1. Okay @RealCandaceO , you want to go there. Cool. Here's a thread on the reality of Russia from the perspective of an ordinarily invisible American.

I first travelled to Russia in 2024 because I wanted to see for myself what it was about, with specific focus on the sanction regime and how it was impacting life for an ordinary Russian.

I revisited twice since then, just to ensure my understanding was not misplaced.

What I write below is not from a guided tour, not from an organized visit through contact with anyone of significance in Russia.

This is simply an American who figures out a way how to get a visa when it was exceptionally complicated during the Biden administration and returned twice thereafter - the latter when Trump took office.

Warning to readers. This will be a long thread, because I will take you on the full journey - beginning in 2024. 2. It's April 2014 - To say the person inside the opaque glass enclosure was stunned, physically flummoxed and surprised in the moment just before the security officers arrived to escort me to the guarded holding area, would be an understatement. And trust me, there’s been some stunned moments visible in the eyes of people who encountered me.

“You need to come with us,” was the end result of a brief conversation at passport control. Followed by “We need to ask you some questions.”  A few hours later I exited onto the streets of the forbidden zone, with an ear-to-ear grin that would only be understood by those in my family who saw how it started as a child.  However, before getting to that part of the story, let me begin with the end in mind.

This journey is not for those of worried disposition, and I do not recommend it for anyone who does not carry a strong stable constitution of snarky and pragmatically humorous outlook.  In many ways this journey is exactly what you would expect, in other ways it is so completely the opposite it’s bizarre.

Y’all already know the motives and intents of how it started [Background] so, I’m going to skip the part about why I chose to do this and instead focus on the stuff that’s likely of greater interest, the discovery stuff.  I’m only here to find out the truth of stuff in Russia vs what we are led to believe.

To begin, I have found the majority of people do not understand the truth of real things and do not believe that its possible for an American to travel to Russia. Perhaps you would be surprised at the number of people who have bought into the pretenses sold by media and don’t think such a journey is physically possible.

The funny thing is, within the system of travel requests and travel permissions, nothing has changed; yet, everyone acts like everything has changed. It’s a weird dynamic to navigate a system that everyone -on both sides- believes no longer exists, but it does.

Almost all of the Russian visa centers, consulates and offices within the Western Zone, are no longer operable. For example, in the USA there are only two offices to submit an application to travel to the “forbidden zone.”  One office in Washington DC another in New York. Neither accepts mail applications nor mailed documents, so that makes the logistics more challenging, but not impossible. It depends on how determined you are.

I should also add that some U.S. politicians have no idea what is legally possible. I say this because oddly some asked me to give them instructions on the process. (I have no idea why.) I should also note that everything in this process I’m describing is done with legitimate compliance, nothing is sketchy.

Current travel to the FZ is a little goofy; then again, it always was. You first have to get a letter of invitation – a strangely worded process from what I can only fathom was a former Soviet era approach that somehow remains in place. You get the letter of invitation from a quasi-official process. Keep in mind, everything RU is “quasi-something.”

So, you text a phone number +1(202) 436-XX55 [I filtered the number because I don’t want any unsuspecting knucklehead to try it out and get on some list, but if you want it – DM me]. Within your text you need to give them your name, email address and approximate date for your travel. The travel voucher people will respond with a link to fill out a voucher application with details. Once you fill out and submit the form, they send you a bill. You pay the bill, and you get a travel voucher/invitation via pdf attachment.  This is your “invitation.”  The cost of the invitation depends on the type of travel visa you need.

After you get the travel invitation, you then fill out a lengthy VISA application form on a Russian consulate site. The questions are lengthy, detailed and generally you are giving them your life story. Then you print the application, attach your photograph, and you must take it to a Russian VISA center. Another quasi-governmental process.

In the USA you cannot mail the documents. You must physically take the visa application, travel invitation and your passport to Washington DC or New York. You pay the visa center to process your request. You must pay in cash. You leave the documents and your passport with the center, who then send everything to the consulate for review and/or visa approval. The center gives you a receipt with a consulate link to track your application.

You check the link provided on your receipt, and when you notice the process has returned to the visa center (a few weeks), you must then travel back to pick up your passport and visa. You do not know if you are approved or not until you pick up your passport and check. If yes, there is a full-page visa sticker inside. If no, then nothing, and you don’t get an explanation.

You can tell following the official and legal process is a little complicated, a little expensive (with travel) and annoying, but generally, it’s not unmanageable. From beginning to end, give yourself about a month to complete the tasks.

Once you have the visa, you can then plan travel. However, given the nature of the current politics, you cannot travel directly. You have to travel to a place where you can transition to travel into the RU. Turkey, a NATO member, but not an EU member state, is the hub most people use to transfer from the west to a flight into the Russian Federation.

Turkey, particularly Istanbul, is making a ton of money as an RU transit hub. Their economy is booming as the gateway into and out of the Russian federation. However, you don’t have to use Turkey; once you have an RU visa, you can fly into Russia from any Grey Zone country.

1. FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Prior to January 2018, open discussion of the FISA Court was technically not allowed. Legally forbidden because everything around this issue was considered "classified" and a "national security interest." 2. If you pull back from the granular debate and think about it, none of the FISA justifications align with reality.

The FISA system is a designated secret court system that is said to only pertain to “foreign nationals.”

Ok, so if we accept the premise. Foreign nationals do not have U.S. constitutional protection. So why does the surveillance and intercept of them, and/or their communications, require secret U.S. courts?

The foundational premise of the FISC doesn't make sense from a constitutional perspective.

However, if you think about FISA and FISC as a false premise, then the actual purpose of both becomes something else entirely.

1. Republicans are going bananas. Democrats, led by senate intel vice-chairman Mark Warner are having fits and meltdowns. 

All of it because President Trump announced the appointment of Bill Pulte to replace Tulsi Gabbard at the end of the month as Acting DNI.

To make the issues even better, Democrats are now threatening to block FISA-702 reauthorization and stop the warrantless surveillance of American citizens unless Pulte’s appointment is withdrawn. 

Yes, read that again slowly if needed – it’s perfect. 2. She couldn't get FISA reauthorization stopped by confronting congress, but she can get FISA reauthorization stopped by giving congress an alternative to herself. It's remarkable. Stunning.

..."Warner, who’s been critical in building Democratic support for a bipartisan deal to extend FISA Section 702, made clear to Thune that all options are on the table to reverse what Democrats see as a dangerous Trump pick to lead ODNI. Pulte, who currently leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has no national security experience and has used his existing role to exact revenge on Trump’s political foes.

From Warner’s perspective, it’s impossible to convince enough Democrats to support a reauthorization of Section 702 when Pulte would be the one overseeing the program. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has also privately told senators that the Pulte appointment makes passing a FISA deal much more difficult."....

punchbowl.news/article/senate…

I don't disagree with this perspective. However, did you ever consider this is part of geopolitically dissolving the 5-eyes dependencies?

https://twitter.com/TonySeruga/status/2060382179834921299

Expand your thinking to include The Abraham Accords.

Remember this in Saudi Arabia?

A couple of points needed for context as the Michael Atkinson transcript is released.

(1) Prior to becoming Inspector General for the Intelligence Community (ICIG), Michael Atkinson was legal counsel to the office of the AAG at the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).

(2) Atkinson was legal counsel to AAG Mary McCord, when the Carter Page FISA was submitted in Oct '16.

(3) The Legal Counsel for the DOJ-NSD is responsible for oversight of all of the FISA applications. Atkinson was responsible for legal review, when McCord submitted the Title-1 warrant application.

(4) Atkinson then left the DOJ-NSD and took a position as ICIG

(5) Mary McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on the joint House impeachment comittee.

(6) When ICIG Atkinson took the CIA complaint from Eric Ciaramella (working at the National Intelligence Council), and engaged with Congress, he was essentially back collaborating with his former colleague, Mary McCord.

(7) Atkinson doesn't have clean hands in this. He is not a neutral figure. He was an enabler for the false impeachment accusation, just as he was an enabler for the falsely constructed FISA application. ICIG Complaint and Investigation documents.

justthenews.com/sites/default/…

1. Unlike most of your followers, I know how to research the claims you are making and see the defamatory lies within them. @ReOpenChris @TuckerCarlson

Source for what is to follow:

projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/org… x.com/ReOpenChris/st… 2. "Alaska" - Franklin Graham hosts "Marriage Encounter" events in Alaska, near his own small property (less than a quarter acre), for military husbands and wives who are in desperate need of marital support, before the marriage collapses.

It is not an "end times" bunker complex. It is cabins in a remote area where the marriage encounter workshops take place.

The entire area does not have municipal electricity. They use generators for power. The 90,000 gal above ground diesel fuel is brought in to power these generators. The remote area is only habitable in summer. It is a Samaritans Purse mission.

@TuckerCarlson

projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/org…

U.S. senators (mostly) write foreign aid policy, rules and regulations thereby creating the financing mechanisms to transmit U.S. funds. 

Those same senators then received a portion of the laundered funds back through their various “institutes” and business connections to the foreign government offices. Everyone in DC knows the gig.

Example: Ukraine laundry to Biden, Haiti laundry to Clinton, Iran laundry to Obama.

The U.S. State Dept. served as a distribution network for the authorization of the money laundering by granting DC conflict waivers, approvals for financing (McCain Institute, Clinton Global Initiative etc), and permission slips for the payment of foreign money.  

The officials within the State Dept. take a cut of the overall payments through a system of “indulgence fees”, commissions, junkets, gifts and expense account payments to those with political oversight.

If anyone gets too close to revealing the process they become a target of the apparatus. 

President Trump was considered a threat to this process. 

In reality all of the U.S. Senators (both parties) on the Foreign Relations Committee understand what is going on and/or are participating in a process for receiving taxpayer money and contributions from foreign governments. [See Bob Menendez]

A “Codel” is a congressional delegation that takes trips to work out the payments terms/conditions of any changes in graft financing. 

On the right the McCain Institute was/is one of the obvious examples of the financing network. [That is the primary reason why Cindy McCain was such an outspoken critic of President Trump.] On the left you see the Clinton Global Initiative, same/same.

This is why Senators spend $20 million on a campaign to earn a job paying $350k/year. 

The “institutes” is where the real foreign money comes in; billions paid by governments like China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Ukraine, etc. etc.  There are trillions at stake.

The current nation of focus is the Ukraine laundry operation. The U.S. intelligence services, including CIA operations in USAID, have historically been the bagmen. That's why they consider Gabbard as a threat.

The Senate Foreign Affairs Committee (SFAC) is structurally designed to sell U.S. foreign policy.  We all know the game of multinational corporations positioning their investment assets in various countries based on the expectation of U.S. foreign policy to support those investments.  It is inside this network of long-established relationships that all of the various quid-pro-quos originate.

The Senate chamber as an institution is where most of the generational level corruption emanates; when the 17th amendment was created, this was the function and purpose for the constitutional change as organized by banking interests.  In the decades since inception, the corruption within the upper chamber has become systemic.  The Senate became entirely predicated on having greater power within the legislative branch.

Inside this institutional system, each Senate committee has an operational objective in alignment with the interests of the DC business.  The Senate is detached from any operational function that would be considered representative of the American voter.  The Senate Intel Committee supports the weaponized intelligence state. The Senate Finance and Banking committee supports the interests of big banks, who then reward the committee members.  The Senate Judiciary Committee is structured to lean into the corruption needed in the Judicial branch, by controlling appointments and nominations.  And so it goes, and so it goes.

Every member on the SFAC uses their position for personal and familial gain.  For their specific expertise, the SFAC funding mechanism is by foreign governments and multinational corporations with foreign policy interests. It’s what they do. 

Menendez is charged with the crime of doing what the Senate Foreign Affairs committee does; participate in bribery and corruption – although the pretending term is “lobbying.”

documentcloud.org/documents/2398…

**ahem** [scenario #2]

https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/2018277500464275804

Context for equities [fourth branch] can be found in a review of this document. The questioning of ICIG Atkinson prior to his confirmation.

intelligence.senate.gov/wp-content/upl…

I really don't want to go back into this weird thing again, but I will tell you nothing about it added up six years ago.

When the Floyd/Chauvin thing erupted this weird "counterfeit money" thing was at the core of it.

When Minneapolis burned, a large number of the businesses torched were cash businesses that seemed to be connected, somehow.

With the recent reports of suitcases of cash shipped out of Minneapolis, y'all might want to go back and revisit. It wasn't a one-off then. I don't know what it all adds up to, but something very unseemly. 👇

https://x.com/TheLastRefuge2/status/1221955255946174478

https://x.com/BenTallmadge01/status/1395091439831306240

Interesting. 🤔 Keep in mind this is 2019, Epstein texting Rep, Democratic member of Congress, Del. Stacey Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands, shortly before Epstein 'killed himself'...

Also Interesting... in 2019: JPMorgan Chase notified the Treasury Department of more than $1 billion in transactions related to “human trafficking” by Jeffrey Epstein dating back 16 years after the notorious sex predator killed himself in 2019, a lawyer for the U.S. Virgin Islands told a federal judge at a hearing.

“Epstein’s entire business with JPMorgan and JPMorgan’s entire business with Epstein was human trafficking,” Mimi Liu, an attorney for the Virgin Islands, told Judge Jed Rakoff in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Thursday, according to a transcript reviewed by CNBC.

cnbc.com/2023/09/01/rep… On April 18, 2023, Elon Musk meets Linda Yaccarino for the first time.

April 26, Elon Musk meets Chuck ‘six-ways-to-sunday’ Schumer. “We talked about the future,” Musk told reporters after exiting the meeting that lasted about an hour. {link 1}

April 28, Attorney General of USVI triggers subpoena to Musk about Epstein. {link 2}

First weeks of May, USVI investigators trying to serve Epstein subpoena on Musk.

May 12, Musk hires DEI advocate Linda Yaccarino as Twitter CEO.

1. reuters.com/world/us/elon-…

2. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

Judge James Boasberg signed off on the search warrants against congress.

Boasberg issued blanket orders to the cell phone companies not to reveal the search warrants.

Boasberg is a FISA Court Judge.

Boasberg authorized one of the Carter Page title-1 surveillance warrants.

Boasberg hired Mary McCord as amicus to the court.

After appointing Mary McCord to take up a defensive position for herself and the FISA Court (cover), Judge Boasberg then becomes the presiding judge in the case against the FBI agent who falsified the FISA application, Kevin Clinesmith.  Boasberg gives Clinesmith a slap on the wrist and a few months’ probation (more cover).

Boasberg told John Durham (Bill Barr) allowing a target to escape prosecution is part of the penalty upon the DOJ for wrongful assembly of the FISA application; a nice way to cover the issue.

t.co/FXXV4c89kE

This is the same Judge Boasberg gave J6 FBI agent provocateur Ray Epps a sentence of probation.

This is the same Judge Boasberg who established a horrible precedent by forcing Vice-President Mike Pence to testify before a DC grand jury about his conversations with President Trump (breaking executive privilege).

While on vacation, Boasberg attended the criminal indictment hearing of President Trump.

Judge Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking DHS, Customs and Border Patrol and ICE from deporting illegal aliens and narcotrafficking gang members belonging to Tren de Aragua (TdA), a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.

There were calls for Boasberg to be impeached.

Immediately, the same day President Trump noted Boasberg should be impeached, Chief Justice John Roberts jumped to his defense:

..."“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said Tuesday in a rare and brief statement issued just hours after Trump publicly joined demands by his supporters to remove judges he called “crooked.”

politico.com/news/2025/03/1…

Fuck off with this nonsense telling me Roberts is NOT protecting Boasberg.

Keep in mind, Mary McCord operates in all three branches of government: Deputy AAG in charge of the DOJ-NSD (executive); on both impeachment committees by Schiff/Nadler and the J6 committee of Thompson (legislative); as amicus to the FISA court (judicial). That's why she is "untouchable."

Mary McCord's husband worked in the office of Justice Roberts. Mary McCord is partnered with Norm Eisen. Norm Eisen hosted John Roberts in Europe and travelled with Justice Roberts as friends.

There is no apple. It's all worms.

https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1763663963076608500

1. Dear @jkenney, to understand President Trump’s position on Canada, you have to go back to the 2016 election and President Trump’s position on the NAFTA renegotiation. 

If you did not follow the subsequent USMCA process, this might be the ah-ha moment you need to understand Trump’s strategy.

🧵 begins.... 2. During the 2016 election President Trump repeatedly said he wanted to renegotiate NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.  Both Canada and Mexico were reluctant to open the trade agreement to revision, but ultimately President Trump had the authority and support from an election victory to do exactly that.

In order to understand the issue, you must remember President Trump, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer each agreed the NAFTA agreement was fraught with problems and was best addressed by scrapping it and creating two seperate bilateral trade agreements. One between the USA and Mexico, and one between the USA and Canada.

In the decades that preceded the 2017 push to redo the trade pact, Canada had restructured their economy to: (1) align with progressive climate change; and (2) take advantage of the NAFTA loophole.  The Canadian government did not want to reengage in a new trade agreement.

Canada has deindustrialized much of their manufacturing base to support the ‘environmental’ aspirations of their progressive politicians.  Instead, Canada became an importer of component goods where companies then assembled those imports into finished products to enter the U.S. market without tariffs.  Working with Chinese manufacturing companies, Canada exploited the NAFTA loophole.

Justin Trudeau was strongly against renegotiating NAFTA, and stated he and Chrystia Freeland would not support reopening the trade agreement. 

President Trump didn’t care about the position of Canada and was going forward.  Trudeau said he would not support it.  Trump focused on the first bilateral trade agreement with Mexico.

The CBS move was easy to see coming.

Larry Ellison previously said he "would never let Elon Musk fail." Ellison is Musk's financial backstop.

Musk will never stake a position against Oracle, Google or Thiel's interests.

Ellison then began moving toward TikTok. K-Street funded to assist with lobbying. Trump circle directly part of the assist (Sacks, Lutnick, Musk).

David Ellison simultaneously begins moving toward Paramount (CBS). There is no distance between father and son. Trump circle then assists (Hollywood tariffs).

Ideologically social media and boomer media target operations complete. Now watch what happens with CNN. At the end of this construct, AI enmeshed with govt., and Social Media data, via national security and Palantir.

L Ellison wins. D Ellison wins. Musk wins. Thiel wins. Sacks wins. Ackman wins. Alex Karp wins. Bibi wins.

Inside the released report by John Durham, the special counsel outlined how former FBI Director James Comey was intimately involved in the creation of the Carter Page FISA application.

Durham noted that Comey kept asking the DOJ National Security Division and FBI counterintelligence investigators, “Where’s the FISA, we need the FISA.”  However, John Durham never interviewed James Comey or Andrew McCabe. 

The former FBI Director and Deputy refused to cooperate or give testimony to John Durham.  So, how did John Durham have details about the demands of Comey?

The answer is found in the footnotes. 

Durham reviewed transcripts of interviews given by Andrew McCabe to the Office of the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, who previously investigated FBI conduct in the origin of the Carter Page FISA.  Durham pulled quotes from that transcript. [Footnote #1207, page 199 – Durham Report]

justice.gov/storage/durham…

QUESTIONS: If Andrew McCabe gave testimony to the OIG about the motives and impetus of FBI Director James Comey in pushing for the Carter Page FISA application, why did the OIG report never outline those transcribed interviews?  Why was the interview transcript never included in the 2019 OIG report?

[ NOTE: A transcribed interview of Andrew McCabe exists in the OIG office. @DNIGabbard through @AGPamBondi can request the transcription and release it to the public.]

However, let me answer the questions without the customary pretending from the DC professional political class.  The short version is that OIG Michael Horowitz was protecting the DOJ and FBI. The longer version is a coverup that includes Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr and ultimately yes, John Durham. 

“Where’s the FISA?  We need the FISA?” ~ James Comey

You see, the DOJ-NSD and FBI CoIntel needed to find a safe and legal justification for previous spying on the Trump campaign.

The Clinton operation and 2016 FISA Title 1 surveillance of former CIA operative Carter Page became the fraudulent justification for that intent.

Because “FISA Title I” surveillance authority against a U.S. citizen is so serious (the U.S. government is essentially calling the target a spy), only a few people are authorized to even apply for such surveillance warrants.  One of the four people authorized to make such a Search Warrant request is the Asst. Deputy Attorney General as head of the National Security Division of the DOJ.

In September and October of 2016 a few critical things were happening:

1. NSA Director Mike Rogers was about to inform the FISC of the FBI spying operation using the NSA database.

2. CIA Director John Brennan was informing President Trump of the risk factors associated with the Clinton/FBI operation (that included #1).

3. The DOJ-NSD was quickly assembling the FISA Court application, sans Woods File, to be used against Carter Page. The Clinton/Steele Dossier was going to be used in lieu of the mandatory Woods File.

While Comey was saying, "where’s the FISA?  We need the FISA?" Pressure was building on the office of the Asst. Deputy Attorney General in charge of the DOJ-NSD, that's John Carlin.

Subsequently, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin resigned as head of the DOJ-NSD.

Did Carlin resign in fear? Seems likely.

washingtonpost.com/world/national…
A few years later, while COVID was raging and few people were paying attention, OIG Horowitz released a COVID delayed letter and summary report about the FBI spying operation [technically, exploiting the NSA database].

On its face the OIG release outlines a review and finding, actually a warning, by Horowitz’s office about FBI contractor access to “a certain national security database.” 

The OIG report was titled: “Management Advisory: Notification of Concerns Identified in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Contract Administration of a Certain Classified National Security Program.”

The advisory part is particularly interesting when absorbed through the prism of prior information.

oig.justice.gov/reports/manage…

On the surface of the release, the OIG was noting concerns and a warning shared with the FBI about ongoing contractor access to the NSA database. Thus, a “classified national security program” becomes defined.

However, in the background of the release it appears the OIG was using this public notification as a CYA of sorts.

Meaning the OIG was saying publicly they have advised the FBI of “concerns” they carried with the FBI abusing access to the NSA database.

Within the report you will note the IG calls out the FBI because the FBI hid their response to the IG warning behind the cloud of “classification.”

This left the IG with no alternative except to say the classified response has to be accepted as the final FBI response to the IG warning. 

The IG goes on to say to the FBI you have 90 days to tell me what you did to address the contractor access abuses.

In reality OIG Michael Horowitz was covering his ass and telling us why. Perhaps that's why Horowitz was removed from his position recently and sent to the IRS office where Secretary Bessent could keep an eye on him.

Keep in mind this contractor access to the bulk NSA metadata is a big deal.  All of the FISA audits in the past eight+ years have pointed out how FBI contractors continue to abuse their access to the database and unlawfully extract information without minimization efforts required by fourth amendment protections. 

The scale of the abuse is actually stunning; and the OIG reviewed the process and found the same issues that existed in 2015 and 2016 remained uncorrected five years later.

/END

1/ During the period of Nov 2015 to April 2016, the Obama administration, through the FBI under James Comey and Andrew McCabe, was conducting a political spying operation against all republican presidential primary candidates using the power of their offices.

The intent was two-fold. (1) Tracking the candidates to identify activity; and (2) conducting opposition research to be fed to the campaign of Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton.

This surveillance activity was happening in concert with Comey, McCabe and a small group inside the FBI, running a defensive operation for the issues surrounding Hillary Clinton's prior use of private email servers -which included classified information transmission- during her tenure as Secretary of State.

SOURCE: DNI

dni.gov/files/document… 2/ Documentary evidence of the Obama spying operation surfaced as an outcome of the NSA compliance officer discovering the FBI activity.

The compliance officer reported the activity to National Security Agency Director, Admiral Mike Rogers.

The spying operation is not an issue of FISA-702, or any FISA system or process. However, the availability of FBI access to the NSA database is what triggered the discovery of the spy operation.

That FBI access is created under the auspices of FISA, but FISA-702 or any aspect therein was not the issue.

The issue was the spying operation. FISA and using the NSA database to conduct the electronic surveillance, was simply the tool to exploit the electronic communication (metadata) of the targets.

The Obama administration was spying on their political opposition and telling the Clinton team the results of their surveillance.

The United States government was spying on candidates for office in order to control the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

1) Newly appointed U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, from the Eastern District of Viginia, has released a criminal indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. [LINK BELOW]

The indictment alleges three counts. Counts one and two are ‘false statements’ to congress on September 30, 2020, [18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2)] and count three is ‘obstruction of a federal proceeding’ stemming from the same testimony. [18U.S.C. § 1505]

The first false statement charge surrounds Hillary Clinton’s “approval of a plan concerning” Donald Trump and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… 2) COUNT #1 – James Comey claimed he could not remember being made aware of the Trump-Russia collusion plan, and there is ample evidence from his own previous public statements, from public and sworn statements by former CIA Director John Brennan, from former statements by officials in the January 5, 2017, meeting memorialized by Susan Rice, from statements that remain sealed as recounted by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and from statements under oath by the former Clinton campaign team -including campaign manager Robby Mook- that James Comey was well aware of the plan.

While this first count is based on the tenuous “I don’t remember” aspect, this count holds more material benefit than simply Comey’s recollection. This count could open the door to public testimony by McCabe, Rice, Mook, Brennan and even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton herself as to Comey’s knowledge; each was a first-hand witness.

This first count holds strong material value in a public trial regardless of the outcome. This first count establishes the baseline for USAO Lindsey Halligan to bring all material witnesses into court and publicly put them on record outlining the Trump-Russia collusion scheme.

You could say, I hope the intent is not just to incarcerate Comey per se’ – but rather to use what Comey represents to indict the entire enterprise around him.  The facts behind Count #1 make this possible.

Let’s all hope this strategic intent unfolds.

1) Grassley does a pretty good job of outlining the predicate for the search warrants issued by the Biden DOJ (Lisa Monaco) and FBI (Arctic Frost).

Where Grassley falls short (by design?) is connecting the search warrant results to their destination.

The J6 Committee!

See it now?

grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/… 2. The results from the FBI search warrants, was the predicate material for the J6 team to begin targeting Trump supporters in the aftermath of the 2020 election.

1) Okay @PeterKlyng , you want to play that "proof" game again. You want receipts? OK, I'm good with that approach. Let's go....

https://twitter.com/PeterKlyng/status/1967537088154542215

2) It was in June 2022, when Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter to then Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, notifying them of whistleblower allegations from within the FBI that senior leadership in both Main Justice and FBI are involved in a coordinated effort to cover up criminal activity related to Hunter Biden.

t.co/cu8I1OEayZ

1) Defending Kash.

Predictably, the one constant in an ever-changing IC universe, steps up to defend his #1 Source.

Solomon defends Kash.

justthenews.com/government/cou… 2) The reality is actually something entirely different.

The people in control of FBI field operations (not Kash), set up their agency head by informing the boss a suspect was in custody.

The ever concerned and focused on public opinion, Kash Patel, then took to Twitter to relay the news.

We all watched it unfold.

Many have asked for this link.

scribd.com/document/34954… On Friday November 18th, 2016, The Washington Post reported on a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position:

..."The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.
The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

[…] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters."...

washingtonpost.com/world/national…

Most have forgotten...

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:

intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/… x.com/TheLastRefuge2… There is little doubt the NSA database 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.

When we reconcile what was taking place and who was involved, then the actions of the exact same principal 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.

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.

This is why President Obama was willing to push the Russiagate story with his activity in December of 2016 after the election.  Obama wasn’t only dirtying up President Trump, Obama was using Russiagate as a cover for the spying that took place using the NSA database.

Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense; Mueller was FBI Director when the use of the NSA database surveillance began. Aaron Zebly was his chief-of-staff.