Tag Archives: Trigger Words

Nov 14 2023

Background, Understanding the Institutional Protection Racket Via Congress, Main Justice DOJ, FBI and FISA Court


Posted originally on the CTH on November 14, 2023 | Sundance

Originally outlined in 2021

Many people are now becoming aware of the severity of self-serving corruption in/around the institutions that frame our government.  Considering that Sundance has a target on his back; and considering that it is only a matter of time before that targeting gets ugly; let me remind everyone of just how severe the issues are confronting our nation.

Having met with many of the top-level key DC players (including Durham inc) in the “Spygate” investigation/review or (__fill in_ the blank_with whatever name you need), here’s the ugly truth.  The staff of the legislative bodies have/had no intent to actually facilitate any sunlight upon the FISA, DOJ-FBI corruption that took place over three years.

How do I know that?

Well, first having sat in a room with the legislative staff, top people who actually write the briefs and inform both congressional representatives on House Committees and Senate Committees, including the chiefs-of-staff for the chairs, it was clear they did not even know the information from within their own research when spread over time.  Accepting this reality leads one to a natural conclusion… they don’t know, because they choose not to know… & they choose not to know, because everything is a pantomime for public display.

The system of DC is based on a series of unwritten rules… “You don’t out me, and I will not out you… and that will protect us both.”   These rules cross over both parties to the extent they usually have a common enemy, us.  The staff of Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, Homeland Security Chair Ron Johnson and even the staff of House Oversight Ranking Member Jim Jordan are purposefully and willfully blind.

They choose not to know things; or at least they claim not to know and do an exceptional job of purposeful pretend.

The investigative information that makes up the news cycles amid the investigative right-side of the spectrum is generally compartmented or silo’d.  Within DC all branches and people within them keep information isolated from each-other in order to create and retain plausible deniability.  This permits their leadership to talk a good game on television while nothing is actually accomplished.

It is all part of the game.

They shuffle the shells but there is no pea.

When CTH pointed out this institutional process of nothingness the ‘trusty planners’ did not like the discomfort associated with the reality… I get it… no-one wants to be that cynical, and, quite frankly, at a point in mid/late-2018 the ‘trusty plan’ had evolved into a business model.  However, what we are seeing today with the Boasberg sentence of Kevin Clinesmith is directly an outcome of this previously mentioned DC institutional preservation process.

Notice how no-one in the executive branch DOJ, FBI, ODNI, ever criticized Robert Mueller, yet we know to a demonstrable certainty the Mueller special counsel was likely more corrupt than the originating DOJ/FBI corruption the special counsel was protecting. The origin of ‘Spygate’ was bad, but the totality of the cover-up effort in the Mueller-Weissmann special counsel was exponentially worse.  More actual laws and policies within the justice department were broken by Robert Mueller than any preceding corrupt official.

Let me wrap up several points above with one factual example.  The example will highlight: (1) the legislative branch being purposely blind to evidence; (2) the corruption of the special counsel – pay attention to dates; (3) the corruption of the FISA court – contrast against Judge Boasberg today; and (4) the corruption of the executive branch though DOJ, FBI during the entirety of the Trump administration.

♦ Amid a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020 [SEE HERE] there was a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court in July 2018 that pointed out the DC agenda, the “institutional cover-up.” [Link to Letter]

Before getting to the substance of the letter, it’s important to put the release in context. After the FISA Court reviewed the DOJ inspector general report (Dec 2019), the FISC ordered the DOJ-NSD to declassify and release documents related to the Carter Page FISA application.

In the cover letter for this specific release to the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees, the DOJ cited the January 7, 2020, FISA court order:

Keep in mind that prior to this release only the FISA court had seen this letter from the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD). As we walk through the alarming content of this letter I think you’ll identify the motive behind the FISC order to release it.

First, the letter in question was sent by the DOJ-NSD to the FISA Court on July 12, 2018. It is critical to keep the date of the letter in mind as we review the content.

Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it. The DOJ is telling the FISA court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains “sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause” to approve the application.

In essence, in July 2018 the DOJ (now with Mueller in place) is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.

However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:

As you can see: Christopher Steele is noted as “Source #1”. Glenn Simpson of Fusion-GPS is noted as “identified U.S. person” or “business associate”; and Perkins Coie is the “U.S-based law firm.”

Now things get very interesting.

On page #8 when discussing Christopher Steele’s sub-source, the DOJ notes the FBI found him to be truthful and cooperative.

This is an incredibly misleading statement to the FISA court because what the letter doesn’t say is that 18-months earlier the sub-source, also known in the IG report as the “primary sub-source”, informed the FBI that the material attributed to him in the dossier was essentially junk.

Let’s look at how the IG report frames the primary sub-source, and specifically notice the FBI contact and questioning took place in January 2017 (we now know that date to be January 12, 2017):

Those interviews with Steele’s primary sub-source took place in January, March and May of 2017; and clearly the sub-source debunked the content of the dossier itself.

Those interviews were 18-months, 16-months and 14-months ahead of the July 2018 DOJ letter to the FISC. The DOJ-NSD says the sub-source was “truthful and cooperative” but the DOJ doesn’t tell the court the content of the truthfulness and cooperation. Why?

Keep in mind this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018. Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG; Christopher Wray was FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy, and Dana Boente is FBI chief-legal-counsel.

Why would the DOJ-NSD not be forthcoming with the FISA court about the primary sub-source? This level of disingenuous withholding of information speaks to an institutional motive.

By July 2018 the DOJ clearly knew the dossier was full of fabrications, yet they withheld that information from the court and said the predicate was still valid. Why?

It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive.

In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex.

This letter justifying the application and claiming the current information would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 DOJ needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant…. My research suspicion is that the DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority. That’s the motive.

In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit.

If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.

This is not simply a hunch, because that motive also speaks to why the FISC would order the current DOJ to release the letter.

Remember, in December 2019 the FISC received the IG Horowitz report; and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ told them in July 2018.

The DOJ letter is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report. Hence, the FISC orders the DOJ to release the July ’18 letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.

The court was misled; now everyone can see it.  However, no-one in the legislative or executive branch touched it because the court was misled by Robert Mueller.

The court was misled by the special counsel.  Reflect on this for a moment.

The content of that DOJ-NSD letter, and the subsequent disparity, points to an institutional cover-up; and as a consequence the FISC also ordered the DOJ to begin an immediate sequestration effort to find all the evidence from the fraudulent FISA application; the proverbial fruit from the poisonous tree.  In hindsight the FISC was covering their own ass.

Moving on…

Two more big misstatements within the July 2018 letter appear on page #9. The first is the DOJ claiming that only after the application was filed did they become aware of Christopher Steele working for Fusion-GPS and knowing his intent was to create opposition research for the Hillary Clinton campaign. See the top of the page.

According to the DOJ-NSD claim the number four ranking official in the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, never told them he was acting as a conduit for Christopher Steele to the FBI. While that claim is hard to believe, in essence what the DOJ-NSD is saying in that paragraph is that the FBI hoodwinked the DOJ-NSD by not telling them where the information for the FISA application was coming from. The DOJ, via John Demers, is blaming the FBI.

The second statement, equally as incredulous, is at the bottom of page nine where the DOJ claims they had no idea Bruce Ohr was talking to the FBI throughout the entire time any of the FISA applications were being submitted. October 2016 through June 2017.

In essence the claim there is that Bruce Ohr was working with the FBI and never told anyone in the DOJ throughout 2016 and all the way past June 29th of 2017. That denial seems rather unlikely; however, once again the DOJ-NSD (Weissmann) is putting the FBI in the crosshairs and claiming they, the special counsel, knew nothing about the information pipeline.

Bruce Ohr, whose wife was working for Fusion-GPS and assisting Christopher Steele with information, was interviewed by the FBI over a dozen times as he communicated with Steele and fed his information to the FBI. Yet the DOJ claims they knew nothing about it.

Again, just keep in mind this claim by the DOJ-NSD is being made in July 2018, six months after Bruce Ohr was demoted twice (December 2017 and January 2018). If what the DOJ is saying was true (it wasn’t), well, the FBI was completely off-the-rails and rogue.

CTH did not buy the DOJ-NSD spin.

Why?

The reason is simple, the DOJ was claiming in the July 2018 letter the predication was still valid… if the DOJ-NSD (Mueller team) genuinely didn’t know about the FBI manipulation, they would be informing the court in 2018 the DOJ no longer supported the FISA application due to new information. They did not do that. Instead, in July 2018, they specifically told the court the predicate was valid, yet the DOJ-NSD knew it was not.

The last point about the July 2018 letter is perhaps the most jarring. Again, keep in mind when it was written Chris Wray is FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy and Dana Boente is FBI chief legal counsel.

Their own FBI reports, by three different INSD and IG investigations; had turned up seriously alarming evidence going back to the early 2017 time-frame; the results of which ultimately led to the DC FBI office losing all of their top officials; and knowing the letter itself was full of misleading and false information about FBI knowledge in/around Christopher Steele; this particular sentence is alarming:

“The FBI has reviewed this letter and confirmed its factual accuracy?”

Really?

As we have just shared, the July 2018 letter itself is filled with factual inaccuracies, misstatements and intentional omissions. So who exactly did the “reviewing”?

This declassification release raised more questions than any other; and yet no-one, not a single investigative body, asked questions about it…

Why?…

Because the letter itself was prima-facie evidence of lies directly from the special counsel of Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann.  No-one in the executive branch, legislative branch or even judicial branch wanted to highlight the corruption of the special counsel.

Here’s the Full Letter. I strongly suggest everyone read the 14-pages slowly. If you know the background, this letter is infuriating…  AND keep in mind, every single staff member in the House and Senate (those investigating the issue) said they never saw it.

That’s how badly broken the system of justice, and the system of checks-and-balances in Washington DC, really is.  What we are seeing now in the blatant targeting, silencing, and outright in-your-face behavior is a downstream result of the system knowing everyone is too far gone…. they have nothing to fear now.

Nov 13 2023

Billions Unaccounted for at 25 US Government Agencies Re-Posted Nov 13, 2023 By Martin Armstrong 


Hunt Money

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) revealed that numerous government agencies had “discrepancies” in their 2022 budgets. Twenty-five agencies in total failed to properly report their expenditures to USAspending, which is intended to act as American’s guide to where their tax dollars are going. The GAO is now urging Congress to hold these agencies accountable.

To the surprise of no one, COVID related spending reports contained the largest errors. In fact, the Treasury stated $231.5 billion was budgeted for the pandemic in their annual report, but only $36 billion was reported to USAspending. Health and Human Services (HHS) stated they were spending $85.7 billion on the pandemic response, but reported spending $91.7 billion to USAspending. Homeland Security (DHS) had a $10 million discrepancy in reporting as well. Numerous entries totaling $1.2 trillion did not contain sources and did not state where the money was spent.

Government’s spending problem is far worse than anyone could imagine. Considering that no one wants to purchase US debt, the problem is becoming a crisis. The fact of the matter is that the people are not supported by their representatives who allow government agencies to rob citizens. This account only notes the agencies required to report their spending as almost a third (49 of 152) did not bother reporting at all. The checks and balances on government are simply gone but this will completely backfire as their reckless spending will soon catch up with them.

Nov 12 2023

Black Guy with Extensive Criminal History Runs Down Two Cops


Posted originally on Rumble by TheSaltyCracker on: Nov 11 at 9:00 AM EST

Nov 12 2023

Devolution Power Hour #196 – Sat 10:30 PM ET –


Posted originally on Rumble by Badlands Media on: Nov 11, 10:30 pm EST

Nov 8 2023

Nashville Shooter’s Manifesto Causes The Media To Melt Down (Ep. 2126) – 11/07/2023


Posted originally on Rumble the Dan Bongino show on:Nov 7, 11:30 am ES

Nov 7 2023

Central Bank & The Taking of Assets? Re-Posted Nov 7, 2023 By Martin Armstrong 


Custodial Risk 1

I will be covering this in detail at the WEC in a couple of weeks. We are getting the same Conspiracy Theories regurgitated and twisted around. People are asking what is real and what is not. Suffice it to say, when you buy shares and leave them at the brokerage house, they remain in THEIR name – not yours. They are in STREET NAME, and that is why I have for years suggested you take delivery the same you would do with gold.

Brokerage SWEEP your account and sell the cash collectively overnight into the REPO market. If that night the entity they had lent it to defaults, you have lost your money and get in line because the corrupt New York counts will declare you are an UNSECURED creditor. Good luck. Just look at what Judge Martin Glenn did to the people who had money on deposit at MF Global.

Glenn

It was Martin Glenn who was the judge in New York on M.F. Global bankruptcy. He was the first one to engage in FORCED LOANS by abandoning the rule of law to help the bankers by protecting them from losses, taking client accounts to cover M.F. Global’s losses. That is no different from what we saw in Cyprus. He allowed the confiscation of client funds when, in fact the rule of law should have been that the bankers were responsible and M.F. Global’s losses should have been reversed. Never should the client’s funds be taken for M.F. Global’s losses to the NY Bankers. It was Judge Martin Glen who placed the entire financial system at risk by trying to protect the bankers. He pampered these bankers, making them the new UNTOUCHABLES. We have to be concerned that there really is no rule of law that will protect you in a crisis.

Nov 7 2023

The Migrant Crisis Impacting Canada Re-Posted Nov 6, 2023 By Martin Armstrong 


WEC 2023_Barbarians_at_Gate C

QUESTION: Will you cover the Canadian migrant crisis and its impact on our markets?

BRD

Nov 7 2023

Pelosi Subpoenaed in Undisclosed Criminal Case Re-Posted Nov 6, 2023 By Martin Armstrong


 
Nov 4 2023

Weirdness Abounds – New York Judge Engoron Expands Gag Order to Stop Trump Defense Attorneys from Discussing Instructions from Court Clerk


Posted originally on the CTH on November 3, 2023 | Sundance 

The judge in the New York City case against Donald Trump and the Trump organization has transparently been a little goofy.  From the first day when he posed for the cameras, to the sketchy application of legal review within the case, Judge Arthur Engoron exhibits the classic traits of being weird and unstable.

There is a pattern amid the deployment of Lawfare that deserves some background context.  Whenever Lawfare is deployed there are always background characters who are seemingly needed to keep the bizarre interpretations of Lawfare tactics on track.

We saw this play out with Debra Katzenberg, Monica McLean and David Laufman controlling Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey-Ford.  We saw it again with Mary McCord playing the role in the background of the Trump Lawfare impeachment to guide Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff.  We saw it again with Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen guiding Special Prosecutor Jack Smith from the backbench of Lawfare.  In each case the principal activity is guided by Lawfare ideologues who use position to influence.

In the Judge Engoron example, court clerk Allison Greenfield has been passing notes and instructions to Engoron as the case has progressed.  The activity has become so disconcerting that Trump’s lawyers have called it out in court as it happens {Breitbart Link}.  In response to the sunlight upon the visible activity, Judge Engoron has now expanded his gag order to prohibit Trump’s lawyers from drawing attention to the activity of Ms. Greenfield.

NEW YORK — The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s ongoing civil fraud trial issued another gag order on Friday — this time prohibiting all lawyers working on the trial from “from making any public statements, in or out of court, that refer to any confidential communications, in any form, between my staff and me.” (link)

The issuance of the gag order is weird because the entire dynamic of the clerk instructing the judge is weird.   The gag order is an effort by Engoron to stop people from noticing it….  Yeah, that’s exponentially weirder.

POLITICO – [Trump Attorney Chris] Kise complained about Greenfield’s habit of passing notes to Engoron during proceedings, suggesting she is improperly influencing his decisions. Engoron reacted sharply to that complaint, telling Kise, “I have an unfettered, absolute right to consult with my law clerks” and saying he wouldn’t tolerate future comments about his staff.

Kise, though, continued to argue that he needed to state objections on the record for the purposes of an eventual appeal. “If notes are being passed at certain specific times or they’re being passed in a way that might indicate some bias,” he said, “that’s a record that needs to be made contemporaneously.” (more)

As noted by Henry Rossof from inside the court today, “Judge Engoron said he will note a continuing objection to his consultation with his clerk but does not want anything more said about her… he will still consult.”

“I have an absolute, unfettered right to consult with my law clerks anywhere, anytime,” Engoron noted. “There’s no more need to make a record” [of it within the court when it occurs] he concluded.

After this series of exchanges today, Engoron then expanded his court order to forbid the Trump lawyers from telling the public about what was happening between him and his clerk in the court.

Yup, weird, sketchy and fitting right in with the pattern of how Lawfare is deployed.

These people are ideologically not stable.

Nov 4 2023

DC Appeals Court Overrules Judge Chutkan Gag Order


Posted originally on the CTH on November 3, 2023 | Sundance

A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s gag order prohibiting Trump from criticizing the special counsel, Jack Smith, or “any foreseeable witness” in the case. [2-Page Opinion Here]  In my opinion, it was the generalized “foreseeable witness” part of the Chutkan order that became the central issue for the appellate court.   Jack Smith could name anyone as a potential witness, just to silence the accused.

President Trump’s team previously indicated in their filing to the appeals court that they are prepared to seek immediate relief at the Supreme Court. However, at least now, that approach will not be needed as the DC Appellate Court has blocked the gag order.

[ SOURCE LINK ]

It is a win for Donald Trump amid a highly political DC Circuit.

If the appeals court had ruled to uphold the gag order, they would have opened the door for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in and potentially overturn the lower rulings.  Therefore, appeals court was most likely not willing to see their own credibility rest on the language of a motion written by Judge Chutkan.

In the ruling, the appeals court will accept briefings and oral arguments prior to making their own ruling on the matter.  That will make any advancement to the Supreme Court much less likely to succeed.  There’s a bit of court credibility and preservation playing out in this dynamic.

WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court on Friday lifted a gag order reining in Donald Trump’s comments about the criminal election-subversion case pending against him in Washington.

At the former president’s request, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily lifted U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan’s order prohibiting Trump from using his public statements to target special counsel Jack Smith and his team, court officials and potential witnesses in the case.

The appeals court’s action makes it likely that the gag order, which Trump contends violates his First Amendment rights and those of his supporters, will be sidelined for more than two weeks and perhaps longer. Trump has also complained that the order interferes with his rights as a presidential candidate to argue to voters that he is being politically persecuted by the Biden administration.

The D.C. Circuit set oral arguments on the gag order issue for Nov. 20. The panel issuing the order consisted of two Obama appointees — Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard — as well as the court’s newest member, Biden appointee Bradley Garcia. (read more)

…”No court in American history has imposed a gag order on a criminal defendant who is actively campaigning for public office—let alone the leading candidate for President of the United States. That centuries-long practice was broken on October 17, 2023, when the district court entered its Opinion and Order, A1 (the “Gag Order”), muzzling President Trump’s core political speech during an historic Presidential campaign.

Given the Gag Order’s extraordinary nature, one would expect an extraordinary justification for it. Yet none exists. President Trump has made months of public statements about this case, but the Department of Justice (“the prosecution”) submitted no evidence of any actual or imminent threat to the administration of justice. Instead, when asked about the supposed threat to the case, the prosecution admitted, “of course this prejudice is speculative.”

Based this speculation, the district court entered a sweeping, viewpoint-based prior restraint on the core political speech of a major Presidential candidate, based solely on an unconstitutional “heckler’s veto.” The Gag Order violates the First Amendment rights of President Trump and over 100 million Americans who listen to him.

President Trump’s uniquely powerful voice has been a fixture of American political discourse for eight years, and central to the American fabric for decades. The prosecution’s claim that his core political speech suddenly poses a threat to the administration of justice is baseless. The prosecutors and potential witnesses addressed by President Trump’s speech are high-level government officials and public figures, many of whom routinely attack President Trump in their own public statements, media interviews, and books.

President Trump’s viewpoint and modes of expression resonate powerfully with tens of millions of Americans. The prosecution’s request for a Gag Order bristles with hostility to President Trump’s viewpoint and his relentless criticism of the government—including of the prosecution itself. The Gag Order embodies this unconstitutional hostility to President Trump’s viewpoint. It should be immediately stayed.

President Trump requests a ruling on this motion by November 10, 2023, and requests an administrative stay pending the Court’s ruling. President Trump has notified the prosecution, who note that they oppose this motion. President Trump respectfully asks that this appeal be expedited to the greatest extent possible.”..

~ President Donald J Trump, Legal Team