In response to media inquiry and FOIA demands, the government of Australia formally admitted today to the role of High Commissioner Alexander Downer and his engagements with George Papadopoulos in 2016.  The timing coincides with the Mueller Report (released today), which states it was information about this engagement from Alexander Downer that opened the FBI counterintelligence investigation in July 2016.

The Australian government cited the conclusion of the Robert Mueller special counsel investigation as the background for their willingness to comply with an 15-month-old FOIA request from Buzzfeed News.

Alexander Downer is the Australian diplomat who engaged George Papadopoulos in London just days after U.S. intelligence asset Joseph Mifsud told Papadopoulos that Russians had emails from Hillary Clinton.

We can take the FOIA information and overlay it into some really fantastic research on Alexander Downer, previously done by TWE:

In 1956, Australia — alongside New Zealand — were both added to the newly expanded UKUSA Agreement, which extended intelligence co-operation to those two countries with the current members of the agreement — United Kingdom, United States and Canada — which formed the alliance known as “Five Eyes”.

Many years later, on February 22, 2006, Alexander Downer and Bill Clinton signed a memorandum of understanding to spread grant money over the course of four years to a project to provide screening and drug treatment to AIDS patients in Asia as part of the Clinton Foundation.

On February 18, 2014, Downer was announced as Australia’s next High Commissioner to London, where he would replace Mike Rann.

Between March 7–13, 2016, Director James Comey visited Australia and met with Attorney General George Brandis and Justice Minister Michael Keenan.

Three days later, on March 16, Director James Clapper arrived in Australia from New Zealand via a C-17 Globemaster.

On May 10, 2016, at the Kensington Wine Rooms in London, England, Downer met with George Papadopoulos, where Papadopoulos — having been introduced through two intermediaries, Christian Cantor and Erika Thompson — mentioned that Russians had material on Hillary Clinton.

There’s a little bit of a conflict in the dates (likely due to the significantly different time zones between London and Australia). According to Downer’s calendar schedule the meeting was May 11th, 2016 (as released today)

Alexander Downer decided to inform the United States Embassy in London, England about his conversation with Papadopoulos, upon the release of the Democratic National Committee’s e-mails by WikiLeaks on July 22, 2016.

Here’s the heavily redacted cable communique from Downer to Canberra, AU office, on May 11th, 2016, the day he meting Papadopoulos (as released today):

Here’s the excerpt from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report that describes the events.  However, worth noting Mueller assigns this meeting to May 6th, 2016. (?):

[Page #89, Muller Report]

Note: I cannot reconcile the disparity in date of May 6th, 2016 (Mueller) -vs- May 10th/11th, 2016 (Downer).

Alexander Downer decided to inform the United States Embassy in London, England about his conversation with Papadopoulos, upon the release of the Democratic National Committee’s e-mails by WikiLeaks on July 22, 2016.

On July 23, 2016, the Australian Government contacted Elizabeth Dibble at the United States Embassy to inform her about Downer and Papadopoulos’s conversation.

Somehow the information was transmitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crossfire Hurricane was then opened on July 31, 2016 by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Two days later, on August 2, 2016, Special Agent Peter Strzok and another agent at the Federal Bureau of Investigation met with Downer directly in London to discuss his conversation with Papadopoulos further. Strzok then received reading materials, which he texted about to Lisa Page.

However, it’s worth noting  information provided by Devin Nunes (April 2018) as it pertains to an unofficial channel of information that surrounded these events:

REPRESENTATIVE DEVIN NUNES: “That’s correct. So it took us a long time to actually get this, what’s called the “electronic communication”, as we know it now for your viewers, what it is it’s the original intelligence, original reasons that the counterintelligence was started.

Now this is really important to us because the counterintelligence investigation uses the tools of our intelligence services that are not supposed to be used on American citizens. And we’ve long wanted to know: what intelligence did you have that actually led to this investigation? So what we’ve found now, after the investigators have reviewed it, is that in fact there was no intelligence.

So we have a traditional partnership with what’s called the Five Eyes Agreement. Five Eyes Agreement involves our friends in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada, and of course, us. So long time processes and procedures in place where we move intelligence across.

We are not supposed to spy on each others’ citizens. And it’s worked well. And it continues to work well. And we know it’s working well because there was no intelligence that passed through the Five Eyes channels to our government.

And that’s why we had to see that original communication. So now we’re trying to figure out, as you know, we are investigating the State Department, we think there’s some major irregularities in the State Department, and we’re trying to figure out how this information about Mr. Papadopoulos of all people who was supposedly meeting with some folks in London, how that made it over across into the FBI’s hands.” (Video Interview Link)

Also, during a MAGA Rally in Las Vegas, NV on September 20, 2018, when President Donald Trump was interviewed by Sean Hannity, the President mentioned that two foreign governments were attempting to block the declassification of the FISA on Carter Page.

“We’re also dealing with foreign countries that do have a problem, I must tell you. I got called from two very good allies saying ‘please, can we talk?’ So it’s not as simple as all that. And we do have to respect their wishes. But it’ll all come out.”

 — President Donald Trump

.

The following day, Sept. 21, 2018, President Trump posted these tweets:

We already know Cambridge Professor Stefan Halper is a U.S. intelligence asset used to run an operation against Carter Page.  If Joseph Mifsud is shown to be a U.S. (or Western) intelligence asset; not Russian; and he planted the Clinton email story on Papadopoulos, then the make-up of the operation to frame Papadopoulos is solidified.

Downer would be used to extract the information planted by Mifsud; giving the appearance of Russian influence.

View image on Twitter

The_War_Economy@The_War_Economy

Literally just a picture of Stefan Halper and Alexander Downer from 2010 with an associated video.https://vimeo.com/59137878 

1,116

10:56 AM – May 24, 2018

965 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

The Robert Mueller report on the 2016 election and Russian interference is available for download HERE (DOJ Site).  Additionally, it is available on pdf HERE. [Embed Below]

.

The scale of internet bandwidth being used to view this 448-page report is incredible.  Allow time for visibility or any download/upload.  Feel free to drop your comments on review below.  CTH will have full analysis after a thorough review.

A much anticipated press conference today with Attorney General Bill Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as they release the report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. When the actual report is released we can FIND IT HERE.

UPDATE: Video and Transcript Added

.

[Transcript of prepared remarks] Good Morning. Thank you all for being here today.

On March 22, 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded his investigation of matters related to Russian attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and submitted his confidential report to me pursuant to Department of Justice regulations.

As I said during my Senate confirmation hearing and since, I am committed to ensuring the greatest possible degree of transparency concerning the Special Counsel’s investigation, consistent with the law.

At 11:00 this morning, I will transmit copies of a public version of the Special Counsel’s report to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. The Department of Justice will also make the report available to the American public by posting it on the Department’s website after it has been delivered to Congress.

I would like to offer a few comments today on the report.

But before I do that, I want to thank Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for joining me here today and for his assistance and counsel throughout this process. Rod has served the Department of Justice for many years with dedication and distinction, and it has been a great privilege and pleasure to work with him since my confirmation. He had well-deserved plans to step back from public service that I interrupted by asking him to help in my transition. Rod has been an invaluable partner, and I am grateful that he was willing to help me and has been able to see the Special Counsel’s investigation to its conclusion. Thank you, Rod.

I would also like to thank Special Counsel Mueller for his service and the thoroughness of his investigation, particularly his work exposing the nature of Russia’s attempts to interfere in our electoral process.

As you know, one of the primary purposes of the Special Counsel’s investigation was to determine whether members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, or any individuals associated with that campaign, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.

Volume I of the Special Counsel’s report describes the results of that investigation. As you will see, the Special Counsel’s report states that his “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

I am sure that all Americans share my concerns about the efforts of the Russian government to interfere in our presidential election. As the Special Counsel’s report makes clear, the Russian government sought to interfere in our election. But thanks to the Special Counsel’s thorough investigation, we now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign – or the knowing assistance of any other Americans for that matter. That is something that all Americans can and should be grateful to have confirmed.

The Special Counsel’s report outlines two main efforts by the Russian government to influence the 2016 election:

First, the report details efforts by the Internet Research Agency, a Russian company with close ties to the Russian government, to sow social discord among American voters through disinformation and social media operations.

Following a thorough investigation of this disinformation campaign, the Special Counsel brought charges in federal court against several Russian nationals and entities for their respective roles in this scheme. Those charges remain pending, and the individual defendants remain at large.

But the Special Counsel found no evidence that any Americans – including anyone associated with the Trump campaign – conspired or coordinated with the Russian government or the IRA in carrying out this illegal scheme.

Indeed, as the report states, “[t]he investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation.” Put another way, the Special Counsel found no “collusion” by any Americans in the IRA’s illegal activity.

Second, the report details efforts by Russian military officials associated with the GRU to hack into computers and steal documents and emails from individuals affiliated with the Democratic Party and the presidential campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton for the purpose of eventually publicizing those emails. Obtaining such unauthorized access into computers is a federal crime.

Following a thorough investigation of these hacking operations, the Special Counsel brought charges in federal court against several Russian military officers for their respective roles in these illegal hacking activities. Those charges are still pending and the defendants remain at large.

But again, the Special Counsel’s report did not find any evidence that members of the Trump campaign or anyone associated with the campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its hacking operations. In other words, there was no evidence of Trump campaign “collusion” with the Russian government’s hacking.

The Special Counsel’s investigation also examined Russian efforts to publish stolen emails and documents on the internet. The Special Counsel found that, after the GRU disseminated some of the stolen materials through its own controlled entities, DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0, the GRU transferred some of the stolen materials to Wikileaks for publication. Wikileaks then made a series of document dumps.

The Special Counsel also investigated whether any member or affiliate of the Trump campaign encouraged or otherwise played a role in these dissemination efforts. Under applicable law, publication of these types of materials would not be criminal unless the publisher also participated in the underlying hacking conspiracy. Here too, the Special Counsel’s report did not find that any person associated with the Trump campaign illegally participated in the dissemination of the materials.

Finally, the Special Counsel investigated a number of “links” or “contacts” between Trump Campaign officials and individuals connected with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign. After reviewing those contacts, the Special Counsel did not find any conspiracy to violate U.S. law involving Russia-linked persons and any persons associated with the Trump campaign.

So that is the bottom line. After nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, and hundreds of warrants and witness interviews, the Special Counsel confirmed that the Russian government sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election but did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded in those schemes.

After finding no underlying collusion with Russia, the Special Counsel’s report goes on to consider whether certain actions of the President could amount to obstruction of the Special Counsel’s investigation. As I addressed in my March 24th letter, the Special Counsel did not make a traditional prosecutorial judgment regarding this allegation. Instead, the report recounts ten episodes involving the President and discusses potential legal theories for connecting these actions to elements of an obstruction offense.

After carefully reviewing the facts and legal theories outlined in the report, and in consultation with the Office of Legal Counsel and other Department lawyers, the Deputy Attorney General and I concluded that the evidence developed by the Special Counsel is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Although the Deputy Attorney General and I disagreed with some of the Special Counsel’s legal theories and felt that some of the episodes examined did not amount to obstruction as a matter of law, we did not rely solely on that in making our decision. Instead, we accepted the Special Counsel’s legal framework for purposes of our analysis and evaluated the evidence as presented by the Special Counsel in reaching our conclusion.

In assessing the President’s actions discussed in the report, it is important to bear in mind the context. President Trump faced an unprecedented situation. As he entered into office, and sought to perform his responsibilities as President, federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office, and the conduct of some of his associates. At the same time, there was relentless speculation in the news media about the President’s personal culpability.

Yet, as he said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion. And as the Special Counsel’s report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the President was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.

Nonetheless, the White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation. Apart from whether the acts were obstructive, this evidence of non-corrupt motives weighs heavily against any allegation that the President had a corrupt intent to obstruct the investigation.

Now, before I take questions, I want to address a few aspects of the process for producing the public report that I am releasing today. As I said several times, the report contains limited redactions relating to four categories of information. To ensure as much transparency as possible, these redactions have been clearly labelled and color-coded so that readers can tell which redactions correspond to which categories.

As you will see, most of the redactions were compelled by the need to prevent harm to ongoing matters and to comply with court orders prohibiting the public disclosure of information bearing upon ongoing investigations and criminal cases, such as the IRA case and the Roger Stone case.

These redactions were applied by Department of Justice attorneys working closely together with attorneys from the Special Counsel’s Office, as well as with the intelligence community, and prosecutors who are handling ongoing cases. The redactions are their work product.

Consistent with long-standing Executive Branch practice, the decision whether to assert Executive privilege over any portion of the report rested with the President of the United States. Because the White House voluntarily cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, significant portions of the report contain material over which the President could have asserted privilege. And he would have been well within his rights to do so.

Following my March 29th letter, the Office of the White House Counsel requested the opportunity to review the redacted version of the report in order to advise the President on the potential invocation of privilege, which is consistent with long-standing practice. Following that review, the President confirmed that, in the interests of transparency and full disclosure to the American people, he would not assert privilege over the Special Counsel’s report. Accordingly, the public report I am releasing today contains redactions only for the four categories that I previously outlined, and no material has been redacted based on executive privilege.

In addition, earlier this week, the President’s personal counsel requested and were given the opportunity to read a final version of the redacted report before it was publicly released. That request was consistent with the practice followed under the Ethics in Government Act, which permitted individuals named in a report prepared by an Independent Counsel the opportunity to read the report before publication. The President’s personal lawyers were not permitted to make, and did not request, any redactions.

In addition to making the redacted report public, we are also committed to working with Congress to accommodate their legitimate oversight interests with respect to the Special Counsel’s investigation. We have been consulting with Chairman Graham and Chairman Nadler throughout this process, and we will continue to do so.

Given the limited nature of the redactions, I believe that the publicly released report will allow every American to understand the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation. Nevertheless, in an effort to accommodate congressional requests, we will make available to a bipartisan group of leaders from several Congressional committees a version of the report with all redactions removed except those relating to grand-jury information. Thus, these members of Congress will be able to see all of the redacted material for themselves – with the limited exception of that which, by law, cannot be shared.

I believe that this accommodation, together with my upcoming testimony before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, will satisfy any need Congress has for information regarding the Special Counsel’s investigation.

Once again, I would like to thank you all for being here today. I now have a few minutes for questions.

(link)

The anticipated start time for the press conference is 9:30am EST; with the release of the Mueller report around 11:00am to Noon at the Special Counsel website HERE.

Fox News Livestream Link – RSBN Livestream Link – Fox Business Livestream Link

This will not come as a surprise to anyone who has followed closely; however, according to the FBI’s primary narrative engineer, Devlin Barrett at the Washington Post, the Mueller team has invested most heavily in “obstruction, obstruction, obstruction”….

For two years 19 lawyers were piecing the script together; while 40 FBI agents used 2,800 subpoenas, 230 orders for communication records, national security letters, FISA authorization, wiretaps, 50 pen register authorizations, and over 500 Title III search warrants to scour the background of every private communication, phone call, text message and email of everyone in the Trump orbit.  Eventually interviewing over 500 witnesses for words to paste into the text of the Mueller/Weissmann obstruction report.

As Barrett outlines on behalf of his benefactors, the team has painted a detailed narrative using every word, tweet, media interview, comment, and private/confidential White House utterance by President Trump -about his unhappiness with the Mueller probe- as clear and convincing evidence of President Trump’s intent to obstruct the investigation.

It’s all about the “obstruction”…. And that is Pelosi’s launch platform.

(WaPo Via Devlin Barrett)  The Justice Department plans to release a lightly redacted version of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s 400-page report Thursday, offering a granular look at the ways in which President Trump was suspected of having obstructed justice, people familiar with the matter said.

The report — the general outlines of which the Justice Department has briefed the White House on — will reveal that Mueller decided he could not come to a conclusion on the question of obstruction because it was difficult to determine Trump’s intent and because some of his actions could be interpreted innocently, these people said.

But it will offer a detailed blow-by-blow of the president’s alleged conduct — analyzing tweets, private threats and other episodes at the center of Mueller’s inquiry, they added.  (read more)

The White House approach to this is visible on the perimeter.  Classic Trump and it will catch the Moonbats completely off-guard.

Put it all out there….  All of it.  As much as possible…. let the world see just how much effort was expended on this stupid investigation into nothing.  This is classic Trump.

You know what the media and the Democrats have forgotten?…

Trump owns the downside better than anyone.

No-one, EVER, has yet to catch on to how brilliantly Trump owns the downside.

The report will outline how many times terrible Trump lashed out over the past two years to his closest advisers about the damn “witchhunt”.  It will outline every time he asked someone if he could do something to stop it…  It will outline everything about how Trump wanted that damned ridiculous investigation to be done with…  etc. etc. etc.

However, in releasing so much granular activity the one thing the Mueller team and the media will forget is….  that’s exactly the behavior of a transparently innocent man.

Wrongfully accused…. that’s what you do.  And you know what, Trump will own it.

Trump will own it in the very Trumpiest of ways.

Yes, I said that… I was, and am still, furious that we have had to put up with this nonsense; with this garbage… it’s infuriating.  etc. etc. etc. in buckets.

In the way only POTUS Trump can deliver.

In the words of a common man.

In the words of every man.

In the words that almost every American will relate to.

That’s how Trump will do it.  Authentically and naturally…. he will completely own his willingness to shut down that stupid Russia collusion nonsense.

“I’m the most powerful man in the world, right?.. that’s what people say, the office, the power of the president right?.. not me specifically..  and yet, excuse me, I’m, excuse me, …I’m creating jobs and this stuff is complex, it’s easy for me, but complex; important stuff, talking deals, and make things better, and negotiating for our country, and, excuse me… and I’ve got this nonsense – remember, no collusion-  tying up my people… and, excuse me, wasting so much time… interrupting everything we are doing to make America great.  It doesn’t stop us, but it’s ridiculous… make me angry?.. Sure. and for what?  Sure, wouldn’t you? ..  For what?.. excuse me, … A report?  That’s it?  $35 million or something right?  For what?… because a ridiculous witchhunt, no collusion”…

Classic Donald Trump.

Two years of fire-breathing dragon-energy Trump.. unleashed.

Can you hear it?

The Democrats/Media have no comprehension about owning the downside…

REMEMBER 2016?:

Regardless of who you supported in the 2016 Presidential primary race, most will admit there’s one strategic advantage held by Donald Trump over all other candidates – Trump’s willingness to “own the downside“.

All policies and proposals have a “downside“, there’s no such thing as a policy proposal with benefit to all and harm to none.

This empirical truth is toxic to professional politicians – therefore they spend an inordinate amount of time using pretzel logic to avoid it.  As a direct consequence of avoidance, the media love to use the downside as a weapon.

For the first time in recent political memory Donald Trump represents a candidacy who is unafraid of their spear; and as a consequence, immune to the damage.

A case in point – NBC’s Chuck Todd thought he could deploy the downside weapon during a Trump campaign stop in Iowa (State Fair). During the exclusive interview aboard the Trumpo Jet Todd deployed his arsenal – “but you can’t actually remove illegal immigrants, I mean you can’t actually deport them“.

Trump owned the downside. “Chuck, yes, yes we will. Either we have borders or we don’t; either we have a country or we don’t“.

Like all other media punditry, Chuck was left aghast. The dangling participle remained naught but a withering “but… but…”

Every other candidate who has ever existed in the history of modern political candidacy, would have given some form of “acceptable” alternative response. (ie. a PC version.) (ie. a lie.)

Not Trump, he owns the downside.

This approach is what makes ‘Splodey Heads!

A Second Case In Point – Trump does it again with CNN’s Jake Tapper, only this time Trump frames the controversial position ownership with an explanation.

Donald Trump is backing up his previous position that removing Iraq’s Sadam Hussein and Libya’s Kaddaffi was not a good idea. Jake Tapper is aghast: “what about the human rights abuses”?

Trump owns the opposite: Human rights abuses? …”you don’t think they’re happening now? They’re worse now than they ever were. People are getting their heads chopped off, they’re being drowned in cages. Right now they’re far worse off than they ever were under Saddam Hussein or Kadaffi”…

Another ‘Splodey !

It doesn’t matter what the issue is.

When confronted by his tax proposal to eliminate taxes on wage earners below $50k Trump is challenged with the “skin in the game” argument. The response is simple: “look, it costs more for the processing of those income tax filers than the revenue which comes from them“…

• Media: Jeb Bush want’s a no-fly zone in Syria?
• Trump: When did ISIS get airplanes?

• Media: You can’t build a wall?
• Trump: I build things, that’s what I do – watch me!

• Media: You’re going to deport 11 million people. You’ll need a “deportation force“.
• Trump: What does I.C.E do?

And on and on it goes. Simple cut-to-the-chase responses with total fearless ownership of any downside from a policy proposal.

• Media: But you used to be a Democrat, you have donated to Democrats?
• Trump: Yes, I live and work in New York. NYC is all Democrats, if I need to leverage assistance for my company goals I need to work with Democrats. It’s a business necessity; I look out for my employees and their best interests.

• Media: But you had Hillary Clinton at your wedding?
• Trump: Yes, it was an amazing event, the best, the biggest, the most elegant, and I asked her and Bill to attend. They did. Wouldn’t you, I mean if I invited you?

• Media: You spend all this time talking about polls. You seem obsessed by polls?
• Trump: Yeah, that’s because I’m winning them. If the polls were not good, I wouldn’t even mention them. Duh.

The march of the Trumpisms’ continues:

• Megyn Kelly: “You’ve called women you don’t like ‘fat pigs,’ ‘dogs,’ ‘slobs,’ and ‘disgusting animals’…”
• Trump: “Only Rosie O’Donnell.”

• Media: You can’t build a wall!
• Trump: “Sure I can, AND Mexico is going to pay for it!!”

• Media: But you support Eminent Domain?
• Trump: Yeah, and “Try building the Keystone Pipeline without it”..

• Media:  But you called Sanders a maniac!
• Trump: “And a Communist”, don’t forget!

• Media:  But you declared bankruptcy!
• Trump:  “Yup, sure did.  And I Chaptered 4 out of 400 companies. Took over bad deals and made money on those too !”…

• Media:  But you held a rally and someone said Obama was Muslim, and you didn’t defend him from it!
• Trump:  Yeah, “Would he defend me? I don’t think so!”

• Media: But you attacked Ben Carson! “…
• Trump: Well, I never hit my mother on the head with a hammer! Did you, Bill?”

When you compare how Trump owns the so-called “negatives”, you immediately recognize they are only negatives if he allows them to be. Thus, he doesn’t let them be issues – he owns them, and says “yeah, so?”

Trump has spent decades with Park Row media types. He has never avoided them, he totally understands how they operate – and more importantly “why”?

Pelosi and Mueller’s team think they’ve got him surrounded with Mueller’s team.  Except they’ve forgotten…  He’s seemingly one man, yet he consistently has his opposition surrounded.

Watch President Trump own the downside to this Mueller report… it’s going to be a thing of absolute beauty…. yet again.

Democrat politicians and their water-carrying media allies who helped spur the Mueller investigation for two years are furious about Attorney General Bill Barr and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein holding a press conference tomorrow (9:30am) shortly before releasing the Mueller report (11:00am).

The level of Democrat pearl-clutching over process is only exceeded by the transparency of their political demands to create a narrative.  It really is silly…

(Nadler)

(Schiff)

(Jeffries)

(Haberman – New York Times)

(Kessler – Washington Post)