Durham Court Filing Identifies Clinton Tech Ally with Govt Provided Access to Spy on Executive Office of President Trump

Durham Court Filing Identifies Clinton Tech Ally with Govt Provided Access to Spy on Executive Office of President Trump

CTH begins every outline of the ongoing Durham investigation with the following disclaimer:  How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?

The short answer is, Durham can’t. The ramifications would collapse the U.S. government; yes, all three collaborating branches.

As a consequence, some of these revelations are only valuable insofar as they will be needed by historians who look upon the scattered rubble of this once great republic and seek to explain to future generations how it all went wrong.  [How the Fourth Branch of Government was created].

In a court filing late yesterday [Read Filing Here] special counsel John Durham dropped an explosive point into the public psyche.  Durham confirms that an outside government contractor, controlled by Hillary Clinton aligned “tech executive-1” Rodney Joffe, had access to conduct electronic surveillance and spying operations into the Executive Office of The President of the United States (EOP).

Tech Executive-1 is Rodney Joffe who worked with a federal cyber contractor called Neustar.

While the surveillance and spying operation against Donald Trump is likely not a revelation to many people here, it will be quite a shock for some to see the direct admission in a public court filing.   The eye-opening part is the contractor access to conduct surveillance of Trump extended into his actual presidency as the “Office of the President” was being monitored by outside agents.

Of course, the legacy media (New York Times, Politico, Washington Post, et al) will have to ignore these surveillance revelations because they so vehemently denied anyone connected to government spying on Trump it in all years past.

If you want to dig into the details of this filing, I would recommend a review of TechnoFog’s outline HERE.

The obvious question is: If Rodney Joffe is spying on the office of the president, why hasn’t he been indicted?

Unfortunately, the most likely answer starts to get into that circular silo crap we have often discussed.  The feds will say they were worried about Trump as a Russian asset as he came into office, so they used extreme sensitive measures to monitor him.  Rodney Joffe will say he used his access to the DNS system of the president because the feds asked him to monitor the office of the President… and you are back in that investigative circular chase that goes nowhere…. until someone says, “mistakes were made.”

I’m sure a lot of deep weeds walkers will get into even more detail about this specific filing.  We’ll share the good ones and check them out.

In the interim, what’s interesting to me is a little question I have always asked for years about this surveillance set up as it starts to surface.  A few years ago, when discussing the Crowdstrike stuff, DNC hack, emails to Wikileaks etc….

… I always said there were just small glances, flickers of evidence, stuff in the background, that seemed to indicate the Clinton campaign had some kind of direct access point, a portal per se, into the government database.  The Clinton crew just seemed to have direct access to information that wasn’t coming from a leak, but rather from their ability to extract government data on their own.

The most obvious reason for this suspicion was the absence of an inside government broker relaying information to the Clinton crew.  Sure, they had boatloads of allies in the Intel Community, CIA, DoD, State Dept, DOJ, FBI and Deep State writ large, but they also seemed to be able to have information that couldn’t be attributed to reception from a government insider.

The Clinton crew had info that didn’t come from a leak.  The Clinton crew had info that was direct.

This filing might just have answered or affirmed my questions and suspicions.  It could be that Rodney Joffe, working outside government with a direct pipe into the same government database, just extracted what Team Clinton needed and then passed it along.  Clinton team packages it, spins it, then launders it back into the government.

There are several federal contractors with access to government databases.  However, Rodney Joffe is a federal contractor with direct access to extract data who works with Clinton.

In essence, Joffe was the portal I always suspected she had.


A lot more will come out related to this singular court filing.  Hell, I’ve got about a dozen questions from just the first few pages; however, I stand by my introductory disclaimer, no-one inside government can/will be touched.

All three branches of government participated in the corrupt and illegal targeting of Donald J Trump, a political outsider.  And all three branches of government have also participated in the cover-up.

CTH – “In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats.  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became the target of the new national security system.  This is very important to understand as you dig deeper into this research outline.

Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01.  DHS came along in 2002 and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed.  When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.”  READ MORE


Tucker Carlson Pushing Back Against NSA Surveillance, However The Intelligence Branch of Government is Much Larger Than Most Consider

Tucker Carlson used his TV broadcast on Wednesday night to continue pushing-back against NSA operational data collection that appears to have caught him in their surveillance dragnet.  However, what Carlson (and many others) have yet to reconcile is the totality of control held by the newest branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.

CTH has been contacted by numerous interested stakeholders in the larger dynamic.  Tomorrow we hope to be able to give readers an explanation of exactly how each traditional branch of government; including the administrative agencies within them; have been taken over by a methodical expansion of the Intelligence Community.  Everything is now controlled by the Intelligence Branch, and the underlying mechanisms of government have abdicated, perhaps even abandoned, their oversight.

In the interim, here’s the latest segment from Carlson along with one of CTH earlier outlines on how the NSA database became a surveillance tool for President Barack Obama.  We are almost 15 years into a process that facilitates the Intelligence Branch as the most powerful -and unelected- governmental system.  After the Carlson segment remind yourself how President Obama exploited a process he created.

[embedded content]

There is no workable solution to debate until the American people and congressional representatives admit and accept the totality of the current corrupt system.  In essence, until everyone realizes there is a fourth branch of government now in control.

The process to create the Intelligence Branch started around the time the office of the DNI was created (post 9/11/01).  However, it was President Obama and AG Eric Holder who took advantage of the framework the ODNI system created with an immediate and methodical plan in 2008.  The effectiveness of what they constructed shows up toward the end of the Obama presidency when they were using that system to assist Hillary Clinton.

That is the context to remember a time-frame between December 2015 and April 2016 when the NSA database was being exploited by contractors within the intelligence community, using windows opened by the Obama-era DOJ/FBI, to facilitate unauthorized searches.

On March 9, 2016, oversight personnel doing a review of FBI system access were alerted to thousands of unauthorized search queries of specific U.S. persons within the NSA database.

NSA Director Mike Rogers was made aware.

Subsequently NSA Director Rogers initiated a full compliance review of the system to identify who was doing the searches; & what searches were being conducted.

On April 18, 2016, following the preliminary audit results, Director Rogers shut down all FBI contractor access to the database after he learned FISA-702 “about”(17) and “to/from”(16) search queries were being done without authorization. Thus begins the first discovery of a much bigger background story.

When you compile the timeline with the people involved; and the specific wording of the resulting review, which was then delivered to the FISA court; and overlay the activity that was taking place in the GOP primary; what we discover is a process where the metadata collected by the NSA was being searched for political opposition research and surveillance.

Additionally, tens-of-thousands of searches were identified by the FISA court as likely extending much further than the compliance review period: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of the non compliant queries since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 period coincided with an unusually high error rate”.

In short, during the Obama administration the NSA database was continually used to conduct surveillance. This is the critical point that leads to understanding the origin of “Spygate”, as it unfolded in the Spring and Summer of 2016.

It was the discovery of the database exploitation and the removal of access as a surveillance tool that created their initial problem. Here’s how we can tell.

Initially in December 2015 there were 17 GOP candidates and all needed to be researched.

However, when Donald Trump won New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina the field was significantly whittled. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson remained.

On Super Tuesday, March 2, 2016, Donald Trump won seven states (VT, AR, VA, GA, AL, TN, MA) it was then clear that Trump was the GOP frontrunner with momentum to become the presumptive nominee. On March 5th, Trump won Kentucky and Louisiana; and on March 8th Trump won Michigan, Mississippi and Hawaii.

The next day, March 9th, NSA security alerts warned internal oversight personnel that something sketchy was going on.

This timing is not coincidental. As FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer later wrote in her report, “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” Put another way: attributes belonging to a specific individual(s) were being targeted and queried, unlawfully. Given what was later discovered, it seems obvious the primary search target, over multiple date ranges, was Donald Trump.

There were tens-of-thousands of unauthorized search queries; and as Judge Collyer stated in her report, there is no reason to believe the 85% non compliant rate was any different from the abuse of the NSA database going back to 2012.

As you will see below the NSA database was how political surveillance was being conducted during Obama’s second term in office. However, when the system was flagged, and when NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down “contractor” access to the system, the system users needed to develop another way to get access.

Mike Rogers shuts down access on April 18, 2016. On April 19, 2016, Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson’s wife, Mary Jacoby visits the White House. Immediately thereafter, the DNC and Clinton campaign contract Fusion GPS… who then hire Christopher Steele.

Knowing it was federal “contractors”, outside government with access to the system, doing the unauthorized searches, the question becomes: who were the contractors?

The possibilities are quite vast. Essentially anyone the FBI or intelligence apparatus was using could have participated. Crowdstrike was a known FBI contractor; they were also contracted by the DNC. Shawn Henry was the former head of the FBI office in DC and is now the head of Crowdstrike; a rather dubious contractor for the government and a politically connected data security and forensic company. James Comey’s special friend Daniel Richman was an unpaid FBI “special employee” with security access to the database. Nellie Ohr began working for Fusion-GPS on the Trump project in November 2015 and she was a CIA contractor; and it’s entirely likely Glenn Simpson or people within his Fusion-GPS network were also contractors for the intelligence community.

Remember the Sharyl Attkisson computer intrusions? It’s all part of this same network; Attkisson even names Shawn Henry as a defendant in her ongoing lawsuit.

All of the aforementioned names, and so many more, held a political agenda in 2016.

It seems likely if the NSA flags were never triggered then the contracted system users would have continued exploiting the NSA database for political opposition research; which would then be funneled to the Clinton team. However, once the unauthorized flags were triggered, the system users (including those inside the official intelligence apparatus) needed to find another back-door to continue… Again, the timing becomes transparent.

Immediately after NSA flags were raised March 9th; the same intelligence agencies began using confidential human sources (CHS’s) to run into the Trump campaign. By activating intelligence assets like Joseph Mifsud and Stefan Halper the IC (CIA, FBI) and system users had now created an authorized way to continue the same political surveillance operations.

When Donald Trump hired Paul Manafort on March 28, 2016, it was a perfect scenario for those doing the surveillance. Manafort was a known entity to the FBI and was previously under investigation. Paul Manafort’s entry into the Trump orbit was perfect for Glenn Simpson to sell his prior research on Manafort as a Trump-Russia collusion script two weeks later.

The shift from “unauthorized exploitation of the NSA database” to legally authorized exploitation of the NSA database was now in place. This was how they continued the political surveillance. This is the confluence of events that originated “spygate”, or what officially blossomed into the FBI investigation known as “Crossfire Hurricane” on July 31.

If the NSA flags were never raised; and if Director Rogers had never initiated the compliance audit; and if the political contractors were never blocked from access to the database; they would never have needed to create a legal back-door, a justification to retain the surveillance. The political operatives/contractors would have just continued the targeted metadata exploitation.

Once they created the surveillance door, Fusion-GPS was then needed to get the FBI known commodity of Chris Steele activated as a pipeline. Into that pipeline all system users pushed opposition research. However, one mistake from the NSA database extraction during an “about” query shows up as a New Yorker named Michael Cohen in Prague.

That misinterpreted data from a FISA-702 “about query” is then piped to Steele and turns up inside the dossier; it was the wrong Michael Cohen. It wasn’t Trump’s lawyer, it was an art dealer from New York City with the same name; the same “identifier”.

A DEEP DIVE – How Did It Work?

Start by reviewing the established record from the 99-page FISC opinion rendered by Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer on April 26, 2017. Review the details within the FISC opinion.

I would strongly urge everyone to read the FISC report (full pdf below) because Judge Collyer outlines how the DOJ, which includes the FBI, had an “institutional lack of candor” in responses to the FISA court. In essence, the Obama administration was continually lying to the FISA court about their activity, and the rate of fourth amendment violations for illegal searches and seizures of U.S. persons’ private information for multiple years.

Unfortunately, due to intelligence terminology Judge Collyer’s brief and ruling is not an easy read for anyone unfamiliar with the FISA processes. That complexity also helps the media avoid discussing it; and as a result most Americans have no idea the scale and scope of the Obama-era surveillance issues. So we’ll try to break down the language.

[scribd id=349542716 key=key-72P5FzpI44KMOuOPZrt1 mode=scroll]


For the sake of brevity and common understanding CTH will highlight the most pertinent segments showing just how systemic and troublesome the unlawful electronic surveillance was.

Early in 2016 NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted of a significant uptick in FISA-702(17) “About” queries using the FBI/NSA database that holds all metadata records on every form of electronic communication.

The NSA compliance officer alerted Admiral Mike Rogers who then initiated a full compliance audit on/around March 9th, 2016, for the period of November 1st, 2015, through May 1st, 2016.

While the audit was ongoing, due to the severity of the results that were identified, Admiral Mike Rogers stopped anyone from using the 702(17) “about query” option, and went to the extraordinary step of blocking all FBI contractor access to the database on April 18, 2016 (keep these dates in mind).

Here are some significant segments:

The key takeaway from these first paragraphs is how the search query results were exported from the NSA database to users who were not authorized to see the material. The FBI contractors were conducting searches and then removing, or ‘exporting’, the results. Later on, the FBI said all of the exported material was deleted.

Searching the highly classified NSA database is essentially a function of filling out search boxes to identify the user-initiated search parameter and get a return on the search result.

♦ FISA-702(16) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (“702”); and the “16” is a check box to initiate a search based on “To and From“. Example, if you put in a date and a phone number and check “16” as the search parameter the user will get the returns on everything “To and From” that identified phone number for the specific date. Calls, texts, contacts etc. Including results for the inbound and outbound contacts.

♦ FISA-702(17) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (702); and the “17” is a check box to initiate a search based on everything “About” the search qualifier. Example, if you put a date and a phone number and check “17” as the search parameter the user will get the returns of everything about that phone. Calls, texts, contacts, geolocation (or gps results), account information, user, service provider etc. As a result, 702(17) can actually be used to locate where the phone (and user) was located on a specific date or sequentially over a specific period of time which is simply a matter of changing the date parameters.

And that’s just from a phone number.

Search an ip address “about” and read all data into that server; put in an email address and gain everything about that account. Or use the electronic address of a GPS enabled vehicle (about) and you can withdraw more electronic data and monitor in real time. Search a credit card number and get everything about the account including what was purchased, where, when, etc. Search a bank account number, get everything about transactions and electronic records etc. Just about anything and everything can be electronically searched; everything has an electronic ‘identifier’.

The search parameter is only limited by the originating field filled out. Names, places, numbers, addresses, etc. By using the “About” parameter there may be thousands or millions of returns. Imagine if you put “@realdonaldtrump” into the search parameter? You could extract all following accounts who interacted on Twitter, or Facebook etc. You are only limited by your imagination and the scale of the electronic connectivity.

As you can see below, on March 9th, 2016, internal auditors noted the FBI was sharing “raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information”.

In plain English the raw search returns were being shared with unknown entities without any attempt to “minimize” or redact the results. The person(s) attached to the results were named and obvious. There was no effort to hide their identity or protect their 4th amendment rights of privacy; and database access was from the FBI network:

But what’s the scale here? This is where the story really lies.

Read this next excerpt carefully.

The operators were searching “U.S Persons”. The review of November 1, 2015, to May 1, 2016, showed “eighty-five percent of those queries” were unlawful or “non compliant”.

85% !! “representing [redacted number]”.

We can tell from the space of the redaction the number of searches were between 10,000 and 99,999 [six digits]. If we take the middle number of 50,000 – a non compliant rate of 85 percent means 42,500 unlawful searches out of 50,000.

The [six digit] amount (more than 10,000, less than 99,999), and 85% error rate, was captured in a six month period, November 2015 to April 2016.

Also notice this very important quote: “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” This tells us the system users were searching the same phone number, email address, electronic identifier, repeatedly over different dates.

Specific person(s) were being tracked/monitored.

Additionally, notice the last quote: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of” these non lawful searches “since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 coincided with an unusually high error rate”.

That means the 85% unlawful FISA-702(16)(17) database abuse has likely been happening since 2012.

2012 is an important date in this database abuse because a network of specific interests is assembled that also shows up in 2016/2017:

  • Who was 2012 FBI Director? Robert Mueller, who was selected by the FBI group to become special prosecutor in 2017.
  • Who was Mueller’ chief-of-staff? Aaron Zebley, who became one of the lead lawyers on the Mueller special counsel.
  • Who was 2012 CIA Director? John Brennan (remember the ouster of Gen Petraeus)
  • Who was ODNI? James Clapper.
  • Remember, the NSA is inside the Pentagon (Defense Dept) command structure. Who was Defense Secretary? Ash Carter

Who wanted NSA Director Mike Rogers fired in 2016? Brennan, Clapper and Carter.

And finally, who wrote and signed-off-on the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment and then lied about the use of the Steele Dossier? The same John Brennan, and James Clapper along with James Comey.

Tens of thousands of searches over four years (since 2012), and 85% of them are illegal. The results were extracted for?…. (I believe this is all political opposition use; and I’ll explain why momentarily.)

OK, that’s the stunning scale; but who was involved?

Private contractors with access to “raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to FBI’s requests“:

And as noted, the contractor access was finally halted on April 18th, 2016.

[Coincidentally (or likely not), the wife of Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacoby, goes to the White House the very next day on April 19th, 2016.]

None of this is conspiracy theory.

All of this is laid out inside this 99-page opinion from FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer who also noted that none of this FISA abuse was accidental in a footnote on page 87: “deliberate decisionmaking“:

This specific footnote, if declassified, could be a key. Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.

Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.

Summary: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) system. The database was repeatedly used by persons with contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.

The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation; and we are not the only one to think that’s what this system is being used for.

Back in 2017 when House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was working to reauthorize the FISA legislation, Nunes wrote a letter to ODNI Dan Coats about this specific issue:

[SIDEBAR: To solve the issue, well, actually attempt to ensure it never happened again, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers eventually took away the “About” query option permanently in 2017. NSA Director Rogers said the abuse was so inherent there was no other way to stop it except to remove the process completely. [SEE HERE]

Additionally, the NSA database operates as a function of the Pentagon, so the Trump administration went one step further. On his last day as NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers -together with ODNI Dan Coats- put U.S. cyber-command, the database steward, fully into the U.S. military as a full combatant command. [SEE HERE] Unfortunately it didn’t work as shown by the 2018 FISC opinion rendered by FISC Judge James Boasberg [SEE HERE]   NOTE: In hindsight I believe Coats and Rogers moved Cyber-Command into the Pentagon in order to bury the corruption more deeply away from any potential oversight.]

There is little doubt the FISA-702(16)(17) database system was used by Obama-era officials, from 2012 through April 2016, as a way to spy on their political opposition.

Quite simply there is no other intellectually honest explanation for the scale and volume of database abuse that was taking place; and keep in mind these searches were all ruled to be unlawful. Searches for repeated persons over a period time that were not authorized.

When we reconcile what was taking place and who was involved, then the actions of the exact same principle participants take on a jaw-dropping amount of clarity.

All of the action taken by CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, ODNI Clapper and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter make sense. Including their effort to get NSA Director Mike Rogers fired.

Everything after March 9th, 2016, had a dual purpose: (1) done to cover up the weaponization of the FISA database. [Explained Here] Spygate, Russia-Gate, the Steele Dossier, and even the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (drawn from the dossier and signed by the above) were needed to create a cover-story and protect themselves from discovery of this four year weaponization, political surveillance and unlawful spying. Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense; he was FBI Director when this began. And (2) they needed to keep the surveillance going.

The beginning decision to use FISA(702) as a domestic surveillance and political spy mechanism appears to have started in/around 2012. Perhaps sometime shortly before the 2012 presidential election and before John Brennan left the White House and moved to CIA. However, there was an earlier version of data assembly that preceded this effort.

Political spying 1.0 was actually the weaponization of the IRS. This is where the term “Secret Research Project” originated as a description from the Obama team. It involved the U.S. Department of Justice under Eric Holder and the FBI under Robert Mueller. It never made sense why Eric Holder requested over 1 million tax records via CD ROM, until overlaying the timeline of the FISA abuse:

The IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” The transaction occurred in October 2010 (link)

Why disks? Why send a stack of DISKS to the DOJ and FBI when there’s a pre-existing financial crimes unit within the IRS. All of the evidence within this sketchy operation came directly to the surface in early spring 2012.

The IRS scandal was never really about the IRS, it was always about the DOJ asking the IRS for the database of information. That is why it was transparently a conflict when the same DOJ was tasked with investigating the DOJ/IRS scandal. Additionally, Obama sent his chief-of-staff Jack Lew to become Treasury Secretary; effectively placing an ally to oversee/cover-up any issues. As Treasury Secretary Lew did just that.

Lesson Learned – It would appear the Obama administration learned a lesson from attempting to gather a large opposition research database operation inside a functioning organization large enough to have some good people that might blow the whistle.

The timeline reflects a few months after realizing the “Secret Research Project” was now worthless (June 2012), they focused more deliberately on a smaller network within the intelligence apparatus and began weaponizing the FBI/NSA database. If our hunch is correct, that is what will be visible in footnote #69:

How this all comes together in 2019/2020

Fusion GPS was not hired in April 2016 to research Donald Trump. As shown in the evidence provided by the FISC, the intelligence community was already doing surveillance and spy operations. The Obama administration already knew everything about the Trump campaign, and were monitoring everything by exploiting the FISA database.

However, after the NSA alerts in/around March 9th, 2016, and particularly after the April 18th shutdown of contractor access, the Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to create a legal albeit ex post facto justification for the pre-existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion GPS gave them that justification in the Steele Dossier.

That’s why the FBI small group, which later transitioned into the Mueller team, were so strongly committed to and defending the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content.

The Steele Dossier, an outcome of the Fusion contract, contains two purposes: (1) the cover-story and justification for the pre-existing surveillance operation (protect Obama); and (2) facilitate the FBI counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign (assist Clinton).

An insurance policy would be needed. The Steele Dossier becomes the investigative virus the FBI wanted inside the system. To get the virus into official status, they used the FISA application as the delivery method and injected it into Carter Page. The FBI already knew Carter Page; essentially Carter Page was irrelevant, what they needed was the FISA warrant and the Dossier in the system {Go Deep}.

The Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to give them a plausible justification for already existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion-GPS gave them that justification and evidence for a FISA warrant with the Steele Dossier.

Ultimately that’s why the Steele Dossier was so important; without it, the FBI would not have a tool that Mueller needed to continue the investigation of President Trump. In essence by renewing the FISA application, despite them knowing the underlying dossier was junk, the FBI was keeping the surveillance gateway open for Team Mueller to exploit later on.

Additionally, without the Steele Dossier the DOJ and FBI would be naked with their FISA-702 abuse as outlined by John Ratcliffe.

[embedded content]



In this video NSA Director Mike Rogers explains how he was notified of what was happening and what he did after the notification.  It should be noted, as explained by Director Rogers, that after the NSA purged their files of the unlawful search results, the compliance officer kept the audit logs of who was doing the illegal queries.  If we did not have a completely compromised legislative and executive branch, those NSA audit logs would be a good place for any inspector general to start digging.  Alas, I digress…

[embedded content]



President Trump Releases a Statement About Bill Barr, The Deep State Attorney General Who Conned The White House

After being duped, played and ultimately conned, by the duplicitous and Machiavellian deep state apparatchik known as former AG Bill Barr {Go Deep Here} it is no surprise to CTH why President Trump would be a level of angry that’s almost unfathomable.

Every word within this statement by President Trump is justified and warranted.

PRESIDENT TRUMP:  “RINO former Attorney General Bill Barr failed to investigate election fraud, and really let down the American people. Even the scam that took place in Georgia of ballot stuffing on camera, he couldn’t see what was wrong with it.

Just like he failed to understand the Horowitz report and let everyone down with respect to getting a timely investigation (where’s Durham?) on all of the corruption of the Obama-Biden Administration.

It’s people in authority like Bill Barr that allow the crazed Radical Left to succeed. He and other RINOs in the Republican Party are being used in order to try to convince people that the election was legitimate when so many incredible facts have now come out to show conclusively that it wasn’t.

He came in with a semi-bang and went out with a whimper. Earlier in his term Bill Barr went ballistic on CNN with Wolf Blitzer warning Democrats were changing election rules to flood the system with mail-in ballots that “as a matter of logic” are “very open to fraud.”

They are, and Bill Barr did nothing about it.

If there was no fraud, why are Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and other States spending so much time and effort on exposing the fraud? We already know that:

•101,789 “obsolete” voters on the rolls in Georgia, including 18,486 dead people
•Ballot batches off by up to 17.5 percent in Maricopa County, Arizona
•“Massive” chain of custody problems with drop boxes in Georgia, missing hundreds of thousands of records for months after the election
•Thousands of ballots “wheeled in through the back door” in Fulton County days after the election
•“Double feeding” ballots in Fulton County, Georgia
•Nearly 200,000 illegal “indefinitely confined” votes in Wisconsin that violated Voter ID law
•“Cash for votes” scheme in Nevada
•Illegal alien votes
•Election law changes were not authorized by the State Legislatures, which is mandated by the U.S. Constitution

And much more!

If he felt this way, why did Barr say he was “greatly honored” and “proud to have played a role in the many successes and unprecedented achievements you have delivered for the American people” in the final letter he wrote to me? He said, “Few could have weathered these attacks, much less forge ahead with a positive program for the country.”

Now it was revealed that Barr was being pushed to tell lies about the election by Mitch McConnell, another beauty, who was worried about damaging the Republicans chances in the Georgia runoff.

What really damaged the Senate Republicans was allowing their races to be rigged and stolen, and worse, the American people to no longer believe their vote matters because spineless RINOs like Bill Barr and Mitch McConnell did nothing.

Bill Barr was a disappointment in every sense of the word. Besides which, Barr, who was Attorney General (lawyer) shouldn’t be speaking about the President. Instead of doing his job, he did the opposite and told people within the Justice Department not to investigate the election.

Just like he did with the Mueller report and the cover-up of Crooked Hillary and RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA, they don’t want to investigate the real facts.

Bill Barr’s weakness helped facilitate the cover-up of the Crime of the Century, the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!”

~ President Donald J Trump


Interesting Timing – Obama Administration Lifted Block on “Gain of Function Research” Just Eleven Days Before President Trump Took Office, January 9, 2017

Okay, straight talk. This discovery makes the suspicions of an intentionally released Pandemic virus, with a political intent, to “STOP TRUMP” look exponentially more plausible. SARS = Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, the deadly consequence within COVID-19.

With people beginning to recognize that U.S. government officials and the intelligence community have been less than honest, and in some cases downright lying, surrounding the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus; and when we overlay the political motives in the background of mass narrative deflection from media and other institutions; and when we consider the known lengths that people inside the U.S. government were willing to go in their efforts to eliminate President Trump; discovering that President Obama’s administration technically authorized the restart of “gain of function” research (biological weaponization of SARS virus) just days before President Trump took office… is way more than alarming.  My hunch is this link might even disappear [SEE HERE]

January 9, 2017 – “lifting the current moratorium on certain life sciences research that could enhance a pathogen’s virulence and/or transmissibility to produce a potential pandemic pathogen (an enhanced PPP).” (link)

An even larger backstory. Eleven Days before leaving office President Obama’s administration re-authorized funding for the creation of biological weapons using SARS viruses. However, essentially this re-authorization was only kickstarting funding within the U.S. because the funding of weaponization of SARS-CoV-2 never actually stopped in 2014. The media reporting on this is misleading, if not downright false.

In the original pdf guidance for the 2014 research pause of into weaponization of SARS viruses there was a footnote that everyone seems to have missed [LINK]:

[U.S. Government Gain-of-Function Deliberative Process and Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain-of-Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS, and SARS Viruses – pdf, page 2 – October 17, 2014]

This exception essentially permitted the Pentagon to continue funding the creation of SARS as a biological weapon in Wuhan, China, under the auspices of national security. Which is exactly what the defense department did: “Grants from the Pentagon included $6,491,025 from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) from 2017 to 2020” (link).


October 17, 2014 – U.S. funding of SARS to create a biological weapon was paused due to the extreme risk of a pandemic.  However, the pause allowed agencies within the U.S. government to continue funding if they determined “the research is urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security.”

♦ 2014 through 2020 the Pentagon continued funding research in Wuhan, China. Fear of discovery would explain why many top officials in the U.S. Defense Department were against the Trump administration [with increased severity after the COVID pandemic began].

May 2016 – [An Election Year] “after thorough deliberation and extensive input from domestic and international stakeholders, the NSABB [National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity] issued its recommendations. NSABB’s central finding was that studies that are expected to enhance PPP have potential benefits to public health but also entail significant risks. NSABB recommended that such studies warranted additional scrutiny prior to being funded.”  Anthony Fauci is on the NSABB.

♦ January 9, 2017 – [Four Days after the Susan Rice oval office meeting with Obama, Biden, Comey, et al] The Obama Administration re-authorizes funding for the creation of SARS biological weapons.  “Adoption of these recommendations will satisfy the requirements for lifting the current moratorium on certain life sciences research that could enhance a pathogen’s virulence and/or transmissibility to produce a potential pandemic pathogen (an enhanced PPP).

Given the workarounds, exceptions and plausible deniability for the consequences, built into the original moratorium guidance in 2014, the defense department was operationally permitted to keep funding the biological weapons research in Wuhan, China.  The 2014 ban was a funding moratorium in name only; however, it appears the funding for U.S. research in North Carolina was stopped.

What was reauthorized in 2017 was the need to use “national security” as an excuse to continue the research.  It also appears funding of SARS as a biological weapon inside the U.S. (North Carolina) was now permitted again.


2017 – Policy Guidelines from Obama Administration

2014 – pdf link of Research Funding Pause

National Science Advisory Board (Wiki)

Pentagon Funding for SARS research 2013 through 2020.

SUMMARY: President Obama (not Trump) started the reauthorization of SARS-CoV-2 Virus experimentation in 2017.  The funding of the Wuhan Lab for the creation of SARS-CoV-2 was originated during the Obama administration and continued during the Trump administration.  The scientific community, the Obama White House and National Security Team, and the Pentagon knew the dangers of funding the weaponization of a biological weapon from SARS.  The COVID-19 pandemic was an outcome of these originating decisions.

…. and yes, there are political and ideological benefits from the perspective of Obama’s ideological group for unleashing the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic as an opportunistic “crisis” to create totalitarian government solutions regardless of who was in office.  However, the timing of the subsequent biological release is very suspicious in relation to the 2020 presidential election and the downstream benefits of manipulating the election via mail-in ballots.

Perhaps not a smoking gun of intent, but definitely bloody footprints walking out the door – in Obama’s size.


Kash Patel Discusses The Inside Story of Spygate

In this exclusive interview with Epoch Times, Jan Jekielek sits down with Kash Patel, a former Obama-era DOJ prosecutor, who was essential in uncovering the Spygate scandal. Patel was personally recruited by Congressman Devin Nunes to spearhead the congressional investigation into the FBI’s handling of the Russia probe.

With all of his inside knowledge, this interview with Kash Patel is well worth the 44 minutes.

[embedded content]


Sunday Talks, Devin Nunes and Kash Patel Discuss Kevin Clinesmith’s Light Sentence For Lying to FISA Court

Congressman Devin Nunes and former lead HPSCI Investigator Kash Patel appear with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the light sentence handed-down by FISA Presiding Judge James Boasberg for FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith.

Clinesmith plead guilty to doctoring an email to make the FISA application against Carter Page and the Trump administration appear valid.  Clinesmith lied to create a fraudulent FISA application and the Judge said he had suffered enough.  Nuts, all of it.

[embedded content]


FBI Lawyer Who Doctored False Information to FISA Court Gets 12 Months Probation, 400 Hrs Community Service and No Fine

We suspected that Kevin Clinesmith was going to get the James Wolfe leniency treatment, not only because the DOJ (Main Justice) wanted to avoid highlighting the severity of his criminal conduct, but rather -more specifically- because that criminal conduct took place under the direction of the Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissman special counsel (June 29, 2017)…. And that is what has happened.  It is all corrupt as hell…. all of it.

The judge over the case against former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was is James Boasberg.  Not coincidentally Boasberg is also now the presiding judge over the secret FISA court.  Judge Boasberg also carried an insitutional preservation motive to downplay the consequences of Kevin Clinesmith altering evidence at the behest of the Robert Mueller special counsel team.

Main Justice is protecting Rod Rosenstein, Sally Yates, Andrew McCabe, James Baker and Dana Boente, all of them knew the Mueller special counsel was corrupt from the outset.  Judge James Boasberg is protecting the secret FISA court.  It’s all FUBAR !

WASHINGTON – Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was sentenced to 12 months probation and 400 hours of community service Friday after pleading guilty to making a false statement in the first criminal case arising from Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe.

Clinesmith in August pleaded guilty to “one count of making a false statement within both the jurisdiction of the executive branch and judicial branch of the U.S. government, an offense that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years and a fine of up to $250,000.”

U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia James Boasberg on Friday during Clinesmith’s sentencing hearing said Clinesmith had suffered by losing his job and standing in the eye of a media hurricane.

Boasberg gave him 12 months probation, 400 hours of community service, and no fine.

[…]  “[He] lost his job, and his government service is what has given his life much of its meaning,” Boasberg said Friday. “He was also earning $150,000 a year and who knows where the earnings go now. He may be disbarred or suspended from the practice of law, you may never be able to work in the national security field again. These are substantial penalties.”

Boasberg added: “What is more, he went from being an obscure career government lawyer to standing in the eye of a media hurricane. He has been threatened, vilified and abused on a nationwide scale.”

[…] “Altering the email has forever changed the course of my life,” Clinesmith said. “I have lost the means to provide for my growing family…lost the ability to give back to my nation… the shame and remorse will stay with me forever.”

[…]  Carter Page was also present at the sentencing hearing and told the court his life had been, “severely affected,” by Clinesmith’s actions, saying at certain points during the ordeal he felt like a, “man without a family,” constantly under media scrutiny.

However, notably, Page asked Boasberg to show Mr. Clinesmith leniency. (read more)

1. Remember, the Special Counsel was appointed in May 2017, and from then until April 2019 any matter which had anything to do with Spygate or Trump/Russia, was managed exclusively by the Special Counsel team. [Rosenstein testified to this June 2, 2020]

2. The Carter Page FISA warrant of June 29, 2017, was renewed during the tenure of the Special Counsel. They alone ran the FISA process for the third renewal.  Clinesmith did not lie until the Special Counsel stepped-in…  The timing speaks volumes.

3. Kevin Clinesmith’s boss at the FBI during the period for FISA assembly was a supervisory special agent and Trisha Beth Anderson was the lawyer responsible to sign-off on the final assembly. [LINK]

4. The Clinesmith criminal indictment (actually an “information”) informs that, while the Special Counsel was running the DOJ, and Andy McCabe was running the FBI, Clinesmith made this request to another government agency “OGA”:

We need some clarification on [Carter Page]. There is an indication that he may be a “[digraph] source.”


5. Why is this “digraph” redacted from the Clinesmith information?

6. Clinesmith continued:

“This [the status of Carter Page] is a fact we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal…”

7. Why is the sentence following that critical question redacted from the Clinesmith indictment with “….”?

8. Clinesmith continued:

“To that end, can we get two items from you? 1) Source Check/ Is [Carter Page] a source in any capacity? 2 ) If he is, what is a [digraph] source ( or what ever type of source he is) ?”


9. Why again is the critical “digraph” source code redacted out of the Clinesmith indictment?

10. The entire issue is that a supervisory special agent is asking Clinesmith to ask the CIA whether Carter Page is any kind of CIA informant. Why redact out that specific material from the Clinesmith indictment, unless the intent is to conceal that material?

11. Why is the specific 2-digit number “digraph” supposedly secret, and why is the “type of source” omitted form the criminal information? The FISA affiant, SSA, is asking, “what is this kind of ‘source’ is Carter Page? He’s claiming to be a source, so check with the CIA to verify ‘if he is any kind of source.’”

12. Again, despite the redaction of what appears to be critical exchange, the Clinesmith indictment still includes asking for official CIA confirmation about Carter Page, “whatever kind of source he is.”

13. We know from the Clinesmith indictment that (at a minimum) he reported back that Carter Page “was a subsource” for the CIA.

14. So when the DOJ (now run by the Special Counsel) signed the Carter Page FISA renewal [June 29, 2017], we know without question that the FBI Supervisory Special Agent who reported directly to the FBI’s Deputy Director (McCabe) knew that Carter Page was at least a CIA subsource.

15. And we know without question that Clinesmith had been informed by the CIA that the CIA has already informed the DOJ and the FBI about Carter Page’s status, a year earlier, on August 17, 2016.

16. The CIA gave Clinesmith an email with all of that information. [LINK]

17. Without any push-back from the DOJ or FBI, in 2020, in connection with Clinesmith’s guilty plea, he stated that he (Clinesmith) never bothered to read the Carter Page file that the CIA gave to him. [LINK]

18. His boss had asked him specifically to check with the CIA as to the status of Carter Page. The CIA confirmed that Carter Page was some kind of source, and provided the file explaining it all.

19. Clinesmith first reports to his boss that the CIA has confirmed that Carter Page is some kind of a source – a “sub-source,” but we don’t know exactly because the “digraph” code describing what kind of source he was had been concealed out of the indictment.

20. What possible reason is there for the DOJ to redact out that code?

21. When Clinesmith reports to his boss that Carter Page is definitely some kind of CIA source, without question the SSA now knows:

“This [the CIA source status of Carter Page] is a fact we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal…”

22. Yet a few days later, Clinesmith sends an email to his boss evidencing that Carter Page “was never a source.” Yet the DOJ’s indictment redacts the “digraph” code about this.


23. Isn’t it a logical conclusion that the combination of the following highlight a DOJ whitewash: (i) the redactions of the digraph code from the indictment, “(ii) the DOJ allowing Clinesmith, unchallenged, to assert that he “did not recall ever reviewing the documents referenced in the [CIA’s] email” disclosing Carter Page’s informant status with the CIA.

24. And how could a veteran FBI attorney (Clinesmith), in the space of a few days, twist “A” into “B”?

25. Here is “A” the process the FBI started with:

Getting “clarification on [Carter Page]. There is an indication that he may be a “ [digraph] source… we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal… To that end….[contact the CIA and find out]: (1) Is [Carter Page] a source in any capacity? and (2) If he is, what is a [digraph] source (or what ever type of source he is)?”

26. What was “B”?

After first telling his boss that Carter Page was a sub-source, Clinesmith changed the official story by then stating that Carter Page “was not a source”, as if there is some distinction between being a CIA-approved “source” versus a CIA-approved “sub-source.”

27. Clinesmith’s boss knew this change of story was a smoking gun of a fix. How do we know that? Two issues:

28. First, the Clinesmith indictment concedes it, although it is buried. SSA asked Clinesmith whether the FBI “had it in writing” from the CIA that Carter Page “was not a source.” That’s not a question in this scenario, that’s an instruction.

29. Clinesmith knew any written claim that Carter Page was not a source would be untrue, because the CIA had informed them specifically that Carter Page was working with the CIA as a [digraph], and that his role was described in the CIA briefing memo to the Crossfire Hurricane team dated August 17, 2016. [LINK]

30. The Crossfire Hurricane team consisted of many senior members of the DOJ and FBI who eventually overlapped into the Special Counsel [They had to know what was going on with this June 29, 2017 renewal]

31. Clinesmith also knew Carter Page was a source for the CIA. He deliberately falsified the CIA email to try and create a CYA position for the use of the FISA application. For this event he has now plead guilty to a felony.

32. What happened during the four days: June 15, 2017 to June 19, 2017, that caused FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith to commit a felony by doctoring an email from the CIA?

33. What happened during the four days June 15 to June 19, 2017, that caused the FBI to pivot from asking about Carter Page’s status with the CIA “in any capacity, and whatever type of source he is” – to later stating something from the CIA they knew was untrue?

34. Trisha Beth Anderson signed-off on the Carter Page FISA application, a title-1 surveillance warrant, under penalty of perjury…. even though we know the application contained materially false information and omissions.

35. Trisha Beth Anderson claims she signed the FISA affidavit(s) because it/they were presented to her in a rather unusual manner. [LINK]

In front of a joint session of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees on Aug. 31, 2018, former FBI Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson said she was normally responsible for signing off on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act applications before they reached the desk of her superiors for approval. Anderson said the “linear path” those applications typically take was upended in October 2016, with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates signing off on the application before she did. Because of that unusual high-level involvement, she didn’t see the need to “second guess” the FISA application.

36. Why did she do this? She disclosed why in her previously hidden testimony to congress (August 2018). [LINK]

Anderson said all FISAs need to be signed off on in the FBI’s National Security Law Branch, where she was assigned at the time. Anderson said she was the Senior Executive Service approver for the “initiation” of the Page FISA, including determining whether there is legal sufficiency.

But Anderson stressed “in this particular case, I’m drawing a distinction because my boss and my boss’ boss had already reviewed and approved this application.” She emphasized “this one was handled a little bit differently in that sense, in that it received very high-level review and approvals — informal, oral approvals — before it ever came to me for signature.”

Anderson said that FISA approvals are typically “tracked in a linear fashion” and that someone in the Senior Executive Service “is the final approver on hard copy before a FISA goes to the director or deputy director for signature.” She said the Page FISA was approved outside regular procedures. (more)

37. Anderson had signed-off on earlier Page FISA applications because they came to her already signed: ex. by James Comey (FBI) and Sally Yates (DOJ).

“Because there were very high-level discussions that occurred about the FISA,” Anderson said she believed that meant “the FISA essentially had already been well-vetted all the way up through at least the Deputy Director [McCabe] level on our side and through the DAG [Yates] on the DOJ side.” Yates had already signed the application by the time it made it to Anderson’s desk.

38. When she signed-off on the last Carter Page FISA renewal (June 29, 2017) the Special Counsel was now running the DOJ. Andrew McCabe was in position and running the FBI

39. Trish Anderson signed-off the prior Carter Page FISA’s because they were presented to her pre-approved and pre-signed by the FBI and and DOJ leadership.

“The General Counsel [Jim Baker] … personally reviewed and made edits to the FISA, for example,” Anderson said. “The Deputy Director was involved in reviewing the FISA line by line. The Deputy Attorney General over on the DOJ side of the street was similarly involved, as I understood, reviewing the FISA application line by line.”

[…] Anderson stressed that McCabe, Yates, and Baker all played key roles in reviewing the Page FISA. “My approval at that point was really purely administrative in nature. In other words, the substantive issues — the FISA had already substantively been approved by people much higher than me in the chain of command,” Anderson said.

Anderson said it “typically would not have been the case” that people such as McCabe and Yates would sign off on a FISA application before she did.

“That part of it was unusual, and so I didn’t consider my review at that point in the process to be substantive in nature,” Anderson said. “In other words, there were smart lawyers, high-level people on both sides of the street who had reviewed and signed off on the application, the details of the application. And so I was simply signaling, yes, this package is ready to go forward.”

Anderson said the seal of approval from such high-ranking FBI and DOJ officials meant that her signature on the FISA application was mostly perfunctory. (more)

40. General Counsel Jim Baker and Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe was Anderson’s FBI boss when she signed-off on a false affidavit and assembly. Rod Rosenstein was Deputy Attorney General.

41. Additionally, on June 29, 2017, the special counsel was in control of the DOJ and DOJ-NSD. This third renewal was under their authority.

42. Who told/influenced Kevin Clinesmith to change events and paper the file with a false claim that Carter Page was somehow not a CIA asset?

[Transcript Link]

42. AG Bill Barr knew from December 9, 2019, about Kevin Clinesmith’s felony forgery when OIG Inspector General Michael Horowitz made a criminal referral for the discovery. Why delay the indictment until August 20, 2020?

This thing reeked of another institutional preservation approach. What I suspected, now proven, was that Bill Barr did not want to touch any material that contacted the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel… however, what took place under the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel is actually more corrupt than any activity that preceded it.

What I also strongly suspected was that Bill Barr was using his oft stated “I will not allow the DOJ to be political” as a crutch in his preservation approach. If nothing from the world or sphere of politics is allowed to enter the world or sphere of the DOJ then what is supposed to happen with all those years of congressional evidence gathering?  This is exactly what took place.

Keep in mind I made first hand contact with the Durham investigators to confirm their intense alignment with Barr’s directive.  We knew from July 2020 that nothing from any embargoed political silo would ever be prosecuted regardless of how it percolated out.

If you read all the material you will see there was clearly no arrangement for Kevin Clinesmith to have provided any other evidence to the DOJ. This was a one-and-done move EXACTLY LIKE former SSCI Security Director James Wolfe. The parallels were  very similar.

Clinesmith Supporting Statement:

Clinesmith indictment/information:

Clinesmith Plea agreement:


A Severely Compromised Senator Mark Warner is About To Become Chairman of The Senate Intelligence Committee

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) is about to become the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and regardless of his current disposition the deepest part of the deep state will have full blackmail control over every aspect of his activity.

To understand just how severely compromised Senator Warner is it becomes necessary to review why, when and how his corrupt legislative engagements with the intelligence apparatus took place.

Keep in mind all dates connect. All dates are important.

“You’ve got Bill Priestap on Feb. 15th, 2018, with four other people from the FBI briefing this Senate Intel Committee, completely whitewashing the truth about the reliability of the dossier,” Graham said in an interview on Fox News in August. (link)

The most consequential information about the FBI operation to target candidate and President Trump surfaced the first week of December 2017. That was when the public first heard of Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr and the ‘small group’ who was targeting Trump through 2016 and 2017.  As a consequence the Mueller team was reacting to the discoveries and needing to urgently contain any collateral damage from the revelations.

January and February 2018 are critical.  This is when the team around Mueller, led by Andrew Weissmann, went into action to cover-up all of the participating legislative branch manipulation which included the SSCI, specifically Mark Warner. Timelines are key:

On February 9, 2018, the text messages between Mark Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer Adam Waldman were released by the Mueller/Weissmann crew.  Four days later on February 13th New York Times Journalist Ali Watkins was informed her cell phone and electronic communication with SSCI Security Director James Wolfe was captured as part of a leak investigation conducted by FBI Special Agent Brian Dugan.  Wolfe leaked the content of the FISA application to Watkins on March 17, 2017, Dugan busted Wolfe.

Two days after the Watkins notification, February 15th, the FBI is testifying in front of the same SSCI that was participating in the targeting of President Trump.  As Graham notes the FBI Director of Counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, was lying to a compromised and complicit SSCI.  This is all connected; this is also where two years of CTH research came into play.

♦The compromised SSCI was collaborating with: (a) the Mueller probe; (b) the DOJ; and (c) the corrupt FBI officials who were -in early 2018- in full cover-up mode.   It was a network of interests in the executive and legislative branches who were all in cover-up mode.  The Weissmann/Mueller team were releasing information to control any all damage/sunlight.

Mark Warner instructed SSCI Security Director James Wolfe to leak the FISA application on March 17, 2017, in order to stimulate the need for a special counsel (Mueller).  At the time telling the public about an official -albeit fraudulent- counterintelligence operation, that must have solid evidence against Trump, was critical.

As the March/April ’17 media narrative was spun: ‘there had to be something to the Trump-Russia claims or the FBI/DOJ couldn’t get a FISA warrant. The FISA leak was part of driving that narrative… and eventually getting the Special Counsel.

AUGUST 2020 – On Tuesday August 18, 2020, I had the opportunity to be interviewed-by and brief the person described as the “main guy”, the “central investigator.” “The guy who coordinates all investigative aspects” behind the John Durham investigation.

His name is William Aldenberg, and before getting to the substance of the conversation some background context is needed.

On June 7, 2018, an indictment against Senate Intelligence Committee Security Director James Wolfe was unsealed.

Approximately six weeks later, July 21, 2018, the DOJ mysteriously declassified and publicly released the Carter Page FISA application. That’s when I noticed the first two documents were related. The FISA application was the “top secret classified document” described in the Wolfe indictment.

Immediately I recognized it wasn’t just any copy of the FISA application that was released by the DOJ; but rather a very specific copy of the FISA application. What the DOJ released was the exact copy used in the leak investigation of James Wolfe. The ramifications of this specific copy being publicly released were immediately noted, although almost everyone seemed to gloss over the issue in favor of discussing the content.

Over the course of the next several months the ramifications became more clear. Despite overwhelming evidence James Wolfe was never charged with leaking the FISA application on March 17, 2017. Quite the contrary, even to this day the official position of the FBI, DOJ and U.S. government is that Wolfe *did not* leak the FISA application. There’s a very big reason for that; as both myself and special agent William Aldenberg discussed.

First, in order to fill in another corner of the interview foundation it must be remembered the goal of the DOJ under former AG Jeff Sessions, despite his recusal on all things Trump, was the removal of political influence in the DOJ. That same objective has been repeated ad infinitum by current AG Bill Barr. This approach is why everyone in/around any issue that skirts on the investigative tissue keeps saying: “a very delicate balance is being navigated”, and “very sensitive approaches” are needed.

None of the former -and some remaining embed- officials in the FBI, DOJ, or Special Counsel actors, had any aversion to the use of weaponized politics in their corrupt investigations of President Trump. However, in the current investigation of the former weaponized political investigations the primary avoidance filter is politics.

As expressed by almost everyone in and around the issue, any evidence that comes from inside the political silo is considered unusable. This sets up a rather challenging approach… hence the overused “delicate balances” etc.

This overlay, the aggressive need not to use political information, is also frustrating.

Some are beginning to question whether it is actually a shield to justify a lack of accountability or institutional preservation. Keep up the pressure, the concerns are valid. The public doesn’t draw distinctions from the origin of evidence.

Regardless of whether information comes from HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes; and/or Senators Grassley, Johnson or Graham (political silo); or from the DOJ itself via John Bash, Jeff Jensen or John Durham; the public is absorbing all it. However, the current AG Barr instructions imply the non use of evidence emanating from the political silo in very direct terms.

After discussions with people familiar with the overall information flow I was prepared to hear about concerns of politics from the DOJ.

Exactly as anticipated lead special investigator William Aldenberg affirmed this concern multiple times. “Did anyone on The Hill assist your assembly?” …. “Did anyone related to, connected to, or in association with The Hill; or any member or person connected directly or indirectly, aid, assist, direct or by any method ‘provide‘ any of the information we are discussing?”

Various iterations of these questions were repeated several times.

Agent William Aldenberg is a polite, courteous and friendly person. He was well prepared with the materials prior to discussion and detail oriented on the specifics. He was everything one might hope from a solid investigator.

There was one month between first contact and our ultimate briefing/discussion on details. He was well prepared, open and engaging.

After introductions and formalities, Aldenberg’s first question -with a rather pronounced Boston accent- was: “how did you find me?” Again, this was not unexpected… no-one knew his role and it was completely accidental how I was able to discover him despite layers of concealment. The silo approach was/is very effective at isolating him.

With the documents in hand to walk through and review, here is the essential story as evidenced within many seemingly disconnected public records. This is what we discussed:

FBI Washington Field Office Special Agent Brian Dugan was given a task in early 2017 to see if he could track down and identify people who were leaking information related to national security. Dugan used a Top-Secret Classified Information request by SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner to begin a very specific leak investigation.

On March 17, 2017, Brian Dugan picked-up a copy of the Carter Page FISA application from the FISA Court. He personally delivered that “read and return” copy to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Security Director James Wolfe. Shortly after 4:02 pm that same day, Vice-Chairman Mark Warner reviewed the FISA in the senate “scif”.

It is not known if any other SSCI committee member viewed that FISA (there is a great deal of circumstantial evidence to indicate only Wolfe and Warner saw it); however, what is factually certain – is that on the same day as Wolfe and Warner reviewed the FISA, Security Director James Wolfe leaked it to journalist Ali Watkins.

Both the New York Times and Washington Post began reporting on the FISA application.

As soon as Ms. Watkins wrote an article for Buzzfeed, April 3, 2017, outlining Carter Page as “person one” in the application, Dugan knew the FISA had been leaked.

Dugan tells us in the Wolfe indictment how the leak took place. The original FISA application is 83 pages with two mostly blank pages. Wolfe sent Ali Watkins 82 text messages (pictures), and later that evening had a lengthy phone call about it. Dugan put Wolfe under physical surveillance for several months as he gathered more information.

Dugan obtained enough evidence surrounding Watkins participation to gain a search warrant for her email, electronic communication and phone records. At the same time it appears Dugan obtained the text messages between Chris Steele’s lawyer, Adam Waldman, and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner. The dates of both captures are very similar.

After more investigative paths were followed; and after more surveillance was conducted; eventually Wolfe was confronted. He lied three times over two dates until eventually Dugan put the direct evidence in front of him, and on December 15, 2017, Wolfe admitted to the leak. He was fired from the SSCI.

Sometime around mid-January 2018 Dugan wrapped up his investigation. However, because the special counsel held investigative authority over everything Trump-Russia, which included the FISA application, Dugan’s entire investigative file had to transfer over to the special counsel for review before going to the DC U.S. Attorney for a grand jury. That moment is when things get really troublesome.

Dugan’s delivery of the investigative file to Main Justice (mid January ’18) was the first time the special counsel knew of the totality of the investigation, and the issues with a trail of evidence going back to a serious SSCI compromise. The special counsel group took the Dugan file apart and began providing cover for their political allies. That’s why the Mark Warner text messages were released on February 9, 2018.

The Wolfe leak was toxic to the purpose of the special counsel. There were also serious issues with an intelligence compromise, a national security compromise, an SSCI compromise, a gang-of-eight compromise, and a compromise between the legislative and executive branches of government. The special counsel was in damage control mode.

Despite recommendations and normal procedures, “Top FBI leadership”, including FBI Director Chris Wray, made decisions not to do a national security damage assessment based on the identified intelligence compromises. The ramifications are rather stark. Everyone was in cover-up mode.

The transfer of the investigative file into Main Justice is how the special counsel gained custody of the exact March 17, 2017, version of the FISA application which they released on July 21, 2018. Additionally, only nine days earlier, July 12, 2018, the special counsel was telling the FISA court the Carter Page FISA application was adequately predicated.

When the Brian Dugan investigative file was returned, the evidence of the Wolfe leak was scrubbed. Wolfe was only charged with lying three times to investigators. Absent the indictment for the leak Wolfe’s lawyers knew they had leverage; they threatened to subpoena the SSCI senators (remember, it’s likely only Warner was a participant in the March 17th FISA review – so the real target of that threat was Senator Mark Warner).

After the threat DC U.S. Attorney’ Office, Jessie Liu, agreed to a plea deal. They dropped the three counts of lying to federal investigators down to one count while simultaneously the media ran from the story.

On December 14, 2018, WFO Special Agent Brian Dugan filed an attachment, Government Exhibit 13, to the final sentencing recommendation – and in that two page sworn statement, under penalty of perjury, SSA Brian Dugan attested to Wolfe leaking the FISA application for the final time.

Everyone ignored it.

The cover-up was complete.

All of the direct evidence of this series of events, and a lot more not in this written summary, is included in a series of public documents released over a period of about twelve months. Because the documents were released out of sequence and seemingly disconnected no-one caught on to the backstory.

This evidence was directly provided to special investigator William Aldenberg who was very apt at asking questions as each document was reviewed. By the end of our discussion there were no questions remaining; and none of it was based on supposition, innuendo, speculation or inference.

Mr. Aldenberg could not affirm or attest to the implications of the information as provided; however, he did accept the briefing was clear and articulately grounded on the evidence within the documents provided.

After answering a series of questions about how this was found; direct inquiry into the provenance; and several questions surrounding how I was able to retrieve this information into a singular timeline of sequential events that seemed disconnected over two years; I reminded Mr. Aldenberg that SSA Brian Dugan was still employed at the FBI Washington Field Office and it should be a very simple conversation to confirm.

Mr Aldenberg and I exchanged direct contact information, and concluded our conversation.

It was always the primary objective to carry this information directly to those badges who are positioned to do something about it. That mission is accomplished.

DOJ investigators are now aware of the issues and evidence that has remained hidden for years. More importantly they now know that we know.

Perhaps even more importantly, none of this evidence comes from within a political silo; all of it was attained from outside the DC system; none of the more illegal activity is based on political lies; and all of issues point to a direct national security threat, including the overarching possibility of blackmail against those who are currently charged with intelligence oversight. Lastly, all of the events to cover-up the Wolfe leak involve direct criminal conduct.


The sequence is critical:

1. Adam Waldman text messages. (release date Feb 9, 2018)


2. Justice Dept. Letter to journalist Ali Watkins (release date Feb 13, 2018)


3. James Wolfe indictment (release date June 8, 2018)


4. FISC / Senate Judiciary Letter (public release April, 2020 – event date July 12, 2018) The letter from DOJ-NSD (Mueller Special Proseuctors) to the FISC is important.


5. Carter Page FISA application (release date July 21, 2018) Only need the first application section. 83 pages of original application.


6. Government Sentencing Wolfe Case memo and recommendation for upward departure and/or variance. Filed December 11, 2018


7. Govt. Reply to Defendant (Wolfe) sentencing memo (date Dec 14, 2018) Govt. Exhibit #13 (two page attestation is critical).



July 27, 2018, – Wall Street Journal – Wolfe lawyers threaten SSCI subpoenas.


Dec 11, 2018 – Politico – Senators seek Leniency –



It is my opinion that Senator Richard Burr, the former Chairman of the SSCI, evolved into a risk for the Deep State in 2019.  Burr likely knew the outlines of what took place, even if he did not know the specifics.  Burr was essentially complicit; however, he also was not going to run for re-election…. As a result, Burr could not be counted-on if the proverbial sh!t hit the fan.

That’s why the intelligence apparatus and U.S. Senate took action to marginalize and remove Richard Burr from the SSCI chairmanship.  Notice how the media never circled back to the result from the investigation into his stock trades?  Burr was removed and a more controllable entity, Marco Rubio, was installed by Mitch McConnell.

History will know…. even if the historians despise us for it.

The Truth Has No Agenda

Senator Mark Warner is under an extreme amount of blackmail material from his activity related to the targeting of Donald Trump.  This same man is about to take charge of the Senate Intelligence Committee.  The Deep State intelligence apparatus has him completely under their control.



Please help truthPeep spread the word :)