DOJ Corruption and Malfeasance


PREMO Member

Fourth IRS Agent Says D.C. and California Prosecutors Blocked Hunter Biden Charges

“Mr. Weiss went to the U.S. Attorney’s Office — I can’t recall the dates — and they did not agree to prosecute the case in D.C.,” Waldon told the House Ways and Means Committee during a transcribed interview in September, the Washington Examiner reported.

“I’m aware that it was presented to the District of Columbia and, at some point, the Central District of California, I believe,” he added.

Waldon’s transcribed interview comes after he previously confirmed Shapley’s claims in April of political interference. Waldon later left the Hunter Biden case for another responsibility within the IRS.

As the investigation progressed, Weiss never charged Hunter Biden in the jurisdictions of Washington, DC, or California. Instead, he formed a sweetheart plea agreement with Hunter Biden that collapsed in July under judicial scrutiny. Shapley’s testimony in April reportedly triggered the plea deal, filed in Delaware. Weiss later brought three gun-related charges in Delaware against Hunter Biden.

The recent testimony by Waldon, who was Shapley’s boss, is notable because Attorney General Merrick Garland testified Wednesday that nobody had the authority to block Weiss from charging Hunter Biden, though “they could refuse to partner with him.”


PREMO Member

FBI agent says prosecutors thwarted Hunter Biden charges, corroborating IRS whistleblowers

The female FBI supervisor, whose name the Justice Department asked be kept private in the transcript, was interviewed recently by the House Judiciary Committee, and she chronicled her interactions with IRS agents Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler and Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, the lead prosecutor in the Hunter Biden probe.

While the agent said she had different recollections than her IRS colleagues about certain aspects of the case and did not believe politics caused any delays, she confirmed there were instances in which prosecutors slowed the investigation.

Specifically, she confirmed agents were concerned that the DOJ tried to use the 2022 midterm elections to delay action in the Hunter Biden case even though his father was not up for election last year.

“I know that that had come up,” said the FBI agent, who worked in the Baltimore office that supervised cases in Delaware..

“Delays related to the election?” she was asked.

“Yes, I noted that had come up” the agent answered.

The FBI generally has a rule that public actions not be taken in cases in the weeks before an election that could impact the outcome of the election, a rule that was not followed in 2016 when the bureau opened the Russia collusion probe against Donald Trump a few weeks before Election Day.

Republicans have argued there was no reason to avoid action in Hunter Biden’s case in 2022 because Joe Biden wasn’t on the ballot during the midterm election.



PREMO Member

US Attorney General Merrick Garland sat down for a rare, one-on-one interview with “60 Minutes” host Scott Pelley of CBS News.

They discussed the ongoing persecution of Trump in the middle of a presidential election, Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.

Merrick Garland is the most radical, corrupt and dangerous attorney general in US history.

Garland’s DOJ indicted President Trump TWICE on junk charges while shielding Hunter Biden from serious tax, FARA and money laundering charges (Hunter has since been indicted on a gun after major backlash).

He has prosecuted and thrown the book at more than 1,000 J6ers. Many J6ers have been held in inhumane conditions in the DC gulag without a trial date. Peaceful, non-violent J6ers are facing years in prison for the ‘crime’ of wandering around the Capitol building for a few minutes while ignoring Antifa and BLM terrorists.

Proud Boy Enrique Tarrio was sentenced to 22 years even though he wasn’t even at the Capitol on January 6!

Garland has locked up elderly pro-life activists for protesting at abortion clinics while ignoring left-wing terrorists bombing pro-life facilities.

Merrick Garland had the gall to claim his DOJ doesn’t have two sets of rules for Republicans and Democrats.



PREMO Member
The Department of Justice directed Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss not to respond to congressional inquiries, according to an email provided exclusively to The Federalist. That same email stressed that under DOJ policy, only its Office of Legislative Affairs, or OLA, can respond to requests from the legislative branch.

Yet Weiss would later sign and dispatch a letter to the House Judiciary Committee in response to an inquiry sent directly to Attorney General Merrick Garland. And in that letter, Weiss misleadingly claimed he had “been granted ultimate authority over” the Hunter Biden investigation. The DOJ’s disregard of its own policy provides further proof that both Garland and Weiss intended to obfuscate the reality that Weiss never held the reins of the Hunter Biden investigation.

On May 9, 2022, Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin wrote to Delaware U.S. Attorney Weiss inquiring about several aspects of the Hunter Biden investigation. After the senators sent a follow-up email to the Delaware U.S. attorney’s office requesting a response by week’s end, Delaware’s First Assistant U.S. Attorney Shannon Hanson asked the DOJ about protocol and then updated Weiss, stating in an email:

Consistent with my conversation with [redacted] last night, we are supposed to forward this and any other correspondence to OLA. Per DOJ policy, only OLA can respond on behalf of the Department to a request from the legislative branch.



PREMO Member

FBI Whistleblower ’Vindicated’ by Exposure of FBI Targeting MAGA

It is significant that Newsweek admitted its sources for its new exposé included those who “feared the repercussions of speaking frankly.” Even within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FBI, there is disagreement about turning tools formerly used against Muslim terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda against MAGA supporters, the outlet noted.

“This article confirms the information I brought forward as a whistleblower 13 months ago,” said Friend, who is now a Domestic Intelligence and Security Services Fellow at the Center for Renewing America. “While I am happy to be vindicated, I am frustrated that mainstream media delayed investigating the veracity of my claim.”

Friend was calling out federal political weaponization long ago, based on his own experience in and knowledge from the FBI. “The fact that my former colleagues spoke out anonymously to Newsweek reveals the chilling effect the FBI’s treatment of whistleblowers has had on its personnel,” Friend continued. “I was constructively terminated and publicly smeared as a conspiracy theorist, political partisan, and grifter. I was never called ‘wrong,’ and now we know why.”

Newsweek began its lengthy exposé, ”The federal government believes that the threat of violence and major civil disturbances around the 2024 U.S. presidential election is so great that it has quietly created a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers.”

The Bureau weaponized Jan. 6, 2021, against MAGA supporters. It is important to know that the majority of protesters on Jan. 6 were peaceful and that many of the individuals sentenced to years in jail did not do anything violent, and, in some cases, didn’t even enter the Capitol. Yet there were no consequences for violent pro-abortion activists who attacked and burned pro-life centers and churches, Antifa and BLM got off largely scot-free for burning and looting cities, and the government and media were strangely silent about violent “transurrections” at multiple state Capitols.


PREMO Member
It’s been some time since we discussed the FBI here at the Briefing. I occasionally wonder if I’m too eager when calling them out. One never knows what might set off Biden’s Bureau these days.

I’m kidding. We totally know what sets them off: any American who doesn’t vote Democrat.

That’s right, Public Enemy Number One for Joe Biden’s door-battering FBI thugs is still the Generic Trump Voter. Matt has the latest from the Dystopian States of America:

As if it wasn’t bad enough that the Biden administration was abusing the justice system to target Donald Trump, now it’s using the Federal Bureau of Investigation to track and counter supporters of Donald Trump. That’s according to a bombshell report that Newsweek published on Wednesday.
“The federal government believes that the threat of violence and major civil disturbances around the 2024 U.S. presidential election is so great that it has quietly created a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers,” the outlet reports. “The challenge for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the primary federal agency charged with law enforcement, is to pursue and prevent what it calls domestic terrorism without direct reference to political parties or affiliations — even though the vast majority of its current ‘anti-government’ investigations are of Trump supporters, according to classified data obtained by Newsweek.”

Since the Republicans took over the House in January, FBI Director Christopher Wray and his boss, Merrick “Biden Capo” Garland, have been summoned to Capitol Hill on numerous occasions to answer for their un-American antics. Both have repeatedly insisted that they aren’t politically biased in their approach to law enforcement. We all know they’re lying, of course.

Because our institutions are garbage now and nothing matters anymore, the FBI isn’t even bothering to hide the fact that its bosses are full of it.

The FBI may have officially designated MAGA devotees a domestic terror threat only recently, but they’ve been unofficially doing that ever since the commie cabal running Joe Biden’s brain came to power.



PREMO Member
But Team Biden still presumes anyone who suspects the feds are violating the Constitution is up to no good.

The FBI is required to have (or claim to have) solid information before launching a criminal investigation. But the bureau needs almost zero information to open an “assessment.”

The FBI conducted more than 5,500 domestic-terrorism “assessments” in 2021, a 10-fold increase since 2017 and a 50-fold increase since 2013.

“Assessments are the closest thing to domestic spying that exists in America and generally not talked about by the Bureau,” Arkin noted.

Those assessments could prove perilous because the official demand for terrorists far exceeds the domestic supply. A top federal official told Newsweek last year: “We’ve become too prone to labeling anything we don’t like as extremism, and then any extremist as a terrorist.”

The House Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee warns that “the FBI appears to be complicit in artificially supporting the Administration’s political narrative” that domestic violent extremism is “the ‘greatest threat’ facing the United States.”

FBI whistleblower Steve Friend complained of current FBI leadership: “There is this belief that half the country are domestic terrorists and we can’t have a conversation with them. There is a fundamental belief that unless you are voicing what we agree . . . you are the enemy.”

Did the Biden administration secretly want Newsweek to vindicate the fears of legions of Trump supporters?

Perhaps those “assessments” are repeating a tactic used against Vietnam War protesters: FBI agents were encouraged to conduct frequent interviews with antiwar activists to “enhance the paranoia endemic in such circles” and “get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox,” according to an FBI memo from that era.

The more paranoid Trump supporters become, the easier it will be for Team Biden to portray them as public menaces.

Biden’s war on extremism could become a self-fulfilling prophecy that destroys American political legitimacy. An official in the Office of Director of National Intelligence lamented: “So we have the president increasing his own inflammatory rhetoric which leads Donald Trump and the Republicans to do the same” — and the media follow suit.

Biden is exempt from official suspicion even when he denounced Republicans as fascists who want to destroy democracy. Yet if Republicans sound equally overheated, Biden’s FBI has pretexts to target them.

Will the FBI’s interventions in the 2024 presidential election be even more brazen than its 2016 and 2020 stunts? Will the agency exploit its “assessments” to recruit knuckleheads to engage in another pre-election Keystone Kops plot to kidnap a governor, as it did in Michigan in 2020?



PREMO Member

DOJ mysteriously pulls invite for Iran-backed Iraqi judge who issued warrant for Trump’s arrest

“The Supreme Judicial Council President Faiq Zidan is going to be hosted by the Department of Justice so we defer to the DoJ to discuss their meetings. We engage with a wide range of counterparts in Iraq and we value engaging the Iraqi judiciary. The DOJ meets regularly with foreign judicial leaders,” a State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital on Wednesday.

The fact that the judge was meeting with the DOJ was evidently well-known.

“According to a separate source familiar with Zidan’s invitation to the DOJ, the judge told many U.S. officials the DOJ invited him to Washington, D.C. The appearance of working at cross-purposes between the State Department and DOJ suggests there may have been tension over the invitation to Zidan due to his pro-Iranian regime rhetoric and conduct,” Fox News reported.

Zidan had previously announced a warrant for Trump’s arrest was filed by Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council in January 2021 due to Soleimani’s death. He was the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force. Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the head of the pro-Iran Kata’ib Hezbollah militia in 2020, was also killed.



PREMO Member

DOJ Warns Financial Institutions That They Can’t Reject Illegal Immigrants’ Credit Applications

“The Justice Department and CFPB are issuing this statement because consumers have reported being rejected for credit cards as well as for auto, student, personal and equipment loans because of their immigration status, even when they have strong credit histories and ties to the United States and are otherwise qualified to receive the loans,” stated the agencies.

The two agencies claimed that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) protections for national origin and race extended to alienage, though they admitted that no such explicit provisions spelled out their interpretation. The agencies conceded that creditors could rely on immigration status to determine repayment ability, but then cautioned against “unnecessary or overbroad reliance” on immigration status.

“[W]hile ECOA and Regulation B do not expressly prohibit consideration of immigration status, they do prohibit creditors from using immigration status to discriminate on the basis of national origin, race, or any other protected characteristic,” said the agencies. “Immigration status may broadly overlap with or, in certain circumstances, serve as a proxy for these protected characteristics.”

Regulation B, which provides additional rules for evaluating credit applications, lists immigration status as a valid reason for denying an applicant to assure “creditor’s rights and remedies regarding repayment.” The agencies further asserted that since no explicit permissions existed, creditors couldn’t discriminate on the basis of citizenship status unless they could prove significant repayment concerns.


In closing, the agencies interpreted the 1866 Civil Rights Act, dubbed Section 1981, to declare that illegal immigrants have the same rights and protections as citizens.

“[C]reditors should be mindful of their obligations under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Section 1981) [which] has long been construed to prohibit discrimination based on alienage,” said the agencies. “[C]ourts have observed that ECOA’s prohibition of national origin discrimination and Section 1981’s prohibitions complement one another and that discrimination that arises from overbroad restrictions on lending to noncitizens may violate either or both statutes.”

The Supreme Court has not weighed in on whether Section 1981 extends to alienage, but the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals did as recently as July.

Under the ECOA, the DOJ may sue those alleged to have engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination concerning race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in addition to national origin.


PREMO Member

FBI Warns of Domestic Threats Linked to Israel–Hamas War

There has been an increase in reported domestic threats since Hamas terrorist group launched its unprecedented attack on Israel, according to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Mr. Wray said on a call with reporters on Sunday that the FBI is moving quickly to mitigate the threats and that it does not discount the possibility that Hamas and other terror groups could use the conflict to call for or plot attacks in the United States.

"The threat is very much ongoing and in fact, the threat picture continues to evolve," Mr. Wray said, CBS reported. "Here in the U.S., we cannot and do not discount the possibility that Hamas or other foreign terrorist organizations could exploit the conflict to call on their supporters to conduct attacks on our own soil."

Speaking in an address to an international police chief conference in San Diego, California, on Saturday, Mr. Wray said the war in the Middle East is creating a "heightened environment" in the United States, where Hamas-inspired bad actors may seek to wreak havoc on home soil.


PREMO Member

Federal prosecutors spied on Congress in search for leaks, now DOJ is being investigated for it

Over the last week, several current and former Senate and House staff from both political parties have alerted Congress that they received belated notifications from Apple, Google or other Big Tech firms that their email or phone records were obtained from their personal devices via a grand jury subpoena.

Officials said the seizures were related, in part, to leak investigations stemming from the FBI's now-discredited Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Russia collusion.

The targeted staffers include people who worked for the Senate Judiciary and House Intelligence committees who have direct oversight responsibility for the FBI and Justice Department, raising concerns that the legislative branch overseers were being monitored by those they oversee in the executive branch.

"The Justice Department’s secret targeting of congressional investigators is a new low in the agency’s sordid history of abusing its authority to evade accountability," Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, told Just the News on Monday evening.

At least one of Grassley's former investigators when the senator chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee and helped uncover FBI wrongdoing in the Russia case, Jason Foster, recently received a notification of a subpoena dating to fall 2017.

"Ever since the botched Crossfire Hurricane investigation came to light, the FBI and Justice Department have gone to great lengths to cover up and distract from their own malfeasance. Their actions only serve to underscore the importance of Congress’ constitutional oversight responsibility. This attack on congressional investigators will not deter us from that duty, and the department must answer for this abuse,” Grassley also said.


PREMO Member

Sen. Josh Hawley Lashes Out at Alejandro Mayorkas During Heated Exchange in Senate Hearing Over DHS Employee’s Controversial Post on Jewish Genocide (VIDEO)

During the hearing, Senator Hawley confronted incompetent Secretary Mayorkas with evidence of Ali’s posts.

“An employee of the Department of Homeland Security who posted these comments on October 7. That’s not all she posted. She also posted this graphic. Now, this is a fake graphic. I want to be clear, but I think we understand it. This is a paraglider, a Hamas paraglider depicted here with a machine gun flying into Israel. She posted it under her online alias with the celebratory ‘Free Palestine,'” said Hawley.

“Mr. Secretary, what’s going on here? Is this typical of people who work at DHS? This is an asylum and immigration officer who is posting these, frankly, pro-genocidal slogans and images on the day that Israelis are being slaughtered in their beds. What have you done about this?”

Mayorkas, clearly taken aback, responded, “Four things I’d like to say to you. Number one, your question to suggest that that is emblematic of the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security is despicable.”

Hawley, not allowing Mayorkas to finish his response, retorted, “I’m sorry? This person works for the Department of Homeland Security.! Have you fired her?” The exchange continued with Hawley pressing for a direct answer on whether Ali had been dismissed from her position.

“Have you fired her? Don’t come to this hearing room when Israel has been invaded and Jewish students are barricaded in libraries in this country and cannot be escorted out because they are threatened for their lives. You have employees who are celebrating genocide and you are saying it’s despicable for me to ask the question?” said Hawley.



PREMO Member

"Did the FBI pay Twitter money to moderate content moderation?" Paul asked.

"I’m not aware of us paying money to moderate content there or anywhere else," Wray responded.

"What was the $3 million for that the FBI gave that’s been revealed in the 'Twitter files' which has been characterized by those writing the 'Twitter files' as payment for content moderation?" Paul pressed before asking Wray directly if he was "aware of the payment."

"I am not aware of that specific payment but I can tell you that when it comes to payments, going back well over four decades when we are required by federal law, when a company like in this instance a provider goes through expenses to produce information, we are required to reimburse them for those expenses, and so I think a lot of the questions about payments revolve around exactly that."

In other words, it's just a standard payment for "expenses," or something, the usual back and forth between government agencies and private companies. Totally normal, boring stuff.



PREMO Member

‘We Caught Them Red-Handed’: DOJ Spied on GOP Staffers Probing the Origins of the Russia Collusion Hoax

According to multiple subpoenas revealed so far, the DOJ had subpoenaed Google, Apple, and other companies to obtain private records in what Patel believes was an unlawful attempt to dig up dirt on them in retaliation for investigating the Democrat-pushed hoax that Donald Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia in the 2016 presidential election.

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, Patel called it an abuse of power.

“You can get anything with a grand jury subpoena and this is what we know about. Did they surveil us with FBI agents? We don’t know,” Patel said, adding, “If you get a grand jury subpoena, you’re not just requesting Google [records]. You’re going to ask for everything that individual ever touched. Apple, Google, AT&T, Comcast, Xfinity, whatever, it’s all coming in. You’re not just going after one item. They have the ability to use the FBI databases to cull for information. And we know that Chris Wray’s FBI just last year was caught illegally querying the FISA database for American citizens 250,000 times. Each one of those instances is illegal. So, it’s not hard to believe that they would abuse their power again.”

Patel and Foster only learned about the DOJ’s subpoenas for their private records when they were notified by Google and other firms after court seals keeping the subpoenas secret expired.

Google notified Foster earlier this month that in 2017, the DOJ obtained records for his Google Voice telephone number between December 1, 2016, and May 1, 2017 — the exact time he was investigating the Russia hoax. Foster told that the DOJ also went after his wife’s phone records and also possibly one of his work phones he used for Senate business.


PREMO Member

FBI director, Virginia officials call for reversal of decision to relocate FBI headquarters in Maryland

Virginia officials and the head of the FBI called on Thursday for the reversal of a decision to relocate the headquarters of America’s top law enforcement agency to suburban Maryland.

They allege that the federal agency tasked with overseeing the relocation, the General Services Administration, which oversees federal real estate, failed to address what they said were conflicts of interest in the selection process.

In an internal message to FBI employees on Thursday that was obtained by POLITICO, FBI Director Christopher Wray blasted the decision to move the agency to Greenbelt, Md., saying that a three-person panel made up of two GSA officials and one FBI official unanimously recommended a site in Virginia for the new headquarters. But instead, a political appointee at the GSA chose the Greenbelt site, against the panel’s recommendation.

Wray emphasized that the agency’s objection was not with the Greenbelt site, but rather with the appearance of improprieties in the process, writing that “we have concerns about fairness and transparency in the process and GSA’s failure to adhere to its own site selection plan.” He added that “despite our engagement with GSA over the last two months on these issues, our concerns about the process remain unresolved.”


PREMO Member

Uncommon Dissident Knowledge​

November 14, 2023 | Sundance | 320 Comments

The nature of our problem.

Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, how the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, Main Justice & DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for approximately a year without informing Congress [Gang of Eight]. When asked why, Comey winced, then justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “um, because of the sensitivity of the matter?

Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance of Comey was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become. In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight…. and Congress just brushed it off.

Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; the institutions were already weaponized by the Patriot Act. What Obama and Holder did was take the preexisting system and retool it, so the weapons of government only targeted one side of the political continuum.

If we take the modern construct, originating at the speed of technological change, we can also see how the oversight or “check/balance” in our system of government became functionally obsolescent.

After many years of granular research about the intelligence apparatus inside our government, in the summer of 2020 I visited Washington DC to ask specific questions. My goal was to go where the influence agents within government actually operate, and to discover the people deep inside the institutions no one elected, and few people pay attention to.

It was during this process when I discovered how information is purposefully put into containment silos; essentially a formal process to block the flow of information between agencies and between the original branches. While frustrating to discover, the silo effect was important because understanding the communication between networks leads to our ability to reconcile conflict between what we perceive and what’s actually taking place.

After days of research and meetings in DC during 2020; amid a town that was serendipitously shut down due to COVID-19; the subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After many hours of specific questions and answers on specific examples, I realized why our nation is in this mess. That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.

The Intelligence Branch is an independent functioning branch of government, it is no longer a subsidiary set of agencies within the Executive Branch as most would think. To understand the Intelligence Branch, we need to drop the elementary school civics class lessons about three coequal branches of government and replace that outlook with the modern system that created itself.

The Intelligence Branch functions much like the State Dept, through a unique set of public-private partnerships that support it. Big Tech industry collaboration with intelligence operatives [Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Meta, Instagram, Twitter, etc] is part of that functioning, almost like NGOs. However, the process is much more important than most think. In this problematic perspective of a corrupt system of government, the process is the flaw – not the outcome.

There are people making decisions inside this little known, unregulated and out-of-control branch of government that impact every facet of our lives.

None of the people operating deep inside the Intelligence Branch were elected; and our elected representative House members genuinely do not know how the system works. I assert this position affirmatively because I have talked to House and Senate staffers, including the chiefs of staff for multiple House & Senate committee seats. They are not malicious people; however, they are genuinely clueless of things that happen outside their silo. That is part of the purpose of me explaining it, with examples, in full detail with sunlight.

We begin….

In April of 2016, the FBI launched a counterintelligence operation against presidential candidate Donald Trump. The questioning about that operation is what New York Representative Elise Stefanik cites in March of 2017, approximately 11 months later (First Two Minutes).

Things to note:

♦ Notice how FBI Director James Comey just matter-of-factly explains no one outside the DOJ was informed about the FBI operation. Why? Because that’s just the way things are done. His justification for unilateral operations was “because of the sensitivity of the matter“, totally ignoring any constitutional or regulatory framework for oversight; because, well, quite simply, there isn’t any. The intelligence apparatus inside the DOJ/FBI can, and does, operate based on their own independent determinations of authority.

♦ Notice also how FBI Director Comey shares his perspective that informing the National Security Council (NSC) is the equivalent of notifying the White House. The FBI leadership expressly believe they bear no responsibility to brief the Chief Executive. As long as they tell some unknown, unelected, bureaucratic entity inside the NSC, their unwritten responsibility to inform the top of their institutional silo is complete. If the IC wants to carve out the Oval Office, they simply plant information inside the NSC and, from their perspective, their civic responsibility to follow checks-and-balances is complete. This is an intentional construct.

♦ Notice how Comey obfuscates notification to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), by avoiding the fact James Clapper was the DNI from outset of the counterintelligence operation throughout the remainder of Obama’s term. When I get deeper into the process, we will understand how the Intelligence Branch has intentionally used the creation of the DNI position (established post 9/11/01) as a method to avoid oversight, not enhance it. Keeping an oblivious doofus like James Clapper in position held strategic value [Doofus Reminder HERE].

That video of James Comey being questioned by Elise Stefanik was the first example given to me by someone who knew the background of everything that was taking place preceding that March 20, 2017, hearing. That FBI reference point is a key to understand how the Intelligence Branch operates with unilateral authority above Congress (legislative branch), above the White House (executive branch), and even above the court system (judicial branch).

Also, watch this short video of James Clapper, because it is likely many readers have forgotten, and likely even more readers have never seen it. Watch closely how then White House national security adviser John Brennan is responding in that video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director, this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place. WATCH:



PREMO Member

2A SCOTUS NEWS: DOJ Says Bruen Makes Gun Control TOO HARD​

In US Supreme Court oral argument in US v. Rahimi, Biden's DOJ whined that they cannot win gun control cases because the Bruen standard is too hard for them to meet. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner illustrates this argument and explains why DOJ's arguments are frivolous.