Pelosi’s Poison Pens!


As we watched Nancy Pelosi sign the articles of impeachment, we were overcome with disgust. What was supposed to be a sad and somber affair (her words), was unnecessarily made into a pompous and grandiose spectacle. Each letter of her name was signed individually with a separate golden pen. Clearly she was enjoying herself as she attempted to aggrandize the ‘historic’ manufactured spectacle.

We know the whole impeachment charade was planned for three years. Nothing is real with the Democrats.

As I watched her, I got the impression of a black widow spider holding many of those pens at once. This cartoon immediately sprung to mind, and since I was making her into an arachnid, I decided to make Schiff as a cockroach and Nadler into a slug-like creature. Why not? After all, they are disgusting traitors who are carrying out a coup against a lawfully elected president.

Pelosi is drunk with power.

She repeatedly talked about the founding fathers and Constitution, but her words ring as hollow as her empty vodka bottle. She’s about power and money and that’s all. Her shame has now been passed onto the Senate for trial. Trump should be exonerated, and quickly.

Pelosi should be condemned, and perpetually mocked forever.

—Ben Garriso

Chaff and Countermeasures? – Timed During Impeachment, Another Report of Former FBI Director James Comey Under Investigation…


Another New York Times report of James Comey under investigation for unscrupulous, potentially illegal, leaks surrounding the FBI Clinton investigation. However, a note of caution: is this simply chaff and countermeasures intended to keep the heat off corruption monitors Bill Barr and John Durham?

In 2018 congressman Jim Jordan noted James Comey had a special employee on assignment ‘off-the-books’.  People started asking questions and Fox News Catherine Herridge detailed how Daniel Richman held special access privileges to the FBI, as an outcome of former FBI Director James Comey authorizing his friend as a “Special Government Employee” or SGE.

According to The Times the current issues surround media leaks from James Comey to his “special FBI employee” friend Daniel Richman related to the Clinton investigation:

(VIA NYT) […] The latest investigation involves material that Dutch intelligence operatives siphoned off Russian computers and provided to the United States government. The information included a Russian analysis of what appeared to be an email exchange during the 2016 presidential campaign between Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat of Florida who was also the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee at the time, and Leonard Benardo, an official with the Open Society Foundations, a democracy-promoting organization whose founder, George Soros, has long been a target of the far right.

In the email, Ms. Wasserman Schultz suggested that then-Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch would make sure that Mrs. Clinton would not be prosecuted in the email case. Both Ms. Wasserman Schultz and Mr. Benardo have denied being in contact, suggesting the document was meant to be Russian disinformation.

That document was one of the key factors that drove Mr. Comey to hold a news conference in July 2016 announcing that investigators would recommend no charges against Mrs. Clinton. Typically, senior Justice Department officials would decide how to proceed in such a high-profile case, but Mr. Comey was concerned that if Ms. Lynch played a central role in deciding whether to charge Mrs. Clinton, Russia could leak the email.

Whether the document was fake remains an open question. But American officials at the time did not believe that Ms. Lynch would hinder the Clinton email investigation, and neither Ms. Wasserman Schultz nor Mr. Benardo had any inside information about it. Still, if the Russians had released the information after the inquiry was closed, it could have tainted the outcome, hurt public confidence in the Justice Department and sowed discord.

Prosecutors are also looking at whether Mr. Richman might have played a role in providing the information to reporters about the Russia document and how it figured into Mr. Comey’s rationale about the news conference, according to the people familiar with the investigation. Mr. Comey hired Mr. Richman at one point to consult for the F.B.I. about encryption and other complex legal issues, and investigators have expressed interest in how he operated. (read more)

People are rightly skeptical of this latest report as all prior reports of Comey misconduct have been summarily dismissed by current DOJ corruption monitors.

Sharyl Attkisson🕵️‍♂️

@SharylAttkisson

I’m not sure why they should bother. The IG referred Comey for charges already and @TheJusticeDept gave him a pass, finding he meant no harm. Why would this be different? https://twitter.com/adamgoldmanNYT/status/1217933267493625866 

Adam Goldman

@adamgoldmanNYT

NEWS: The case is the second time the Justice Department has investigated leaks potentially involving Mr. Comey, a frequent target of President Trump, who has repeatedly called him a “leaker.” https://nyti.ms/2uU6edT 

456 people are talking about this

What Sharyl Attkisson references is the IG referrals to no-where from the prior IG Report on James Comey.  The IG found serious issues with the way James Comey hid information and obstructed the FBI investigation of his memos.  Again another series of leaks to his friend, and special FBI employee, Daniel Richman.  However, the DOJ failed to take any action on those referrals…. so why would this be any different?

There was absolutely no doubt James Comey used his memos akin to FD-302 investigative reports from an FBI agent. Meaning, from beginning-to-end he considered himself an investigative agent against the President-elect and then President Trump.

Note: His recording of his encounter with the target, President-elect Trump should be “treated like FISA derived information in a counterintelligence investigation.” During this January 6th operation, Comey was the active FBI agent gathering evidence for later use. The collected intelligence would be shared with the team via memo #1.

Every encounter, and every aspect of every action within that encounter, was conducted in what Comey perceived as an official investigative capacity.

President Trump was the target of Comey’s operations and he wrote his memos as investigative notes therein. Example: Comey ran the January 6th, 2017, operation:

So the “small group”: Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Baker, Priestap, Rybicki, et al, were running a counterintelligence operation against the incoming administration.

There are parts of the IG report highlighting a stunning amount of self-interest.

Example: Who made the decision(s) about what “was” or what “was not” classified? Or, put another way: who was making the internal decisions about Comey’s exposure to legal risk for sharing his investigative notes (memos) outside the department?

The answer is the same “small group” who were carrying out the operation:

James Baker, Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, James Rybicki and Lisa Page were determining what parts of James Comey’s investigative notes needed to be classified.

The corrupt FBI was in position to police itself. This is not a conflict of interest, it is better described as a profound conflict of self-interest.

The information the ‘small group‘ wanted to use to frame the target would be visible, not classified; however, any material that would outline the construct of their corruption in targeting the target would be hidden, classified. You can’t make this stuff up folks.

The “small group” WAS the sources and methods they were protecting.

Everything needed to understand that level of corruption is outlined in the way the IG report discusses the handling of James Comey’s investigative notes (ie. memos). AND the fact that James Comey kept them hidden, yes hidden. Read this stuff!

First, “no hard copies of any of the memos were found in Comey’s FBI office.”:

So, if the memos were not held in Director James Comey’s official FBI office, the next logical question is where were they?

Well, when Special Agents went to James Comey’s house, he still kept them hidden and never informed the agents:

If Mr. Altruism, James Comey, was simply fulfilling the duty of a concerned and dedicated FBI Director, why not tell the FBI agents -picking up FBI records- that he had copies of FBI investigative notes in his “personal safe” while they were there?

What honorable justification exists for keeping them hidden from valid investigators?

Obviously me, you and God are not the only ones able to see the sketchy nature of this construct. In fact, an internal FBI whistleblower came forward soon after that search of Comey’s home to request official “whistleblower status protection” from the IG.

Think logically…. What would prompt someone inside the FBI; who at some point gained access to the Comey memos; to request ‘whistleblower protected status’?

Doesn’t the “whistleblower request” indicate the requesting FBI official saw something nefarious in the way this was all going down?

Who was that ‘whistleblower’?

Well, first, Captain Obvious would tell you it has to be someone who actually gained possession of those memos right?…. this is not a big group. Second, you only need to read a few more pages of the IG report to see who it was:

The “whistleblower” was the Supervisory Special Agent described in page 38 as above.

The memos were “stored” in a “reception area“, and in locked drawers in James Rybicki’s office. [“Drawer safes” are silly FBI legal terms for fancy locked drawers] Also note…

Reception area“? “May 15th“?

May 10th, no-one knows where the memos are.  May 12th the FBI goes to James Comey’s House; again no mention of the memos he was keeping there.  Then all of a sudden, poof, May 15th and the memos are in the FBI “reception area”?

First, apparently no-one wanted to be the one holding the hot potato of investigative evidence (Comey memos); that ownership would outline them as participatory members in carrying out the targeting of then President Trump.

Oh, yeah, those investigative notes were not in “the office of the FBI Director” on May 10th, when you were here searching the last time,… for some mysterious reason.. they, uh,… well, they were discovered… May 15th in the “reception area“… yeah, yeah, that’s the ticket! Right under the four month old copy of People Magazine, n’ stuff.

….ARE YOU FRIGGIN’ KIDDING ME WITH THIS?

…AND secondly, the very next morning, GUESS what happened?…

Now we see why the FBI Supervisory Special Agent in charge in charge of inventorying Comey records asked the IG for official “whistleblower status.”

The SSA agent was surrounded by sketchy warning flares right there in the FBI executive suites.  May 10th, no memos; May 12th, Comey house, no memos; May 15th the memo’s mysteriously appear; and the next day Comey is taking pictures of the memos and sending them to his BFF Daniel Richman to send to the New York Times.

Of course the FBI SSA gave the Inspector General the seven memos, asked for whistle-blower protection, and likely told the IG the way they were produced stinks to high heaven. Good grief.  And the media can’t see this?

And U.S. Attorney Bill Barr can’t clearly see this?

And we can?

C’mon Man!

With that in mind, is this latest leak about yet another Comey investigation simply an effort by the DOJ to deflect and isolate themselves from anger and frustration while President Trump is going through an impeachment trial?

Given the history, the possibility cannot easily be dismissed.

Flynn Update – Judge Sullivan Grants Continuance, Requests Briefs and Sets Hearing Date…


Judge Emmet Sullivan has granted the Flynn motion for continuance and established a briefing schedule for consideration on the Flynn motion to withdraw his guilty plea.  Judge Sullivan has set February 27th, 2020, as the next date for a hearing in his courtroom.

It will be interesting to watch how the Bill Barr DOJ responds to Flynn’s request to withdraw his guilty plea….

Impeachment Trial Next Steps – Senate Leader McConnell Establishes Briefing Schedule…


Adopted today by unanimous consent:

  • A Summons to the White House notifying them of the impeachment trial will be issued by the Senate and delivered by Saturday January 18th, 2020, 6:00pm,
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of 5:00pm Saturday, January 18th, 2020, for the filing of their impeachment brief to the Senate.
  • The White House (defense lawyers) have a response deadline of 5:00pm Monday, January 20th, for their response to the House impeachment brief.
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of Noon Tuesday, January 21st, for their rebuttal brief to the White House defense brief.
  • The Senate Trial begins at 1:00pm Eastern, Tuesday January 21st, 2020.

Senators will not be allowed to bring their cell phones or any electronic device into the Senate chamber while the trial is underway.

Following Thursday’s senate swearing-in and administration of oath, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said he will try to force votes on witnesses on Tuesday.  Democrats have called for subpoenaing four witnesses including former National Security Advisor John Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is keeping the construction of the senate impeachment resolution, laying out the rules, quiet.  As of this moment no-one knows the details of the resolution being assembled by the Senate majority.

CTH has been warning those who are interested, since last year, not to underestimate the scheming and planning of the Democrats and Lawfare in the Senate phase.  The entire apparatus of the resistance network within government is aligned with the impeachment effort.  Nothing is happenstance and everything unfolding in the media is pre-planned.

Just like the media worked hand-in-glove with the DOJ, FBI, CIA and intelligence officials to construct the fraudulent Russia conspiracy case against Trump; and just like those same administrative state officials and media worked hand-in-glove with the Mueller investigation to advance the fraudulent special counsel effort; those exact same participants are working together to frame the appearance of criminal conduct within this impeachment effort.   Same people, same purposes and intents.

All of the media headlines are pre-scripted by narrative engineers who have been given advanced notification and copy of the needs.  All of the players within the headlines are working in unison; this includes the resistance operative inside government offices such as the DOJ.   All media stories are pre-engineered, sequenced, and scripted with a template provided by political operatives.

It took a long time for President Trump’s allies to realize the 2018 Pelosi rule changes were directly connected to the 2019 activity and the construction of a fraudulent whistle-blower complaint.  Many people, unfortunately including most on our side, just don’t grasp the amount of time and energy the resistance operatives put into the pre-planning.

The recent discovery of Mary McCord working on behalf of the impeachment effort should have been a bucket of cold water in the face of those who keep downplaying the risk.  I hope the independent researchers and new-media have awakened to the reality that surrounds all of us.

Impeachment Trial – Chief Justice John Roberts Swears-in Senate – 2:00pm Livestream…


Today begins the official Senate trial of President Donald John Trump. Chief Justice John Roberts will be swearing-in all senators to begin the impeachment trial at 2:00pm ET.

First there will be a call of the roll to ensure all senators present; then the arrival of Chief Justice Roberts; then the oath of duty administered by Senator Grassley to the ¹Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts; then Justice Roberts will swear-in all standing Senators to their oath of duty for trial.

Following the affirmation of oath, all senators will affix their signature or mark to the Senate “oath book” documenting their declaration and affirmation.    Video Added:

.

¹NOTE: Chief Justice John Roberts is not the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; in his official duties he is the Chief Justice of the United States of America.

Livestream Link – Alternate Livestream Link

.

It Begins – Senate Leader Mitch McConnell Receives Articles of Impeachment and Structures Schedule…


Sickening.  Earlier today Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a media event signing ceremonycomplete with commemorative pens for dozens of her Democrat colleagues, and initiated the parade ceremony for the march across the Capitol with the articles.  Upon arrival at the upper chamber of congress, Senate Leader Mitch McConnell accepted delivery and began the process of organizing the procedure through a series of rules by unanimous consent.

[McConnell] “A few minutes ago, the Senate was notified the House of Representatives is finally ready to proceed with their articles of impeachment. So, by unanimous consent, we’ve just laid some of the groundwork that will structure the next several days.”

  • We have officially invited the House managers to come to the Senate tomorrow at noon to exhibit their articles of impeachment.
  • Then, later tomorrow afternoon at 2:00pm, the Chief Justice of the United States will arrive here in the Senate. He will be sworn in by the President Pro Tem, Senator Grassley.
  • Then the Chief Justice will swear in all of us senators. We will pledge to rise above petty factionalism and do justice for our institutions, for our states, and for the nation.
  • And then we will formally notify the White House of our pending trial and summon the President to answer the articles and send his counsel.

‘So the trial will commence in earnest on Tuesday.

‘But first, Mr. President, some important good news for the country: ‘We anticipate the Senate will finish the USMCA tomorrow and send this landmark trade deal to President Trump for his signature. A major victory for this administration, but more importantly, for American families.

‘Let me close with this. This is a difficult time for our country. But this is precisely the kind of time for which the framers created the Senate. I am confident this body can rise above short-termism and factional fever and serve the long-term best interests of our nation.

‘We can do this. And we must.’

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

.

MICHAEL SHERIDAN@BOOMER4K

WTF did I just watch?

Pens on silver platters? Then wtf was with her signature? Is she signing ONE LETTER AT A TIME so everyone that gets a pen gest one that was actually used?

This was a celebration ceremony, this was Nacy’s victory lap! Enjoy it skank, payback is 10 mos away

Embedded video

3,972 people are talking about this

Mark Meadows

@RepMarkMeadows

They claim it’s a somber, serious occasion they’re heartbroken over… and then they pass out impeachment-signing pens with special cases. Folks. You can’t make it up. https://twitter.com/FoxReports/status/1217571118942425089 

Lauren Fox

@FoxReports

So many pens that Pelosi will sign to officially transmit the articles of impeachment and sign resolution appointing House managers. Why so many? They will be given away to members like House managers as a symbol of today.

View image on Twitter
8,115 people are talking about this

Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy Blasts Impeachment Effort During Floor Speech…


As the House debated the fiasco of their vote to submit two articles of impeachment to the Senate chamber, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy rises in opposition:

Nancy Pelosi Announces Seven House Impeachment Managers…


Today Nancy Pelosi announced seven House “impeachment managers” who will transmit the two articles of impeachment from the House to the Senate.

Speaker Pelosi selected: Adam Schiff (HPSCI Chairman – lead), Jerry Nadler (HJC Chairman), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Rep. Val Demings (D-FL), Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO), Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-TX).

It does not seem accidental that Pelosi’s team of Lawfare advisors selected Adam Schiff and Zoe Lofgren who are two of the key people who helped construct the fraudulent whistle-blower complaint; and both of whom would be fact witnesses if the ‘whistle-blower’ is called into question. By announcing them as prosecutors for the House Pelosi is attempting to isolate them from testimony.

As we predicted in early 2019, the democrats will use great fanfare to create a spectacle of delivering the physical impeachment articles to the Senate.  Remember Pelosi with the parade and big gavel in 2010 on the day they passed the partisan Obamacare bill?

Today’s grand optical parade will be promoted for the same intents and purposes.

Advertisements

Sketchy Changes to IG FISA Report Cover-Up Major Discrepancy in First Version…


There was a major discrepancy in the Inspector General report on FISA abuse, that appears to have been overlooked and casts a considerable cloud upon the DOJ Office of Inspector General and Michael Horowitz.

In chapter ten of the report, on page #312 you will find the following information.  The claim is that no-one in the FBI initiated any use of “Confidential Human Sources” into the campaign prior to opening the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.  Read Carefully:

(Page #312 – pdf link)

“In our review, we did not find any evidence that the FBI used CHSs or UCEs to interact with members of the Trump campaign prior to the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”…

However, in the very next chapter (#11, page #400), in the original IG report as released on December 9th, 2019, you will find the following statement:

(Page #400 – pdf link)

The two statements are completely contradictory.

Carter Page and George Papadopoulos started working for the Trump campaign in early March 2016.  The Crossfire Hurricane investigation began on July 28th, 2016.

If the FBI tasked CHS’s before and after they were affiliated with the Trump campaign, that was certainly before the opening of Crossfire Hurricane.   That statement was also included in the original Executive Summary (page xvi) as below:

The IG report was modified after publication to change this paragraph to:

“We determined that the Crossfire Hurricane team tasked several CHSs and UCEs during the 2016 presidential campaign, which resulted in multiple interactions with Carter Page and Papadopoulos, both during and afterthe time they were affiliated with the Trump campaign”…

However, that still presents an issue with this statement:

“In our review, we did not find any evidence that the FBI used CHSs or UCEs to interact with members of the Trump campaign prior to the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.  All of the members of the Crossfire Hurricane team told the OIG that no investigative steps of any type were taken prior to receipt of the predicating information for the Crossfire Hurricane investigation on July 28, 2016, and we found no evidence to the contrary.

If no investigative steps “of any type” were taken prior to July 28th, 2016, then how does George Papadopoulos run afoul of meeting(s) being monitored in March 2016 with the “overseas professor” Joseph Mifsud (DOJ Statement of Offense – Papadopoulos):

Indeed the original IG report text would indicate that George Papadopoulos was subject to Confidential Human Sources (CHS’s) and/or Undercover Employees (UCE’s) during the earliest part of his activity with the Trump campaign (literally within a week), and would refute the claim “we did not find any evidence that the FBI used CHSs or UCEs to interact with members of the Trump campaign prior to the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation” (July 31st, 2016).

That revelation and conflict is likely why the IG had to modify the text of the report after publishing it.

By modifying the language to “during and after“, the tasks against Papadopoulos could be somewhat reconciled…. so long as the IG report also stated that Mifsud was not a tasked source against Papadopoulos in March…. however, how did the DOJ know about the content of the conversation in order to use it against Papadopoulos in 2017?

The FBI sticking to the statement that: “all of the members of the Crossfire Hurricane team told the OIG that no investigative steps of any type were taken prior to receipt of the predicating information for the Crossfire Hurricane investigation on July 28, 2016” is a very strong motive to bury Maltese Professor Joseph Mifsud.

Is that why Mifsud was disappeared?

Was Mifsud disappeared because the DOJ and FBI needed to cover-up the use of any CHS prior to the official opening of Crossfire Hurricane on July 31st?

Is that why Mifsud went into hiding?

Is that why Mifsud recorded a police statement with his attorney before he went into hiding?

Is that why AG Bill Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham went to listen to that recording?

Keep in mind this is AG Bill Barr’s DOJ inspector general now saying no CHS’s were used prior to the opening of Crossfire Hurricane.

Is that why U.S. Attorney John Durham said:

“I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff. However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department.

Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”(link)

Was the original IG report correct when it said twice that: “we determined that the Crossfire Hurricane team tasked several CHSs and UCEs during the 2016 presidential campaign, which resulted in multiple interactions with Carter Page and Papadopoulos, both before and after the time they were affiliated with the Trump campaign” ?

It seems unlikely a mistake of that importance, on a key and very specific issue, could be made twice in an heavily reviewed inspector general report.  However, if the IG didn’t change the text then this statement would be a lie:

The FBI wouldn’t try to lie and cover-up to protect themselves right?

Right?

Boy, if the FBI is lying to the IG about predictation that would put Durham and Barr in a precarious position.

Preserve the institution, or highlight that FBI leadership have lied?

Is that why FBI Agent SSA-1, Joseph Pientka, the primary culprit in this mess, was shipped to San Francisco and then scrubbed?

I mean we’re putting a ton of ‘hope’ on the moral character of John Durham and Bill Barr to tell the truth here…. and there are clear and present signals the current FBI backstory is full of lies, bigger than what is currently known.

Joseph Mifsud is the key.  No surprise he disappeared.

What would the intelligence community, especially the CIA and FBI, do to retain their lies?

Unfortunately, I think we all know the answers to most of those questions.

.

I think what we don’t see happening is shouting at us….

….the question is: are we brave enough to hear the silence.

Advertisements

Laura Ingraham Blocks Devin Nunes from Discussing Mary McCord Working With Adam Schiff…


Do Laura Ingraham and Mary McCord have a history together in/around Washington DC schools, law firms, clerks, social circles etc?

Because obviously Ingraham doesn’t want Devin Nunes to discuss the revelations about former DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord now working with Adam Schiff on the impeachment agenda.  WATCH [@02:50]

.

Then again, it could be her typical Hannitus Interruptus style of self-important talking that destroys the opportunity for decent information. :::Sigh:::

The key to understanding the corrupt endeavor behind the fraudulent “whistle-blower” complaint, doesn’t actually originate with ICIG Atkinson. The key person is the former head of the DOJ National Security Division, Mary McCord.

Prior to becoming IC Inspector General, Michael Atkinson was the Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division, Mary McCord.

It is very safe to say Mary McCord and Michael Atkinson have a working relationship from their time together in 2016 and 2017 at the DOJ-NSD. Atkinson was Mary McCord’s senior legal counsel; essentially her lawyer.

McCord was the senior intelligence officer who accompanied Sally Yates to the White House in 2017 to confront then White House Counsel Don McGahn about the issues with Michael Flynn and the drummed up controversy over the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak phone call.

Additionally, Mary McCord, Sally Yates and Michael Atkinson worked together to promote the narrative around the incoming Trump administration “Logan Act” violations. This silly claim (undermining Obama policy during the transition) was the heavily promoted, albeit manufactured, reason why Yates and McCord were presumably concerned about Flynn’s contact with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It was nonsense.

However, McCord didn’t just disappear in 2017 when she retired from the DOJ-NSD. She resurfaced as part of the Lawfare group assembly after the mid-term election in 2018.

THIS IS THE KEY.

Mary McCord joined the House effort to impeach President Trump; as noted in this article from Politico:

“I think people do see that this is a critical time in our history,” said Mary McCord, a former DOJ official who helped oversee the FBI’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and now is listed as a top outside counsel for the House in key legal fights tied to impeachment. “We see the breakdown of the whole rule of law. We see the breakdown in adherence to the Constitution and also constitutional values.”

“That’s why you’re seeing lawyers come out and being very willing to put in extraordinary amounts of time and effort to litigate these cases,” she added. (link)

Former DOJ-NSD Head Mary McCord is currently working for the House Committee (Adam Schiff) who created the impeachment scheme.

Now it becomes critical to overlay that detail with how the “whistle-blower” complain was organized. Mary McCord’s former NSD attorney, Michael Atkinson, is the intelligence community inspector general who brings forth the complaint.

The “whistle-blower” had prior contact with the staff of the committee. This is admitted. So essentially the “whistle-blower” almost certainly had contact with Mary McCord; and then ICIG Michael Atkinson modified the whistle-blower rules to facilitate the outcome.

There is the origination. That’s where the fraud starts.

The coordination between Mary McCord, the Whistle-blower and Michael Atkinson is why HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff will not release the transcript from Atkinson’s testimony.

It now looks like the Lawfare network constructed the ‘whistle-blower’ complaint aka a Schiff Dossier, and handed it to allied CIA operative Eric Ciaramella to file as a formal IC complaint. This process is almost identical to the Fusion-GPS/Lawfare network handing the Steele Dossier to the FBI to use as the evidence for the 2016/2017 Russia conspiracy.

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

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

.

Michael Atkinson was moved from DOJ-NSD to become the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) in 2018. What we end up with is a brutally obvious, convoluted, network of corrupt officials; each carrying an independent reason to cover their institutional asses… each individual interest forms a collective fraudulent scheme inside the machinery of government.

Michael Atkinson and Mary McCord worked together in 2016/2017 on the stop-Trump surveillance operation (FISA application via DOJ-NSD). Then, following the 2018 mid-term election, in 2019 Mary McCord and Michael Atkinson team up again on another stop-Trump operation, each in a different position, and -working with others- coordinate the House impeachment plan via the ‘whistle-blower’ complaint.

While Devin Nunes is focused on the false statements of ICIG Michael Atkinson, the key is the contact between the ‘whistle-blower’ (Eric Ciaramella) and the House Intelligence Committee via Mary McCord.

There’s a very strong likelihood this entire impeachment construct was manufactured out of nothing.

National Security Council resistance member Alexander Vindman starts a rumor about the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call, which he shares with CIA operative Eric Ciaramella (a John Brennan resistance associate). Ciaramella then makes contact with resistance ally Mary McCord in her role within the House. McCord then helps Ciaramella create a fraudulent whistle-blower complaint via her former colleague, now ICIG, Michael Atkinson….

…And that’s how this impeachment operation gets started.