursue their own separate, violent, and extremist agenda.

It is time to stop watching the violence and to confront and stop it. The continued violence and destruction of property endangers the lives and livelihoods of others, and interferes with the rights of peaceful protestors, as well as all other citizens.

It also undercuts the urgent work that needs to be done – through constructive engagement between affected communities and law enforcement leaders – to address legitimate grievances. Preventing reconciliation and driving us apart is the goal of these radical groups, and we cannot let them succeed.

It is the responsibility of state and local leaders to ensure that adequate law enforcement resources, including the National Guard where necessary, are deployed on the streets to reestablish law and order. We saw this finally happen in Minneapolis last night, and it worked.

Federal law enforcement actions will be directed at apprehending and charging the violent radical agitators who have hijacked peaceful protest and are engaged in violations of federal law.

To identify criminal organizers and instigators, and to coordinate federal resources with our state and local partners, federal law enforcement is using our existing network of 56 regional FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF).

The violence instigated and carried out by Antifa and other similar groups in connection with the rioting is domestic terrorism and will be treated accordingly.” (link)

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, a well known Antifa supporter.

Sunday Talks: Crump on Floyd – “We Don’t Understand”…

Our old friend Ben ‘objectib ebidense’ Crump, the defense lawyer for the Floyd family, appears on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan to discuss the deaf of George Floyd. It’s been a while…. Ben does what Ben does, and factually he’s a goofy cat doing the best he can on behalf of his client.

“Officer” (in quotes deliberately) Derek Chauvin did kill George Floyd; that’s not the issue. The issue driving the media narrative surrounds why “Officer” Derek killed George. Toward the end of the interview Brennan asked Crump about Derek and George knowing each-other. Ben’s response, specifically how he phrases the admission, is what’s worth watching.


Hi Ben. Good to see you again. Oh, and you’re right, nothing makes sense.

By now Ben is discovering that everything around El Nuevo Rodeo, the Mexican Cantina and Dance Club where George and Derek worked, is sketchy. Likely Ben and Daryl Parks (Parks & Crump Esq.) have realized it’s better to focus their financial strategy toward reparations from the city of Minneapolis because this incident hits on something even Crump doesn’t want to touch.

El Nuevo Rodeo (hereafter ENR) is a front business. Nothing is as it seems.

The background ownership of ENR takes you to a shady network of LLC’s and the name Omar Investments Inc. (est. 1996).  Dig a little deeper and something else becomes evident… The ownership might connect to one or more U.S. three letter agencies.

The ownership network has previous interactions with FBI operations in/around Minneapolis. This is not surprising because Minneapolis Minnesota has more national security operations ongoing than any other community in the country. Various Somali groups are being watched, and anyone can do a google search to see when those security operations surface in the media.

Omar Investments Inc. owns El Nuevo Rodeo Cantina and night club since 1996.  The principle of Omar Investments Inc. is Muna Sabri. In 2001 a close relative, Basim Sabri, was captured by the FBI in a sting operation.

…”In 2001, FBI agents recorded Sabri giving Herron $5,000, cash intended to curry the lawmaker’s support for his development. Sabri was later convicted on three bribery counts and fined $75,000.” (link)….

FBI intercept in 2001, there’s the capture.  That’s the asset creation point for U.S. security to find a way to embed within Minneapolis, and assist the Sabri’s along the way.

The presented “former club owner”, Maya Santamaria, seen on television, appears to be a purposeful ‘front’ (a face useful in deflecting attention from the primary owner and operations). With that in mind, the scale of false information in/around the visible event, horrible as it was/is, creates layers and layers of purposeful misinformation and a need to control what the public sees in the media.

As I said before, I prefer to sit this one out; however, it is interesting.  If you consider that El Nuevo Rodeo might likely be a front for a three letter national security agency; or at the very least a valuable inside source for domestic intelligence and surveillance, things start reconciling rather quickly.

ENR also looks like a money laundering operation.  Part of that laundry operation appears to involve counterfeit currency.  This enterprise, writ large, looks like the answer to ‘how’a U.S. agency infiltrated the background criminal network in Minnesota to watch and monitor for domestic threats.  So there are layers to what is visible and a myriad of interests involved.

Officer Derek Chauvin is a 19-year veteran of the Mineapolis police dept.  Derek Chauvin also worked at ENR for 17 years.  That timeline puts Derek Chauvin showing up to work security at El Neuvo Rodeo cantina and club right after the FBI busts Basim Sabri (everyone remembers what intel agencies were doing right after 9-11-01).

Recently – When the Wuhan Virus hits the night club needs to shut down. By extension this shuts down any illicit activity maintained by the legit operation.  Any activity within a laundering operation would have to be paused.  It would look silly, very suspicious, if the ENR club bookkeeper was making bank deposits while the business is closed.

However, this also means George Floyd was out of work.  According to the indictment:

(read more)

The police were called because George Floyd was passing counterfeit $20 bills.

Could the way Chauvin, and the responders writ large, interacted with George Floyd have been an outcropping of concern that Floyd was putting the ENR operation at risk?

Read the indictment. Everything was cool until the responding officers attempted to put Floyd in Derek Chauvin’s squad car.  Floyd is presented as being ok with the arrest stuff; but really, really, didn’t want to get in Derek’s car.

17-years as a “security officer” for El Nuevo Rodeo.  Was Chauvin the enforcer?

Does that explain why everyone seems casual, even the responding EMT’s?

Could the national security angle explain why no prior charges against Chauvin in a 2006 shooting were ever sought?

One thing is clear, as attested by Benjamin Crump, Derek Chauvin and George Floyd knew each-other; this was not some random street incident.    Arguably, every single person in/around law enforcement and EMT response that day knew each-other.

I asked this question back in January about counterfeit currency in Minnesota:


🤔Very, very, weird. Why would anyone go through the trouble of counterfeiting $1 bills?

Considering time, labor, material and energy. It costs more to counterfeit a box of $1 bills than an actual real box of $1 bills is worth.

Something sketchy here. 



ICYMI: CBP officers discovered $900,000 in counterfeit US currency in a commercial rail shipment in International Falls, MN. The counterfeit currency was seized and will be turned over to @SecretService. Details: 

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
532 people are talking about this

Who would go through a cost-prohibitive process to counterfeit $1 dollar bills?

A U.S. national security agency conducting an operation with little interest in the profit dynamic; that’s who.

BOOM – Dana Boente Removed! – FBI Chief Legal Counsel Forced to Resign…

Finally, the DOJ has moved to remove one of the biggest background corrupt officials within the FBI. According to multiple media sources FBI chief legal counsel Dana Boente was forced to resign on Friday.  Finally, sunlight has removed a very corrupt player.

In prior positions as U.S. Attorney for Virginia; and while leading the DOJ National Security Division; and then later shifting to the FBI as chief legal counsel under Chris Wray; Dana Boente was at the epicenter of corrupt intent and malign activity toward the Trump administration. First, the report from NBC:

WASHINGTON DC – After a 38-year career with the Justice Department, the FBI’s top lawyer Dana Boente was asked to resign on Friday. Two sources familiar with the decision to dismiss Boente said it came from high levels of the Justice Department rather than directly from FBI Director Christopher Wray.

His departure comes on the heels of recent criticism by Fox News [Lou Dobbs] for his role in the investigation of former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. A spokesman for the FBI confirmed to NBC News that Boente did in fact resign on Friday.

Fox Business host Lou Dobbs said on April 27 that, “Shocking new reports suggest F.B.I. General Counsel Dana Boente day was acting in coordination with F.B.I. Director Christopher Wray to block the release of that evidence that would have cleared General Flynn.”

Wray formally asked for Boente’s resignation, but the decision to end his tenure at the FBI came from Attorney General William Barr’s Justice Department, which oversees the FBI, according to two sources.

A spokesman for the FBI said Boente announced on Friday his decision to retire, which will take effect June 30. (read more)

To understand the background, specifically as it pertains to why AG Barr had to make this move now, is complex.   A sequence of previous articles that CTH presented in/around the Dana Boente issue(s) have merged within this decision.

It is easiest to capture the full background content in this sequence:

♦June 2019 – Devin Nunes threatens criminal referrals for Dana Boente and Chris Wray – This background highlights Boente as a very bad actor [SEE HERE].

♦April 24, 2020 – Boente and Wray try to block release of Flynn documents.  AG Bill Bar intervenes.  This is the Flynn firetruck story, that ties to the release of the July 2018 letter from the DOJ-NSD and FBI to the FISA court. [SEE HERE]

♦April 26, 2020 – CTH Open Letter to Bill Barr – Outlines the corruption of Boente and Wray in the long-view and how it all comes together. [SEE HERE]

My educated hunch is the July 12, 2018, letter from the DOJ/FBI that was fraught with false information and purposeful lies to the FISA court, is really the issue that DOJ Bill Barr could not avoid.  The lies within the letter are just too brutally obvious, and contrast heavily against revelations coming from the outside USAO’s that Barr has brought in to review all of the prior DOJ and FBI activity.

Why do I think that’s the final straw?  Because if you take that moment in time and start working backward what you find is demonstrable and provable evidence that Dana Boente was one of the original Trump-era officials who participated in protecting “spygate” and using his support of the Mueller investigation as an internal weapon.   Remember, all the corrupt FBI players on Mueller’s team reported to Boente, including David Archey.

Dana Boente is enmeshed in all of it: the Wolfe case and cover-up, the Assange case and cover-up, and the hiding of documents in the Flynn case and cover-up.  Boente’s role as a manipulative fixer to protect the ongoing corrupt action of the Mueller probe was exactly why FBI Director Chris Wray hired him.

Taking out Boente now exposes the complicit nature of FBI Director Chris Wray; who, it appears, AG Bill Barr is being forced -by new discoveries- to leave Wray naked to his enemies.

In a June 2019 interview Nunes said “someone at the FBI” appears to have been “determined to hide” then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s notes from both the FISA court and Congress.  Our research identified that “someone” as Dana Boente a year before the Nunes remarks. [I even said ‘bookmark this and prove me wrong]

If you followed closely, and accept that Rosenstein was part of the problem, then you see how FBI Director Christopher Wray came into office; and, more importantly how/why Wray selected former DOJ-NSD head Dana Boente to shift from main justice to be legal counsel for the FBI.

Boente took over for former chief legal counsel James Baker, after the discoveries around Baker and McCabe could no longer be hidden. After being removed from responsibility eventually Baker resigned and went to work with the Lawfare group.  Boente’s job at FBI was/is to bury information, block congressional inquiry, and protect the crew.

Throughout 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and through today, across both administrations, the corrupt group within the FBI in DC were/are protecting themselves. The FBI redacted the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The FBI removed Page and Strzok texts and emails. The FBI hid texts and emails from Lisa Page to Andrew McCabe. The FBI kept documents from congress. The FBI has leaked false information to media to cover their tracks; and yes, the Trump-era FBI and GOPe politicians have participated writ large, many still do.

The corrupt FBI under Comey, McCabe and Baker is being protected and facilitated by the corrupt FBI under Christopher Wray, David Bowditch (San Bernadino infamy) and Dana Boente. It’s one long continuum of exactly the same behavior. Remember, 50 FBI ‘agents’ on Mueller’s team? Etc…. This DC network is ideologically aligned, operating on their own self-interests, and facilitated by a compliant media.

In 2015 the DOJ-OIG (office of inspector general) requested oversight of the DOJ National Security Division. It was Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the DOJ-NSD.

The DOJ-NSD is where FISA warrants come from. The weaponized and highly politicized officials within the DOJ-NSD were using the auspices of FARA violations (foreign agent registration act) to gain FISA court authorized surveillance on politicians all over Washington DC. Combined with the NSA database extractions, by federal contractors authorized by the FBI, it’s a massive web of political surveillance.

When John Carlin resigned as Asst. Attorney General in charge of the DOJ National Security Division in October 2016 he was replaced by Principal Deputy Asst. Attorney General and Chief of Staff, Mary McCord. After President Trump took office on January 20th, 2017, Sally Yates was Acting AG and Mary McCord was in charge of the DOJ-NSD.

Yates and McCord were the two Main Justice officials who then engaged with White House Counsel Don McGahn on January 26th, 2017, regarding the General Flynn FBI interview conducted on January 24th. The Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy was the headline.

On January 30th, 2017, Sally Yates was fired for refusing to defend the Trump travel ban from extremist countries. Yates was replaced on January 31st by the U.S. Attorney from the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), Dana Boente.

With his shift to Main Justice Dana Boente was Acting Attorney General, and Mary McCord was Asst. AG in charge of the DOJ-NSD. Boente was in the Acting AG position from Jan 31st, 2017, until Jeff Sessions was confirmed on February 8th, 2017.

When Jeff Sessions became AG, Dana Boente became Acting Deputy AG, a role he would retain until Rod Rosenstein was confirmed on April 25th, 2017. [Mary McCord remained head of the DOJ-National Security Division]

On March 2nd, 2017, Dana Boente was one of the small group who participated in a conversation that led to the recusal of Jeff Sessions from anything related to the 2016 election. This recusal included the ongoing FBI counterintelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane, which was later picked up by Robert Mueller.

The other attendees for the recusal decision-making meeting (see above schedule) included Sessions’ chief of staff Jody Hunt; Criminal Chief in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland, Jim Crowell; Deputy Assistant Attorney General (DAAG) in the Department of Justice National Security Division Tash Gauhar (FISA lawyer); and Associate Deputy Attorney General Scott Schools. [Note: Tash Gauhar was lawyer for FBI Clinton case; and Scott Schools was part of drafting Clinton exoneration letter.]

The Main Justice group influenced Jeff Sessions to recuse.

With AG Jeff Sessions recused on March 2, 2017, FBI Director James Comey now reported to Acting Deputy AG Dana Boente. [Technically, Boente is still EDVA U.S. Attorney and is only ‘acting’ as Deputy AG] Additionally, on March 31st, 2017, President Trump signs executive order 13787 making the U.S. EDVA Attorney the 3rd in line for DOJ succession.

Question: If Dana Boente was appointed “Acting Attorney General” on January 31st, 2017 (he was), then why did Don McGahn need to draw up XO 13787 on March 31st, 2017… especially after confirmed AG Jeff Sessions was already in place Feb 9th?

The answer likely has to do with a sign-off needed for FISA.

See the issue?

How does somebody (unknown) advise White House Counsel Don McGahn to draw up an executive order so that Boente can sign a FISA…. without telling Don McGahn the reason why AG Sessions can’t sign off on the FISA? See the issue now?

In the period between March 2nd and April 25th – With AG Sessions recused, and without a Deputy AG confirmed, Dana Boente is simultaneously:

  • U.S. Attorney for EDVA
  • Acting Deputy AG.
  • Acting AG for all issues related to Sessions recusal.

It is James Comey and Dana Boente who sign the April 2017 FISA renewal for Carter Page.

(Page #271 – Carter Page FISA Application)

This dynamic would later become important as notes Boente took from conversations with James Comey became evidence for Mueller’s expanded obstruction investigation. [3/2/17 Mary McCord is still head of DOJ-NSD]

Somehow Acting Deputy AG Dana Boente’s personal and handwritten notes were mysteriously leaked to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

[Backstory Here]

On April 20th, 2017, Mary McCord announces her intent to resign from the DOJ National Security Division effective with the confirmation of Deputy AG nominee Rod Rosenstein.

On April 25th, 2017, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein is confirmed. Rosenstein now takes over the responsibilities held by Acting DAG Dana Boente; this includes the FBI counterintelligence probe.

On May 9th, 2017, FBI Director James Comey is fired.

On May 10th, 2017, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe opens a criminal ‘obstruction of justice investigation’ of President Trump to parallel/compliment the ongoing counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign and administration.

On/Around May 11th, 2017, Mary McCord departs. Dana Boente now becomes the Asst. Attorney General and head of the DOJ National Security Divison. Simultaneously retaining role as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of VA.

On May 16th, 2017, Rosenstein takes Robert Mueller to the White House to meet President Trump. On May 17th, Rosenstein appoints the Robert Mueller special counsel probe. On May 18th, 2017, Scott Schools authorizes Robert Mueller:

And we’re off to the Trump-Russia-Collusion-Obstruction races…

With hindsight it is now clear the various players inside Main Justice and the FBI had a vested interest in maintaining the assault against Trump. By now everyone can see the bigger goal was against the office of POTUS. [“obstruction” etc.] All of the personnel moves should be reviewed with hindsight of the larger anti-Trump objective in mind.

Against the known fraud that was the Trump-Russia Collusion-Conspiracy narrative, there are no visible people who didn’t participate in one form or another.

Dana Boente was head of DOJ-NSD from May 11th, 2017 through end of October 2017 when he officially announced his intent to retire. However, the timeline gets cloudy here because Boente said he was staying on until an official replacement was announced. There’s no indication of when he actually left the DOJ-NSD or the EDVA role.

On January 23rd, 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray announces Boente has shifted over to the FBI to be Chief Legal Counsel (replacing James Baker). As Mueller is using 19 lawyers, and 40 FBI investigators, Boente now becomes a legal adviser to Christopher Wray while the Mueller probe is ongoing.

As we discovered, Mueller’s lead FBI agent for the corrupt Russia collusion-conspiracy investigation, was David W. Archey. Agent Archey was selected by Robert Mueller when FBI Agent Peter Strzok was removed. The Mueller probe took over the counterintelligence investigation in May 2017, a few months later Special Agent Peter Strzok was removed (July) and David W. Archey was brought in:

As David Archey arrives in August 2017, Mueller is getting the new scope memo from Rod Rosenstein. There’s little doubt the entire FBI group would have known the Trump-Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative was false. So Archey status as lead agent has to be considered *corrupt/sketchy*; FBI activity was likely focused on the obstruction angle.

Interestingly at the conclusion of the Mueller investigation Archey was promoted by Christopher Wray to head of the Richmond, Virginia FBI field office (March 4, 2019). This field office overlaps with another FBI/DOJ filing from the EDVA.

The April 11, 2019, released Julian Assange indictment stems from the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6, 2018:

(Link to pdf)

However, on Tuesday April 15, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

The investigation took place prior to December 2017, it is coming from the EDVA where Dana Boente was still, presumably, U.S. Attorney. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until April of 2019.

Why the delay? Here’s where it gets interesting….

This FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

It would appear the FBI took keen interest after this August 2017 meeting and gathered specific evidence for a grand jury by December 2017. Then the DOJ sat on the indictment (sealed in March 2018) while the Mueller probe was ongoing; until April 11th, 2019, when a coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was launched. Assange was arrested, and the indictment was unsealed (link).

To me, as a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, JAR report(needed for Obama in December ’16), and political ICA (January ’17); this looks like a Deep State move to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report is dependent on Russia cybercrimes…. AND that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story:

(Bloomberg) Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said Friday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report describes Russian cybercrimesduring the 2016 election.

The report, which is expected to be released soon, will clear up questions about the Russian campaign to interfere in the election President Donald Trump won, Rosenstein said in a speech given to a private group at the Metropolitan Club of Washington, according to three people in attendance. (more)

The Weissmann/Mueller/Rosenstein report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview. There’s the FBI motive to shut Assange down.

The DNC hack claim is contingent upon analysis by Crowdstrike computer forensics who were paid by the DNC to look into the issue. The FBI was never allowed to review the servers independently, and now we know the FBI never even looked at a full forensics report from Crowdstrike. Almost all independent research into this DNC hack claim also challenges the claims of a Russia hack of the DNC servers.

Dana Boente was part of the group who advised Sessions to recuse. Boente later authorized the second renewal of the Title-one surveillance warrant and worked with James Comey. Boente then leaked his Comey notes to the media, essentially to support Comey’s narrative about Trump; and participated from within the FBI as legal counsel to Chris Wray who told everyone in July 2018 there was no political bias in the FBI… but hey, everyone is going to bias training….. and pay no attention to the 40 FBI agents who were investigating an invisible Trump Russia-Collusion-Conspiracy for two years.


There are no “good guys” in this. There are no “white hats” here. Certainly not Mueller, Rosenstein, Wray, Bowditch or Boente. Instead, this is a matrix of broad interests positioned only to benefit and sustain the status quo of the administrative state; and protect the larger corrupt DC community from the Trump disruption.

In the end it all comes back to the same series of questions. Who was recommending to President Trump that he retain and promote DOJ and FBI officials who were part of the anti-Trump Russia collusion-conspiracy program?

People who knew the DC system and were vulnerable to DC peer influence. People who would take counsel and advice on who was needed and where. People in positions of influence with President Trump. People who could intentionally, or unwittingly, steer these placements from a position of advisement close to the President.

Appointing Rod Rosenstein as DAG was one of those key placements.

Appointing DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu was another.

From Rosenstein we got: Mueller, Chris Wray, David Bowditch and Dana Boente.

Meanwhile Jessie Liu quashed cases against: Awan bros, James Wolfe, Greg Craig and Andrew McCabe.

The Russia Conspiracy Collusion is built on a foundation of purposeful lies. The DC network within the FBI and DOJ are at risk if those lies are exposed.

One of the cornerstone lies is that the Russians hacked the DNC servers…. that entirely false claim was manufactured in the heart of the December 2016 Joint Analysis Report and January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. The central claim is based on a secret evaluation by political operatives, and pushed by an intelligence apparatus that needs the Russian Conspiracy to hide their schemes.

Underneath all that FUBAR is where U.S. Attorney John Durham is looking.

And let’s not forget this little gem from July 2018, long, long after Chris Wray knew that he was leading an institution that was part of a corrupt take-down of a U.S. President.  This is the document that starts the trail that has led to Boente’s removal:

There was nothing within that 2018 letter to the FISA court that was either “factual” or “accurate”; instead it was a complete fraud…. A fraud that was so structurally brazen in its intent to falsify information to the court, that the court literally banned any participants  from the FBI from providing any further material to the court.

Further, the FISC ordered the FBI to go back through: (1) the entire evidence file gained from the Carter Page FISA application and begin sequestration effort; and (2) later demanding the names of dozens of targets from other FBI attestations to similarly fraudulent FISA applications identified by the inspector general.

At the heart of the matter, in the real activity that took place, there was a multi-branch seditious effort to remove President Donald J Trump.  Within that effort was a necessary group of embeds specifically assigned to conceal the activity.  Dana Boente was one of those embeds.

Dana Boente has now been removed.

Last point – this would not be happening right now if Durham was not coming toward the end of his investigation.  Generally speaking, DC provides identified corruptocrats with an opportunity for a graceful exit before the evidence against them surfaces publicly.


The Badge of Dishonor!

Americans witnessed a murder in Minneapolis. For several minutes, a policeman had his knee on the neck of a man who couldn’t breath. The suspect was accused of a non-violent crime. He was in handcuffs. He was not resisting. There was no reason for the cop to press his knee into the man’s neck on hard pavement. The other policemen present did try to stop it. George Floyd died without due process or mercy.

Not everyone is cut out to be a policeman. It takes a person with a high tolerance for risk and excitement. It also requires a knowledge of right and wrong. In this case, the cop was a sadist. He had to have been taught proper procedure at the police academy, but apparently they can’t teach human decency. They shouldn’t have to.

—Ben Garrison

Sunday Talks: Sidney Powell Discusses Issues Surrounding Judge Sullivan and Flynn Case – DC District Court and Now Circuit Court Have Intervened in Flynn Case…

Yesterday we noted a rather important, yet less discussed, motive for the strength of the DC Circuit Court position against Judge Emmet Sullivan.  I’ll expand after the video.

In this interview Gregg Jarrett talks with Flynn’s defense lawyer Sidney Powell about the rather unusual behavior of Judge Emmet Sullivan.  WATCH:


A DC judge hiring a well connected DC lawyer to write his response to a DC circuit court appeals panel is the part that’s interesting.  There’s no guarantee the appeals court will accept such a response; but that’s also another issue.   Bottom line: Judge Sullivan is importing a lawyer to represent his interests.  Very unusual.

CTH readers are smart; aware and smart enough not to get stuck in the weeds; so let’s stay elevated on this and look at the whole picture.  Consider this decision by Judge Emmet Sullivan through the prism of recent events surrounding Flynn:

♦ The DOJ, joined with the defense position and filed an unopposed motion to drop the case against Michael Flynn.

♦ A USAO from Missouri, Jeff Jensen, has discovered a trail of internal evidence pointing toward a corrupt originating prosecution for the case against Flynn.   Mr. Jensen has been revealing those documents and providing them to the court (and defense).

♦ Meanwhile DNI Ric Grenell has declassified and revealed documents showing a corrupt intent by the U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) against Michael Flynn.

♦ On Friday (5/22/20) the FBI Director announced an internal investigation into officials inside the FBI for wrongful conduct specifically as it relates to a corrupt operation, now discovered and public, against Michael Flynn.

Additionally, we shall not play games and ignore the obvious.

Judge Emmet Sullivan is well aware of the reason why former Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Contreras was recused from the Flynn case; only days after accepting the first plea agreement, and less than 72 hours after the Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text messages publicly surfaced.

Lisa Page: “Rudy is on the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]! Did you know that?” “Just appointed two months ago””..

Peter Strzok: “I did. We talked about it before and after. I need to get together with him.”…

Notice Strzok is saying he and Rudy had a talk about the judge joining the FISA court both before and after Judge Contreras was appointed.  There is a friendship connection, not just a professional relationship.  This will come into play later on.

Lisa Page and Peter Strzok even discussed the friendship between the FBI Agent and Judge Contreras being an issue that might cause a conflict of interest within the activity of Strzok as lead agent within the counterintelligence division within the FBI.

The issue was enough for Peter Strzok to say he was planning to discuss the conflict with Rudy.  Specifically Strzok was aware his work and Contreras position would likely lead to an investigation where the judge would have to recuse himself.

Agent Strzok planned to have this conversation with Rudy, and he preferred to have the discussion informally just days before Strzok official launched operation crossfire hurricane.

As the texts outline the issue of Rudy and Peter’s friendship is known to the small group in the FBI, being talked about internally, and Strzok is keenly aware he will have to approach it.  As Peter Strzok replies to Lisa Page: “M suggested a social setting with others would probably be better than a one on one meeting.”

The informal nature of a social conversation about it, with others who could corroborate if needed, would provide plausible deniability on both ends and dilute the toxicity of any issue that surfaced later on.  The conflict was enough of a concern to require a strategy.

Fast forward to the following year…

The special counsel investigation was absorbing 100% of the media’s attention.  Within DC all that anyone was talking about was the Mueller investigation and the “Trump-Russia” narrative.  The indictment of Lt. General Michael Flynn has led the news headlines for months.

There is no way a DC district court judge ; especially one that has sat on the FISA court during the time the DOJ and FBI were abusing the process; would be unaware of the investigation.  Additionally and more importantly, there is no way a DC district judge, FISA judge and good friend of Peter Strzok, would be unaware that Flynn’s prosecution was an extension of an FBI counterintelligence case against all of the Trump officials.

Holding a position of justification by saying DC district court Judge Rudolph Contreras would be unaware of the nature and circumstances of the Flynn case prior to assignment would be intellectually silly and obtuse in the extreme.   Contreras knew the case; perhaps not the granular details, but he knew the case and who was prosecuting it.

On November 30th, 2017, Mike Flynn signed a guilty plea; ostensibly admitting lying to FBI investigators.  The plea was accepted the next day by Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Contreras (who is also a FISA court judge).  Six days later, December 7, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation.

It’s important to note that Judge Contreras did not recuse himself, he was recused by the U.S. District court for the District of Columbia. [Source]

The court made the public announcement that Judge Contreras “has been recused from handling the case.”

If the conflict -which required recusal- existed on December 7, 2017, wouldn’t that same conflict have existed days earlier on November 30th?  Of course it did.  And of course Judge Rudolph Contreras would be aware of that conflict long before engaging in the case itself.

The moment the case was assigned, Contreras knew there was a conflict for him.

Again, if the conflict existed on December 7th, the conflict certainly existed on December 1st.   So why did he accept the case?  Why did he participate in the case until the district court intervened and removed it from him?

There has been a transparent lack of media curiosity on this issue from the day the court announced his recusal.  Apparently those questions did not fit the media objective.

This context is important because the DC circuit court is now ordering district Judge Sullivan to explain his decision-making.  They are using very strong language toward Judge Sullivan and have surprised many legal experts in the way the circuit court panel has approach it.

The panel of circuit judges: Henderson, Wilkins and Rao, did not rule on the petition for the writ of mandamus; instead they “ordered” Judge Sullivan to explain himself within ten days.  The same panel “invited” the DOJ to participate:

I would suggest to you the reason for the strength in the circuit court position is entirely connected to their knowledge of the back-ground of the Flynn case which included the  recusal of Judge Contreras.  None of this, specifically the tone of the panel in their order, is disconnected from the larger background.

Whether they want to admit it or not, and they would never do so publicly, the DC court has to be keenly aware of the material behind this case.  They have to be aware of what DNI Grenell has exposed; they have to be aware the FBI is now investigating itself based on how the FBI handled the Flynn case; and this same DC circuit knows the FISA court process was abused by the exact same participants involved in this Flynn prosecution.

The media, and some DOJ and FBI defenders are playing too-cute-by-half in providing justifications for the DOJ/FBI activity.  But the bigger picture is in full sunlight.

The media ignoring it, and the legions of former DOJ and FBI employees attempting to be disingenuous about it, does not change our level of information about it; and certainly does not change the disposition of a DC court system that has watched this playing out in their back yard.