Elise Stefanik Takes Action Against Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Election Interference – ‘Fight The Democrats Unjust Lawfare And Expose This Corruption’
On Tuesday, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) filed an official ethics complaint with the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility against special counsel Jack Smith, claiming that Smith is interfering in the 2024 presidential election with the indictments he brought against presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump last year.
In her complaint to Office of Professional Responsibility counsel Jeffrey Ragsdale, Rep. Stefanik, who is rumored to be a potential vice presidential pick for Trump, pointed out a serious violation. She stated that Smith’s attempt to expedite his case to trial before the election is a clear breach of the Department of Justice’s long-standing policy. This policy strictly prohibits timing investigations to aid a certain political candidate. “Biden special counsel Jack Smith is attempting to expedite the trial in order to influence the general election in November,” she wrote.
Rep. Stefanik further detailed the alleged misconduct of Smith and his team. She asserted that they have repeatedly violated the court-ordered stay by serving 4,000 pages of discovery to Trump’s legal team and making a pretrial motion in district court. This, she argued, is a clear indication of Smith’s conduct bringing disrepute to the Department of Justice and the entire federal government. “The DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility should impose the discipline that such conduct warrants,” the lawmaker added.
The New York representative demanded that Ragsdale open an investigation into Smith immediately for his actions that attempted to “politicize his criminal prosecution” and interfere in the general election against Trump. During a press conference after Stefanik issued the complaint, she reconfirmed her resolve to fight back against the various prosecutors going after the former president.
“Democrats’ corrupt and desperate witch hunts against President Trump must come to an end. This is lawfare and blatant election interference, and the American people know it. That is why today I filed an official complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility on Joe Biden’s special counsel, Jack Smith, for his clear and illegal efforts of election interference,” she said. “We will fight the Democrats unjust lawfare and expose this corruption whether it is in New York, Atlanta, or right here in Washington, DC.”
President Trump is currently facing four criminal indictments against him. The first, which is currently underway in New York City, was brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) in which the DA’s office charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records by writing down in business ledgers that hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels were legal payments to Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen. The other case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) alleges that Trump and 18 other co-defendants attempted to illegally overturn the 2020 election. Special counsel Jack Smith brought the last two indictments, with one being focused on the 2020 election and the other focused on classified documents Trump allegedly took with him post-presidency to Mar-a-Lago.
🚨🚨🚨 I just filed an official ethics complaint against Jack Smith with the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility for his illegal election interference.
It’s obvious to any reasonable observer that Jack Smith is trying to interfere with the 2024 election… pic.twitter.com/lNW4MUz5Oi
Democrats’ corrupt and desperate witch hunts against President Trump must come to an end. This is lawfare and blatant election interference and the American people know it. That is why today I filed an official complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional… pic.twitter.com/yo61lAbnnD
Fani Willis, the district attorney for Fulton County, is currently dealing with yet another legal issue—this time, a lawsuit brought by a state legislator in Georgia.
In her suit, Rep. Mesha Mainor, a Republican elected to the Georgia House in 2020, “alleges that Willis, Commissioner Marvin Arrington, the Fulton County Ethics Board, and the county itself were derelict in its duties to properly litigate a criminal case in which Mainor was repeatedly stalked by a former friend and political associate,” Newsweek reported.
A spokesperson for the state lawmaker said she would provide additional details regarding the lawsuit during a press conference scheduled for Tuesday.
Mainor, who secured a substantial victory in the 2020 election from the constituents of House District 56 in the Democratic stronghold of Atlanta, grabbed headlines last July by switching parties and formally affiliating herself with the Republican Party. At the time, she said she was no longer morally comfortable complying with Democrats’ “left-wing radicalism, lawlessness, and putting the interests of illegal aliens over the interests of Americans.”
Mainor’s lawsuit, which was filed on April 2 in Fulton County Superior Court, alleges that she enlisted Corwin Monson as a campaign volunteer in January 2019. The lawsuit describes them as associates for several years with numerous mutual friends.
He “assured” Mainor he could help her get elected, though one month later, she was “forced to terminate” him after she witnessed “his unruly, belligerent behavior,” the suit said, according to Newsweek.
It reportedly resulted in multiple instances of stalking in various forms, including Monson showing up uninvited to campaign or church events, lingering outside her residence, making calls from different numbers and leaving voicemails, and even proposing to her in front of her minor children at her home, the suit says.
It also claimed that Monson was “in love” with Mainor, though the two of them had never had a romantic relationship.
A judge granted Mainor’s request for a Temporary Protective Order (TPO) against Monson in August 2019. He was subsequently arrested in both September 2019 and September 2020 for violating the TPO.
Following the second incident, Fulton County indicted Monson for aggravated stalking. The second aggravated assault charge in January 2021 could lead to up to 20 years of imprisonment for Monson.
However, the lawsuit alleges that Arrington, who defended Monson in a legal capacity, “used his influence to circumvent the office policies of the District Attorney’s office,” which allegedly included copying the DA on emails, negotiating plea bargains directly, and demanding meetings.
Newsweek added:
Arrington is also alleged to have told Willis “that b**** is crazy”, in reference to Mainor—claimed within the suit to have peddled his influence to in turn influence Willis.
After Willis was sworn in January 2021, she became responsible for the Monson case.
She reportedly dismissed one of his aggravated stalking cases. On the other charge, she offered a plea of three years with one year served in prison and the rest probation. Mainor said she was never informed of the plea deal, [which she] claimed to be a violation of the Georgia Crime Victims Bill of Rights.
“Furthermore, due to DA Willis’ bias towards Mr. Arrington, Plaintiff Mainor has experienced disparate treatment under the law as a victim,” the suit says. “Plaintiff Mainor has been forced to advocate for herself and her safety, although that is the District Attorney’s role.”
Trouble for Willis has been mounting over the past few months which has affected her election-related RICO case against former President Donald Trump. Last month, Judge Scott McAfee, who is presiding over the case, ordered her to either fire an attorney she hired, Nathan Wade, after discovering the two were involved in a romantic relationship or take herself and her entire office off of the case.
A federal judge on Monday adjourned a civil lawsuit brought against former President Donald Trump over the Jan. 6, 2021, riot under a 19th-century law, handing him a delay in the case that he and his legal team sought.
The suit’s lead plaintiff, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), was joined by several other Democrats “who said they were impeded in their duties by the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol,” Newsweek reported.
The case was pursued under an 1871 act designed to prevent the Ku Klux Klan from intimidating members of Congress in the execution of their duties. On Monday, Mehta ruled that “immunity-related discovery” will persist until September 11, 2024.
Following the conclusion of discovery in September, both parties will present their arguments regarding whether Trump is entitled to presidential immunity from the civil lawsuit—a separate matter from the Supreme Court’s examination of presidential immunity from criminal lawsuits. The proceedings for the former could extend over several months.
Newsweek noted that should Trump be given immunity, then the case is over. If presidential immunity is not granted, further discovery on the case’s facts is anticipated, and a trial is unlikely to commence until after the inauguration in January 2025. Trump, who has consistently sought trial delays, could subsequently seek recourse in federal court to postpone the case until after his term in office has concluded.
Newsweek noted further:
On December 4, 2023, Lee had released a statement in which she said “justice is owed to the Congressional staff, Capitol support staff, law enforcement, and members of Congress who feared for their lives on January 6, 2021. I look forward to seeing Mr. Trump in court.”
MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Monday that a higher court, the Washington D.C. Circuit, had handed the case back to Mehta after reaffirming that “former presidents are entitled to civil immunity for acts even on the ‘outer perimeter’ of their official duties.
“But they [the D.C. Circuit] held Trump had not yet shown his entitlement to such immunity and would instead have a chance to prove in the lower court that ‘his alleged actions in the run-up to and on January 6 were taken in his official capacity as President,’” she wrote.
“That opinion was handed down on December 1, 2023. And now, in the last days of April, Judge Amit Mehta, the district court judge to whom the case has been assigned, has allowed the parties to conduct ‘immunity-related discovery’ through September 11, 2024,” Rubin added, further claiming that Mehta’s ruling doesn’t bode well for Trump in his D.C. criminal case where he’s been charged by special counsel Jack Smith of election interference following Joe Biden’s victory in 2020.
The election fraud proceedings, overseen by Tanya Chutkan, another D.C. district judge, have been put on hold as the Supreme Court deliberates presidential immunity.
“Now think about the criminal case before Judge Chutkan: In a world where the Supreme Court similarly decides there must be further lower court proceedings to determine whether Trump can mount an immunity defense, can that case be tried before 2025? Increasingly, I think not—and that might be the only win Trump wants or needs,” Rubin wrote.
During oral arguments regarding the question last week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch said that former presidents ought to enjoy some immunity from subsequent attacks if they leave office.
“It didn’t matter what the president’s motives were; that’s something courts shouldn’t get engaged in … I am concerned about future uses of criminal law to target political opponents based on accusations about their motives,” the Supreme Court justice, who was Trump’s first of three appointees to the nation’s highest court, said on April 25.
This is a good overall encapsulation by Julie Kelly and to a lesser extent Steve Bannon about what Judge Aileen Cannon is doing with the Jack Smith “documents” case in Florida.
Kelly notes accurately {See Background} that Judge Aileen Cannon is somewhat limited on what she can do about the federal government case due to the DOJ using the false pretense of “national security” to control how the judicial branch can interact with the lawfare construct of the executive branch. The Lawfare crew intentionally created the “national security” angle to control all sides of the case and limit the release of information to the public.
Judge Cannon has recently been releasing and un-redacting documents and motions filed in the case to allow disinfecting sunlight and transparency to enter. This approach undercuts the prosecution manipulation, the DOJ does not like it. Julie Kelly outlines some of the details that Cannon’s releases have highlighted. {Direct Rumble Link}
At the 12:00 minute mark, Steve Bannon highlights his anger as he rails against congress and the staff of multiple committees who participate in the willful blindness and pretending game.
After noticing how congress is mute about the revelations that Cannon is providing, Bannon notes the republicans are essentially anti-Trump and controlled opposition, which is essentially accurate…. However, he’s just now noticing this?
It is a little annoying to see Mr. Bannon discuss outrage as a manipulative tactic {Chaffe and Countermeasures}, considering the years of outrage traps laid by the republicans in the Deep State against President Trump. The latest effort by congress pretending not to notice, and then staying quiet, is not exactly a surprise.
Think about two sets of documents as evidence against two teams working in synergy. Team one (Clinton) was outside government. Team two (DOJ/FBI) was inside government. The documents the DOJ/FBI were urgently searching to retrieve pertained to both groups but were also divided. That helps to explain the wording of the memo below and the motive behind the DOJ/FBI using the General Services Administration (GSA) and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) as tools to conduct post-Trump-term physical surveillance and searches.
Here’s the Occam’s Razor…. and I will only say this once. A lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and the Spygate manipulators was filed in 2022. [LINK HERE]
The lawsuit was filed against specific persons, and most of those persons were interviewed by the FBI as part of the originating investigation. Within the subjects of the lawsuit, we find names and groups including:
Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America Campaign Committee, DNC, DNC Services Corp, Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Dolan, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robby Mook, Phillipe Reines as well as Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith and Andrew McCabe.
Once the lawsuit against CLINTON/FBI was filed, the background physical paper evidence no longer needed to be in the possession of the person(s) who wrote the lawsuit (physical possession). [LINK HERE] Simple thumb-drives would suffice.
From Liz Cheney to Harriet Hageman, a remarkable upgrade from voters in Wyoming. Stunningly so. I have alerts established for all things Hageman, because she presents as a stealth wolverine very quietly. I like that.
Yes, you will hear me say it first…. this is my first opportunity to do so…. If there are reservations about Ben Carson for VP (personally I do not think there are any), then I would implore President Trump to consider Harriet Hageman as his VP running mate. Yes, I would be good with taking a chance on Hageman as POTUS in ’28. WATCH:
On May 31, 2022, Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL) made an explosive announcement as an outcome of a whistleblower providing information to him and Jim Jordan about the FBI having a collaborative relationship with the Clinton/DNC law firm Perkins Coie. {Go Deep} Specifically, the explosive element surrounds the FBI having a workspace within the DNC law firm that would have given Democrats an open portal into FBI databases for use in opposition research.
In this video former NSA Director Mike Rogers explains how he was notified of unlawful FBI extractions from the NSA database, what was happening with illegal search queries and what he did after the notification. WATCH:
Knowing that Perkins Coie and the FBI were working together on this targeting operation, makes everything else make sense.
However, the involvement of official government agencies like NSA Admiral Mike Rogers, creates a paper trail. Search query logs, notifications to Mike Rogers, notifications to the FISA Court, notifications to FBI officials of the suspension of contractor access, and subsequent FISA court opinions like the 99-pages from Rosemary Collyer, all of it creates an internal trail of government documents that tell the story.
It’s those documents that become a risk to the people who operate within the system. In this example of government documents, the trail outlines the targeting of Donald Trump and that was what he continued to ask the ODNI, DOJ and FBI to release.
Frustrated by the lack of action, in March 2022 Donald Trump filed a massive civil lawsuit against the Clinton campaign and everyone involved in this targeting operation. [SEE LAWSUIT HERE] “Acting in concert, the Defendants maliciously conspired to weave a false narrative that their Republican opponent, Donald J. Trump, was colluding with a hostile foreign sovereignty,” the president states.
“Under the guise of ‘opposition research,’ ‘data analytics,’ and other political stratagems, the Defendants nefariously sought to sway the public’s trust. They worked together with a single, self-serving purpose: to vilify Donald J. Trump,” says one segment of the lawsuit.
All of the claims within the filing are substantiated by documents outlining the history of the events. I’m not sure any defendant is going to be successful getting themselves out of the target zone on the lawsuit. The suit alleges “racketeering” and a “conspiracy to commit injurious falsehood,” among other claims.
The basis for the evidence against the entire crew? That was likely part of the assembly of evidence, the declassified documents at the heart of the battle, that were targeted by the DOJ and FBI raid.
The Government Wants to Play God. What Does That Mean for Our Freedoms?
By John & Nisha Whitehead April 03, 2024
The government wants to play god.
It wants the power to decide who lives or dies and whose rights are worthy of protection.
Abortion may still be front and center in the power struggle between the Left and the Right over who has the right to decide—the government or the individual—when it comes to bodily autonomy, the right to privacy, sexual freedom, the rights of the unborn, and property interests in one’s body, but there’s so much more at play.
In the 50-plus years since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade, the government has come to believe that it not only has the power to determine who is deserving of constitutional rights in the eyes of the law but it also has the authority to deny those rights to an American citizen.
This is how the abortion debate has played into the police state’s hands: by laying the groundwork for discussions about who else may or may not be deserving of rights.
Despite the Supreme Court having overturned its earlier rulings recognizing abortion as a constitutional right under the Fourteenth Amendment, the government continues to play fast and loose with the lives of the citizenry all along the spectrum of life.
Take a good, hard look at the many ways in which Americans are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
American families who have their dogs shot, their homes trashed and their children terrorized or, worse, killed by errant SWAT team raids in the middle of the night are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
School-aged children as young as 4-years-old who are leg shackled, handcuffed and strip searched for violating school zero tolerance policies by chewing a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun and playing an imaginary game of cops and robbers, or engaging in childish behavior such as crying or jumping are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
Unarmed citizens who are tasered or shot by police for daring to hesitate, stutter, move a muscle, flee or disagree in any way with a police order are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
Likewise, Americans—young and old alike—who are shot by police because they pointed a garden hose at a police officer, reached for their registration in their glove box, relied upon a cane to steady themselves, or were seen playing with air rifles or BB guns are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
Female motorists who are unlucky enough to be pulled over for a questionable traffic infraction only to be subjected by police to cavity searches by the side of the road are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
Male pedestrians and motorists alike who are being subjected to roadside strip searches and rectal probes by police based largely on the color of their skin are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
American citizens subjected to government surveillance whereby their phone calls are being listened in on, their mail and text messages read, their movements tracked and their transactions monitored are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
Homeowners who are being fined and arrested for raising chickens in their backyard, allowing the grass in their front yards to grow too long, and holding Bible studies in their homes are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
Homeless individuals who are being harassed, arrested and run out of towns by laws that criminalize homelessness are being denied their rights under the Constitution.
These are all American citizens—endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, rights that no person or government can take away from them, among these the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—and they are all being oppressed in one way or another by a government that has grown drunk on power, money and its own authority.
If the government—be it the President, Congress, the courts or any federal, state or local agent or agency—can decide that any person has no rights, then that person becomes less than a citizen, less than human, less than deserving of respect, dignity, civility and bodily integrity. He or she becomes an “it,” a faceless number that can be tallied and tracked, a quantifiable mass of cells that can be discarded without conscience, an expendable cost that can be written off without a second thought, or an animal that can be bought, sold, branded, chained, caged, bred, neutered and euthanized at will.
It’s a slippery slope that justifies all manner of violations in the name of national security, the interest of the state and the so-called greater good.
Yet those who founded this country believed that what we conceive of as our rights were given to us by God—we are created equal, according to the nation’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence—and that government cannot create, nor can it extinguish our God-given rights. To do so would be to anoint the government with god-like powers and elevate it above the citizenry.
Unfortunately, we have been dancing with this particular devil for quite some time now.
If we continue to wait for the government to restore our freedoms, respect our rights, rein in its abuses and restrain its agents from riding roughshod over our lives, our liberty and our happiness, then we will be waiting forever.
The highly politicized tug-of-war over abortion will not resolve the problem of a culture that values life based on a sliding scale. Nor will it help us navigate the moral, ethical and scientific minefields that await us as technology and humanity move ever closer to a point of singularity.
Humanity is being propelled at warp speed into a whole new frontier when it comes to privacy, bodily autonomy, and what it means to be a human being. As such, we haven’t even begun to wrap our heads around how present-day legal debates over bodily autonomy, privacy, vaccine mandates, the death penalty, and abortion play into future discussions about singularity, artificial intelligence, cloning, and the privacy rights of the individual in the face of increasingly invasive, intrusive and unavoidable government technologies.
Yet here is what I know.
Life is an inalienable right.
By allowing the government to decide who or what is deserving of rights, it shifts the entire discussion from one in which we are “endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights” (that of life, liberty property and the pursuit of happiness) to one in which only those favored by the government get to enjoy such rights.
If all people are created equal, then all lives should be equally worthy of protection.
Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; instead, what they did was take the preexisting system and retool it so the weapons only targeted one side of the political continuum. This point is where many people understandably get confused.
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.
The preexisting Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security apparatus. However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism based on political ideology. The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four pillars of this new institution. Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government.
We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake. However, we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in 2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the design. By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the aftermath. The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch of Government was quietly created.
As time passed, and the system operators became familiar with their new tools, technology allowed the tentacles of the system to reach out and touch us. That is when we first started to notice that something very disconcerting was happening. Those four pillars are the root of it, and if we take the time to understand how the Fourth Branch originated, questions about this current state of perpetual angst will start to make sense.
Grab a cup of your favorite beverage, and take a walk with me as we outline how this was put together. You might find many of the questions about our current state of political affairs beginning to make a lot more sense.
Remember, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding fourth branch of government. Such an effort would be exhausting and likely take our discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.
History provided enough warnings from Dwight D. Eisenhower (military), to John F. Kennedy (CIA), to Richard Nixon (FBI), to all modern versions of warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell. None of those prior reference points are invalid, and all documented outlines of historic reference are likely true and accurate. However, a generational review is not useful, as the reference impacting us ‘right now‘ gets lost.
Instead, we pick up the expansive and weaponized intelligence system as it manifests after 9/11/01, and my goal is to highlight how the modern version of the total intelligence apparatus has now metastasized into a Fourth Branch of Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every facet of our life.
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; I found a letter slid under the door of my room in a nearly empty hotel with an introduction of sorts. 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.
I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works: (1) to control every other branch of government; (2) how it functions as an entirely independent branch of government with no oversight; (3) how and why it was created to be independent from oversight; (4) what is the current mission of the IC Branch, and most importantly (5) who operates it.
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 is part of that functioning; almost like an NGO. 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:
[Sidebar: Every time I post this video it gets scrubbed from YouTube (example), so save it if you ever want to see it again.]
The video of James Clapper highlights how the ODNI position (created with good national security intention) ended up becoming the fulcrum for modern weaponization, and is now an office manipulated by agencies with a vested interest in retaining power. The Intelligence Branch holds power over the ODNI through their influence and partnership with the body that authorizes the power within it, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).
Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in their favor. The checks create silos of proprietary information, classified information, vaults of information that work around oversight issues. The silos are part of the problem.
Ironically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been prevented. The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the 9/11 commission.
The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside the Executive Branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to analyze threats to the U.S. This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.
The DNI office created a problem for those who operate in the shadows of proprietary information. You’ll see how it was critical to install a person uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the Intelligence Branch of Government.
• The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George W. Bush. Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing resolutions and individual spending bills.
Why does this matter? Because many people think defunding the Intelligence Community is a solution; it is not…. at least, not yet. Worse yet, the corrupt divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign entities).
• When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007, they took office with a plan. Nancy Pelosi became Speaker, and Democrats controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader. Barack Obama was a junior senator from Illinois.
Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting. Baseline budgeting means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the next year budget. All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within baseline budgeting.
Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation. This is the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect. TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery Program), auto bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were all part of the non budget spending. The federal reserve assisted with Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.
Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process since September of 2007.
• While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S. military was cut, but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded. We were all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican party wanted to keep us that way. However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.
The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control over specific elements inside the U.S. government. Eric Holder played a key role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.
AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were aware of the larger institutional objectives. One of those objectives was weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the DOJ that had no inspector general oversight. For most people the DOJ-NSD weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting candidate Donald Trump many years later. However, by then the Holder crew had executed almost eight full years of background work.
• The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI. Why was that important? Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone who needs or holds a security clearance. The removal of security clearances could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they were assembling. Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security clearances were easy to justify.
Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this filtration within the security clearance process. How does that issue later manifest? Just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency has become, specifically including the FBI.
• At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making room for the next phase was being assembled. Names like Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.
Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional objective. Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his first foreign trip. The State Department worked with grassroots organizers (mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya. Obama leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan for contacts and support.
Why does this aspect matter to us? Well, you might remember how much effort the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources for the various mideast rebellions the White House and DoS supported. This was the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech social media.
In many ways, the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The U.S. intelligence community working with social media platforms and political operatives.
Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“. Where does this contractor activity manifest? In the FISA Court opinion of Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or MOU.
Hopefully, you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was. None of this was accidental, all of this was by design, and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally allowing most of this to take place.
That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the modern IC was created. Next we will go into how all these various intelligence networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the President from knowing their activity.
♦ When Barack Obama was installed in January 2009, the Democrats held a 60 seat majority in the U.S. Senate. As the people behind the Obama installation began executing their longer-term plan, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was a tool to create the Intelligence Branch; it was not an unintentional series of events.
When Obama was installed, Dianne Feinstein was the Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and Democrat operative Dan Jones was her lead staffer. Feinstein was completely controlled by those around her including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The CIA was in the process of turning over personnel following the Bush era, and as a result of a massive multi-year narrative of diminished credibility (Iraq WMD), a deep purge was underway. Obama/Holder were in the process of shifting intelligence alignment and the intensely political Democrat Leader Harry Reid was a key participant.
THE TRAP – Many people say that Congress is the solution to eliminating the Fourth and superseding Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. This is an exercise in futility because the Legislative Branch, specifically the SSCI, facilitated the creation of the Intelligence Branch. The SSCI cannot put the genie they created back in the bottle without admitting they too are corrupt; and the background story of their corruption is way too intense to be exposed now.
Every member of the SSCI is compromised in some controlling manner. Those Senators who disliked the control over them; specifically disliked because the risk of sunlight was tenuous and, well, possible; have either left completely or stepped down from the committee. None of the SSCI members past or present would ever contemplate saying openly what their tenure involved.
[Note: You might remember when Vice Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages surfaced, there was a controlled Republican SSCI member who came to his defense in February of 2018. It was not accidental that exact Senator later became the chair of the SSCI himself. That Republican Senator is Marco Rubio, now vice-chair since the Senate re-flipped back to the optics of Democrat control in 2021.]
All of President Obama’s 2009 intelligence appointments required confirmation from the Senate. The nominees had to first pass through the Democrat controlled SSCI, and then to a full Senate vote where Democrats held a 60 vote majority. Essentially, Obama got everyone he wanted in place easily. Rahm Emmanuel was Obama’s Chief of Staff, and Valerie Jarrett was Senior Advisor.
Tim Geithner was Treasury Secretary in 2010 when the joint DOJ/FBI and IRS operation to target the Tea Party took place after the midterm “shellacking” caused by the Obamacare backlash. Mitch McConnell was Minority Leader in the Senate but supported the targeting of the Tea Party as his Senate colleagues were getting primaried by an angry and effective grassroots campaign. McConnell’s friend, Senator Bob Bennett, getting beaten in Utah was the final straw.
Dirty Harry and Mitch McConnell saw the TEA Party through the same prism. The TEA Party took Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts (Scott Brown); Sharon Angle was about to take out Harry Reid in Nevada; Arlen Spector was taken down in Pennsylvania; Senator Robert Byrd died; Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary to Joe Miller in Alaska; McConnell’s nominee Mike Castle lost to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware; Rand Paul won in Kentucky. This is the background. The peasants were revolting…. and visibly angry Mitch McConnell desperately made a deal with the devil to protect himself.
In many ways, the TEA Party movement was/is very similar to the MAGA movement. The difference in 2010 was the absence of a head of the movement, in 2015 Donald Trump became that head figure who benefited from the TEA Party energy. Trump came into office in 2017 with the same congressional opposition as the successful TEA Party candidates in 2011.
Republicans took control of the Senate following the 2014 mid-terms. Republicans took control of the SSCI in January 2015. Senator Richard Burr became chairman of the SSCI, and Dianne Feinstein shifted to Vice-Chair. Dirty Harry Reid left the Senate, and Mitch McConnell took power again.
Republicans were in control of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2015 when the Intelligence Branch operation against candidate Donald Trump was underway. [Feinstein’s staffer, Dan Jones, left the SSCI so he could act as a liaison and political operative between private-sector efforts (Fusion GPS, Chris Steele) and the SSCI.] The SSCI was a participant in that Fusion-GPS/Chris Steele operation, and as a direct consequence Republicans were inherently tied to the problem with President Trump taking office in January of 2017. Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats was a member of the SSCI.
Bottom line…. When it came to the intelligence system targeting Donald Trump during the 2015/2016 primary, the GOP was just as much at risk as their Democrat counterparts.
When Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, the SSCI was shocked more than most. They knew countermeasures would need to be deployed to protect themselves from any exposure of their intelligence conduct. Dianne Feinstein stepped down, and Senator Mark Warner was elevated to Vice Chairman.
Indiana’s own Mike Pence, now Vice President, recommended fellow Hoosier, SSCI Senator Dan Coats, to become President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). [Apply hindsight here]
• To give an idea of the Intelligence Branch power dynamic, remind yourself how House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Chairman Devin Nunes, tried to get access to the DOJ/FBI records of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign via Carter Page.
Remember, Devin Nunes only saw a portion of the FISA trail from his review of a Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) previously given to President Obama. Chairman Nunes had to review the PDB at the White House SCIF due to compartmented intelligence, another example of the silo benefit.
Remember the massive stonewalling and blocking of the DOJ/FBI toward Nunes? Remember the back and forth battle over declassification surrounding the Nunes memo?
Remember, after Nunes went directly to House Speaker Paul Ryan for help (didn’t get any), the DOJ only permitted two members from each party within the HPSCI to review the documents, and only at the DOJ offices of main justice?
Contrast that amount of House Intel Committee railroading and blocking by intelligence operatives in the DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI, with the simple request by Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner asking to see the Carter Page FISA application and immediately a copy being delivered to him on March 17th 2017.
Can you see which intelligence committee is aligned with the deepest part of the deep state?
The contrast of ideological alignment between the House, Senate and Intelligence Branch is crystal clear when viewed through the prism of cooperation. You can see which legislative committee holds the power and support of the Intelligence Branch. The Senate Intel Committee facilitates the corrupt existence of the IC Branch, so the IC Branch only cooperates with the Senate Intel Committee. It really is that simple.
• The Intelligence Branch carefully selects its own members by controlling how security clearances are investigated and allowed (FBI). The Intelligence Branch also uses compartmentalization of intelligence as a way to keep each agency, and each downstream branch of government (executive, legislative and judicial), at arms length as a method to stop anyone from seeing the larger picture of their activity. I call this the “silo effect“, and it is done by design.
I have looked at stunned faces when I presented declassified silo product from one agency to the silo customers of another. You would be astonished at what they don’t know because it is not in their ‘silo’.
Through the advise and consent rules, the Intelligence Branch uses the SSCI to keep out people they consider dangerous to their ongoing operations. Any appointee to the intelligence community must first pass through the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, before they get a full Senate vote. If the SSCI rejects the candidate, they simply refuse to take up the nomination. The president is then blocked from that appointment. This is what happened with President Trump over-and-over again.
• Additionally, the Intelligence Branch protects itself, and its facilitating allies through the formal classification process. The Intelligence Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} This is something 99.9% of the people on our side get totally and frustratingly wrong.
No one can declassify, or make public, anything the Intelligence Branch will not agree to. Doubt this? Ask Ric Grenell, John Ratcliffe, or even President Trump himself.
• The classification process is determined inside the Intelligence Branch, all by themselves. They get to choose what rank of classification exists on any work-product they create; and they get to decide what the classification status is of any work product that is created by anyone else. The Intelligence Branch has full control over what is considered classified information and what is not. The Intelligence Branch defines what is a “national security interest” and what is not. A great technique for hiding fingerprints of corrupt and illegal activity.
[For familiar reference see the redactions to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The Intelligence Branch does all redactions.]
• Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control. If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member? They have to go through the SSCI confirmation. See the problem?
Yes, there are ways to break up the Intelligence Branch, but they do not start with any congressional effort. As you can see above, the process is the flaw – not the solution. Most conservative pundits have their emphasis on the wrong syllable. Their cornerstone is false.
For their own self-preservation, the Intelligence Branch has been interfering in our elections for years. The way to tear this apart begins with STATE LEVEL election reform that blocks the Legislative Branch from coordinating with the Intelligence Branch.
The extreme federalism approach is critical and also explains why Joe Biden has instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the full power of the DOJ to stop state level election reform efforts. The worry of successful state level election control is also why the Intelligence Branch now needs to support the federal takeover of elections.
Our elections have been usurped by the Intelligence Branch. Start with honest elections and we will see just how much Democrat AND Republican corruption is dependent on manipulated election results. Start at the state level. Start there…. everything else is downstream.
♦ People want examples, reference points for work the Intelligence Branch conducts, specifically how it protects itself.
Here is an example: Julian Assange.
Yes, the history of the U.S. national security apparatus goes back decades; however, the weaponization of that apparatus, the creation of an apex branch of government, the Intelligence Branch, originated –as we currently feel it– under President Barack Obama.
Obama took the foundational tools created by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and used the intelligence system architecture to create a weapon for use in his fundamental transformation. An alliance of ideologues within government (intel community) and the private sector (big tech and finance) was assembled, and the largest government weapon was created. Think about this every time you take your shoes off at an airport.
After the weapon was assembled and tested (Arab Spring), the Legislative Branch was enjoined under the auspices of a common enemy, Donald J. Trump, an outsider who was a risk to every entity in the institutional construct of Washington DC. Trillions were at stake, and years of affluence and influence were at risk as the unholy alliance was put together.
To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to U.S. Intelligence Branch interests, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the FBI/CIA were in 2016.
It is within the network of foreign and domestic intel operations where Intelligence Branch political tool, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, was working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI counterintelligence operations.
By now, people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor generally identified as a western intelligence operative who was tasked by the FBI/CIA to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}
In a similar fashion, the FBI tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor, Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Halper also targeted Papadopoulos.
The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets much easier.
HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes outlined how very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also mentions George Papadopoulos. The FBI also fabricated information in the FISA.
However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears the fingerprints of the international intelligence apparatus; only this time, due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S., the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies was important.
Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok had a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, former CIA Director John Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and Peter Strzok wrote the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane.” Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief allied intelligence officials connected to the Australian Ambassador to the U.K, Alexander Downer.
In short, Peter Strzok acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for the Intelligence Branch and CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.
Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons, the 2015 GOP candidates for President.
It was also Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskaya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S.
Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash.
Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s private sector handler [NOTE: remember, the public-private sector partnership], it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Patrick Byrne the instructions on where to send Butina. {Go Deep}
All of this context outlines the extent to which the FBI/CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that eventually settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. The international operations of the Intelligence Branch were directed by the FBI/CIA; and the domestic operations were coordinated by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]
Recap: ♦Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be a Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Donald Trump Jr (FBI). All of these activities were coordinated.
Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. However, Deripaska refused to participate.
All of this foreign and domestic engagement was directly controlled by collaborating U.S. intelligence agencies from inside the Intelligence Branch. And all of this coordinated activity was intended to give a specific Russia influence/interference impression.
♦ The key point of all that background context is to see how committed the Intelligence Branch was to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ and DOJ-NSD, put a hell of a lot of work into it.
We also know that John Durham looked at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talked to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.
On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:
The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, and it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.
Why the delay?
What was the DOJ waiting for?
Here’s where it gets interesting….
The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after Congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”
(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.
Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.
“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”
Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)
Knowing how much effort the Intelligence Branch put into the false Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange, monitor all activity, and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.
Within three months of the EDVA grand jury, the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018.
The DOJ sat on the indictment while the Mueller/Weissmann probe was ongoing.
As soon as the Mueller/Weissmann probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).
As a person who has researched this fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against Assange is too coincidental.
It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange. The Weissmann/Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes for justification, and that narrative was contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.
♦ This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements.
The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC and FBI contractor.
The CIA holds a self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim; the FBI holds an interest in maintaining that claim; the U.S. media hold an interest in maintaining that claim. All of the foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.
Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack.
This “Russian hacking” claim was ultimately important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus, it forms the corner of their justification. With that level of importance, well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Julian Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the Weissmann/Mueller report was going to be public.
…. and that’s exactly what they did. They threw a bag over Assange.
♦ COLLAPSED OVERSIGHT – The modern system to ‘check’ the Executive Branch was the creation of the legislative “Gang of Eight,” a legislative oversight mechanism intended to provide a bridge of oversight between the authority of the intelligence community within the Executive Branch.
The Go8 construct was designed to allow the President authority to carry out intelligence operations and provide the most sensitive notifications to a select group within Congress.
The Go8 oversight is directed to the position, not the person, and consists of: (1) The Speaker of the House; (2) The Minority Leader of the House; (3) The Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI; (4) The Ranking Member (minority) of the HPSCI; (5) The Leader of the Senate; (6) The Minority Leader of the Senate; (7) The Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, SSCI; and finally (8) the Vice-Chair of the SSCI.
Example: When the Chief Executive (the President) initiates an intelligence operation on behalf of the United States, the President triggers a “finding memo.” In essence, the instruction to the intel agency or agencies to authorize a covert operation. When that process takes place, the Go8 are the first people notified. Depending on the sensitivity of the operation, sometimes the G08 are notified immediately after the operation is conducted. The notification can be a phone call or an in-person briefing.
Because of the sensitivity of their intelligence information, the Gang of Eight hold security clearances that permit them to receive and review all intelligence operations. The intelligence community are also responsible for briefing the Go8 with the same information they use to brief the President.
~ 2021 Gang of Eight ~
The Go8 design is intended to put intelligence oversight upon both political parties in Congress; it is designed that way by informing the minority leaders of both the House and Senate as well as the ranking minority members of the SSCI and HPSCI. Under the concept, the President cannot conduct an intelligence operation; and the intelligence community cannot carry out intelligence gathering operations without the majority and minority parties knowing about it.
The modern design of this oversight system was done to keep rogue and/or corrupt intelligence operations from happening. However, as we shared in the preview to this entire discussion, the process was usurped during the Obama era. {GO DEEP}
Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, that the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and 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 over a year without informing the Go8. Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”
Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance 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.
Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact he said exactly the opposite, he said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC). The implication, the very direct and specific implication; the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was totally informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor.
Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?
Again, no one saw the immediate issue. What Comey just described on that March day in 2017 was the total usurpation of the entire reason the Gang of Eight exists; to eliminate the potential for political weaponization of the Intelligence Community by the executive branch. The G08 notifications to the majority and minority are specifically designed to make sure what James Comey admitted to doing was never supposed to happen.
Team Obama carried out a political operation using the intelligence community and the checks-and-balances in the system were intentionally usurped. This is an indisputable fact.
Worse still, the entire legislative branch of Congress, which specifically includes the Republicans that now controlled the House and Senate, did nothing. They just ignored what was admitted. The usurpation was willfully ignored. The mechanism of the G08 was bypassed without a twitch of condemnation or investigation…. because the common enemy was Donald Trump.
This example highlights the collapse of the system. Obama, the executive branch, collapsed the system by usurping the process; in essence the process became the bigger issue and the lack of immediate legislative branch reaction became evidence of open acceptance. The outcomes of the usurpation played out over the next four years, Donald J. Trump was kneecapped and lost his presidency because of it. However, the bigger issue of the collapse still exists.
The downstream consequence of the Legislative Branch accepting the Executive Branch usurpation meant both intelligence committees were compromised. Additionally, the leadership of both the House and Senate were complicit. Think about this carefully. The Legislative Branch allowance of the intelligence usurpation meant the Legislative Branch was now subservient to the Intelligence Branch.
That’s where we are.
Right now.
That’s where we are.
Term-3 Obama is now back in the White House with Joe Biden.
Term-1 and Term-2 Obama usurped the ‘check and balance‘ within the system and weaponized the intelligence apparatus. During Trump’s term that weaponization was covered up by a compliant congress, and not a single member of the oversight called it out. Now, Term-3 Obama steps back in to continue the cover up and continue the weaponization.
Hopefully, you can now see the scale of the problem that surrounds us with specific citation for what has taken place. What I just explained to you above is not conspiracy theory, it is admitted fact that anyone can look upon. Yet….
Have you seen this mentioned anywhere? Have you seen this called out by anyone in Congress? Have you seen anyone in media (ally or adversary) call this out? Have you seen any member of the Judicial Branch stand up and say wait, what is taking place is not okay? Have you seen a single candidate for elected office point this out? Have you seen anyone advising a candidate point this out?
This is our current status. It is not deniable. The truth exists regardless of our comfort.
Not a single person in power will say openly what has taken place. They are scared of the Fourth Branch. The evidence of what has taken place is right there in front of our face. The words, actions and activities of those who participated in this process are not deniable.
There are only two members of the Gang of Eight who have existed in place from January 2007 (the real beginning of Obama’s term, two years before he took office when the Congress flipped). Only two members of the G08 have been consistently in place from January of 2007 to right now, today. All the others came and went, but two members of the Gang of Eight have been part of that failed and collapsed oversight throughout the past 15 years, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.
♦ TECHNOLOGY – On a global scale – the modern intelligence gathering networks are now dependent on data collection to execute their intelligence missions. In the digital age nations have been executing various methods to gather that data. Digital surveillance has replaced other methods of interception. Those surveillance efforts have resulted in a coalescing of regional data networks based on historic multi-national relationships.
We have a recent frame of reference for the “U.S. data collection network” within the NSA. Through the allied process the Five Eyes nations all rely on the NSA surveillance database (U.K, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and U.S.) The NSA database provides the digital baseline for intelligence operations in defense of our allies. The portals into the NSA database are essentially an assembly of allies in like-minded ideological connection to the United States.
Unfortunately, there have been some revelations about the NSA database being used to monitor our allies, like in the example of Germany and surveillance on Angela Merkel’s phone. As long as “the good guys” are operating honorably, allies of the United States can feel confident about having protection from the NSA surveillance of global digital data. We warn our friends if we detect something dangerous etc.
The U.S. has nodes on communication pipelines to intercept and extract data. We have also launched hundreds, perhaps thousands, of satellites to conduct surveillance and gather up data. All of this data is fed into the NSA database where it is monitored (presumably) as a national security mechanism, and in defense of our allies.
However, what about data collection or data networks that are outside the NSA database? What do our enemies do? The NSA database is just one intelligence operation of digital surveillance amid the entire world, and we do not allow access by adversaries we are monitoring. So what do they do? What do our allies do who might not trust the United States due to past inconsistencies, ie. the Middle East?
The answers to those questions highlight other data collection networks. So a brief review of the major players is needed.
♦ CHINA – China operates their own database. They, like the NSA, scoop up data for their system. Like us, China launches satellites and deploys other electronic data collection methods to download into their database. This is why the issues of electronic devices manufactured in China becomes problematic. Part of the Chinese data collection system involves the use of spyware, hacking and extraction.
Issues with Chinese communication company Huawei take on an added dimension when you consider the goal of the Chinese government to conduct surveillance and assemble a network of data to compete with the United States via the NSA. Other Chinese methods of surveillance and data-collection are less subversive, as in the examples of TicTok and WeChat. These are Chinese social media companies that are scraping data just like the NSA scrapes data from Facebook, Twitter and other Silicon Valley tech companies. [ Remember, the Intelligence Branch is a public-private partnership. ]
♦ RUSSIA – It is very likely that Russia operates their own database. We know Russia launches satellites, just like China and the USA, for the same purposes. Russia is also very proficient at hacking into other databases and extracting information to store and utilize in their own network. The difference between the U.S., China and Russia is likely that Russia spends more time on the hacking aspect because they do not generate actual technology systems as rapidly as the U.S. and China.
The most recent database creation is an outcome of an ally having to take action because they cannot rely on the ideology of the United States remaining consistent, as the administrations ping-pong based on ideology.
♦ SAUDI ARABIA – Yes, in 2016 we discovered that Saudi Arabia was now operating their own intelligence data-gathering operation. It would make sense, given the nature of the Middle East and the constant fluctuations in political support from the United States. It is a lesson the allied Arab community and Gulf Cooperation Council learned quickly when President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 and launched the Islamist Spring (Arab Spring) upon them.
I have no doubt the creation of the Saudi intelligence network was specifically because the Obama administration started supporting radical Islamists within the Muslim Brotherhood, and threw fuel on the fires of extremism all over the Arab world.
Think about it., What would you do if you were Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan, Oman or Yemen and you knew the United States could just trigger an internal uprising of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood to seek your destruction?
Without a doubt, those urgent lessons from 2009, 2010, 2011 triggered the formation of the Arab Intelligence Network as a network to defend itself with consistency. They assembled the network and activated it in 2017 as pictured above.
♦ Israel – Along a similar outlook to the Arab network, no doubt Israel operates an independent data collection system as a method of protecting itself from ever-changing U.S. politics amid a region that is extremely hostile to its very existence. Like the others, Israel launches proprietary satellites, and we can be sure they use covert methods to gather electronic data just like the U.S. and China.
As we have recently seen in the Pegasus story, Israel creates spyware programs that are able to track and monitor cell phone communications of targets. The spyware would not work unless Israel had access to some network where the phone meta-data was actually stored. So yeah, it makes sense for Israel to operate an independent intelligence database.
♦ Summary: As we understand the United States Intelligence Branch of government as the superseding entity that controls the internal politics of our nation, we also must consider that multiple nations have the same issue. There are major intelligence networks around the world beside the NSA “Five-Eyes” database. China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel all operate proprietary databases deploying the same tools and techniques for assembly.
The geopolitical conflict that has always existed has now shifted into a digital battle-space. The Intelligence Agencies from these regions are now operating as the backbone of the government that uses them, and has become dependent on them. [<- Reread that].
Once you accept the digital-era intelligence apparatus of China, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, The United States and Israel, are now the primary national security mechanisms for stabilization of government; then you accept the importance of those intelligence operations.
Once you understand how foundational those modern intelligence operations have become for the stability and continuity of those governments…… then you begin to understand just how the United States intelligence community became more important than the government that created it.
♦ Public Private Partnership – The modern Fourth Branch of Government is only possible because of a Public-Private partnership with the intelligence apparatus. You do not have to take my word for it, the partnership is so brazen they have made public admissions.
The biggest names in Big Tech announced in June their partnership with the Five Eyes intelligence network, ultimately controlled by the NSA, to: (1) monitor all activity in their platforms; (2) identify extremist content; (3) look for expressions of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE); and then, (4) put the content details into a database where the Five Eyes intelligence agencies (U.K., U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand) can access it.
Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft are all partnering with the intelligence apparatus. It might be difficult to fathom how openly they admit this, but they do. Look at this sentence in the press release (emphasis mine):
[…] “The Group will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.”
Think about that sentence structure very carefully. They are “adding to” the preexisting list…. admitting the group (aka Big Tech) already have access to the the intelligence-sharing database… and also admitting there is a preexisting list created by the Five Eyes consortium.
Obviously, who and what is defined as “extremist content” will be determined by the Big Tech insiders themselves. This provides a gateway, another plausible deniability aspect, to cover the Intelligence Branch from any oversight.
When the Intelligence Branch within government wants to conduct surveillance and monitor American citizens, they run up against problems due to the Constitution of the United States. They get around those legal limitations by sub-contracting the intelligence gathering, the actual data-mining, and allowing outside parties (contractors) to have access to the central database.
The government cannot conduct electronic searches (4th amendment issue) without a warrant; however, private individuals can search and report back as long as they have access. What is being admitted is exactly that preexisting partnership. The difference is that Big Tech will flag the content from within their platforms, and now a secondary database filled with the extracted information will be provided openly for the Intelligence Branch to exploit.
The volume of metadata captured by the NSA has always been a problem because of the filters needed to make the targeting useful. There is a lot of noise in collecting all data that makes the parts you really want to identify more difficult to capture. This new admission puts a new massive filtration system in the metadata that circumvents any privacy protections for individuals.
Previously, the Intelligence Branch worked around the constitutional and unlawful search issue by using resources that were not in the United States. A domestic U.S. agency, working on behalf of the U.S. government, cannot listen on your calls without a warrant. However, if the U.S. agency sub-contracts to say a Canadian group, or foreign ally, the privacy invasion is no longer legally restricted by U.S. law.
What was announced in June 2021 is an alarming admission of a prior relationship along with open intent to define their domestic political opposition as extremists.
July 26 (Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.
Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes, adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.
The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove it. (read more)
The influence of the Intelligence Branch now reaches into our lives, our personal lives. In the decades before 9/11/01 the intelligence apparatus intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize.
After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after 9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence apparatus being granted a massive amount of power. The problem with assembled power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own malicious benefit. That is exactly what the installation of Barack Obama was all about.
The Obama network took pre-assembled intelligence weapons we should never have allowed to be created, and turned those weapons into tools for his radical and fundamental change. The target was the essential fabric of our nation. Ultimately, this corrupt political process gave power to create the Fourth Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. From that perspective the fundamental change was successful.
♦ WHAT NOW? There is a way to stop and deconstruct the Intelligence Branch, but it requires some outside-the-box thinking and reliance on the Constitution as a tool to radically change one element within government. In the interim, we must remain focused on the three tiers that we need for success.
• Tier One is “tactical civics” at a local level. Engaged and active citizen participation at the community, city, town and hamlet level of society. This is what might be described as grassroots level, school board level; city council level; county commissioner level.
• Tier Two is “extreme federalism” at a state level. Engaged and active citizen participation through your State House and State Senate representative. This is state level assembly and action demands upon the State House, State Senate and State Governor.
• Tier Three the challenge of “federal offices” on a national level {Go Deep}. This is the part where we need President Donald Trump, and his power to confront the issues comes directly from us.
I am confident that ultimately “We The People” will win. How we can execute the solution is more challenging; in the interim, tactical civics and extreme federalism are doable right now, in this next 2024 election cycle.
It sucks that a UniParty congress extended FISA-702. However, even if the hail-Mary pass on Monday fails, FISA was still extended for only two-years.
Before getting into bigger picture analysis and intellectual discussion about FISA and the 702 reauthorizations, let me just reveal some inside DC crap that drives me nuts and at the same time will help y’all understand the nonsense.
First, the Intelligence Community (IC) tells congress, particularly the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, that all hell will break loose if they don’t reauthorize full electronic surveillance of Americans. Congress is petrified of the IC.
Speaker Johnson and all of the key participants are totally siloed from understanding that 702 has nothing to do with incidental collection of American data whilst the honorable IC were doing foreign intercepts. Johnson and most republicans believe the IC nonsense. They really do.
The politicians and their key staff cannot fathom how the FBI, DOJ, NSD, DHS and Contractors use this database to conduct political and “other” (think corporate espionage for sale) surveillance. They really do think the IC is full of honorable rank-and-file. They are inside a DC bubble.
Second, the IC argument is now something akin to we have let thousands of terrorists into the country through the southern border crisis. They say: “my god, we need to monitor the terrorists, and if you take away 702 the foreign terror cells will activate and start killing us all. Do you want that blood on your hands?” You cannot take away surveillance tools.
Third, FISA 702 reauthorization is used as a bargaining chip by people who don’t want to get caught up in the surveillance.
The DC conversations are something like, “ok, we’ll reauthorize it, but you cannot use it against us – and all the sex parties and perverted stuff we do when no one is around, you must promise to keep our secrets hidden“… Yes, this is why the IC agree to accept a reauthorization that exempts congress. The IC keep the blackmail, just promise not to use it.
We The People do not have any friends in DC on this issue. The democrats will reauthorize 702 to continue exploiting surveillance authority – don’t forget over 10,000 log-in portals with access to the NSA database exist, including the workstation at Perkins Coie that ties into the NSA database {GO DEEP}.
President Trump finally opposes the FISA system – writ large – and THAT is progress.
More soon….
(An Accurate Depiction )House Speaker Mike Johnson
President Donald J Trump seeks optimal solutions for all challenges. Internally he has his own set of standards and crystal-clear understanding of what he would want in any given situation; this is not difficult for a clear brain to accomplish.
However, in the world of multi-interests and larger group needs, in this case an entire nation of individuals and groups, President Trump knows that optimal solutions are best found closest to the work, closest to the source of the individual hearts. Pragmatic leadership is often about optimal solutions. WATCH:
He/We will win.
They are increasingly desperate. The need for control is a reaction to fear. The next week to 10 days is critical.
I have much to share with our fellowship. You will journey with me.
Legal experts are warning this week that the judge presiding over the New York fraud trial of former President Donald Trump may have already made a mistake in his decision to dissolve some of Trump’s companies.
Before the commencement of the trial, Judge Arthur Engoron determined that Trump had deceitfully exaggerated his net worth and mandated the dissolution of certain New York-based companies affiliated with the 45th president. However, legal experts told The New York Times that Engoron “potentially lacked the jurisdiction to terminate the corporations.”
The judge’s punishment was temporarily halted by an appeals court last week as it examined the order.
“President Trump very much appreciates the court’s consideration and ruling,” Trump attorney Christopher Kise said after the appellate court took up the case, adding that it would help “pave the way for a much needed, and deliberative, review of the trial court’s many errors.”
According to the Times report, Engoron has the authority to personally modify the order and utilize his anticipated January decision to revise the penalty before the appellate court’s ruling.
“The judge has extraordinary powers to fashion a remedy to curtail and punish the misconduct, meaning bad news for Trump,” Steven Cohen, a former top official at the New York attorney general’s office, told the Times.
In addition to the $250 million fine that New York Attorney General Letitia James is seeking, Engoron has the authority to forbid Trump and his business from signing any new commercial real estate contracts or requesting loans from state-licensed banks. Additionally, he has the power to prohibit Trump from operating any business within the state.
However, the report suggests that the portion of the order that terminates certain New York companies belonging to him is less likely to be upheld.
The report states that the order revoked a specific form of business certification that permits Trump’s New York-based companies to operate under specific names. The order may require approximately 10 of the ex-president’s businesses to acquire new certificates. Additionally, the order mentions the “dissolution of the canceled LLCs,” the limited liability companies overseeing Trump’s properties.
According to legal experts, a judge cannot terminate an LLC unless one of its members specifically requests it.
“He’s going beyond what the statute seems to allow,” David Lowden, a lawyer who specializes in commercial transactions and corporate law, told the Times, predicting that the order would not destroy Trump’s empire but merely result in a “simple bureaucratic irritation, resolvable through paperwork.”
Additional legal experts have observed that the judge’s order applies to all ten of Trump’s New York companies that possess the certificate, rather than solely the smaller number mentioned in James’ complaint.
Some experts argued that penalizing a company that is not accused of any wrongdoing may lead to the involvement of the appeals court.
Advertisement
“He may have bought himself an appellate problem,” Cohen said, “and fueled an otherwise dubious claim of bias.”
The judge was slammed earlier this week when he used another opportunity to issue a blistering attack on the former president.
In the case where New York Attorney General Letitia James accuses Trump of fraudulently inflating the value of his properties and assets in financial statements, Engoron rejected the former president’s appeal for a directed ruling to exonerate him.
Advertisement
Engorn disagreed with Trump’s request for the court to rule in his favor and pointed out several “fatal flaws” in the former president’s defense, including the data provided by Eli Bartov, a research professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business.
The leader of the Republican presidential primary, Trump, has denied any wrongdoing and called the investigation a “witch hunt” with a political agenda to derail his 2024 campaign.
Closing arguments are scheduled to be held in early January in New York.
Guest post by Joe Hoft and republished with permission.
Democrats want to mimic Communist China. They want to choose the Republican candidates who can run for US President.
The takeover of Hong Kong began when Great Britain handed over Hong Kong to China in 1997. At the time, China agreed to wait 50 years before taking over the tiny country. But China did not wait.
One of the first things China did was to take over the tiny country’s election of its CEO – its head of state, with powers like the President in the United States. China began vetting the candidates for CEO and only China-approved candidates could run in the election.
And the situation in Hong Kong has only gotten worse. CBC News reported:
When China announced a new national security law in 2020 to deal with what it saw as troublesome Hong Kong subversives, then-secretary of state Mike Pompeo said the U.S. going forward would treat Hong Kong as “one country, one system,” and punish those repressing freedom in the city.
Beijing has had its own ideas ever since, and has offered up only one candidate to be Hong Kong’s next chief executive, effective July 1.
Sole candidate John Lee was instrumental in the harsh responses to widespread protests in Hong Kong going back eight years. A former police officer, Lee was under secretary for security in Hong Kong from 2012 to 2017, when he was elevated to secretary for the next four years.
The election committee comprised of a cross-section of Chinese officials has already endorsed Lee for chief executive. He needs only a simple majority to win. Clearly, Beijing wants the Asian financial centre ever more under its sway.
The process for selecting candidates to vie for the Hong Kong leadership has always been opaque and designed to ensure Hong Kong residents only selected from applicants approved by Beijing. But Benedict Rogers, the British co-founder and CEO of the non-governmental organization Hong Kong Watch, said this year’s process represented a new low.
“Every [chief executive] election since 1997 has been a stitch-up. But at least in the past they’ve pretended to have a contest,” Rogers tweeted this week. “Yet this one is a farce.”
On Tuesday, Democrats in Colorado decided that they wanted to choose the candidates for the Presidential election from the Republican Party.
The Colorado Supreme Court validated the unconstitutional decision from a lower court in the state that ruled that President Trump could not run for the office of the President of the United States and would not be allowed on the 2024 ballot.
One of Colorado’s Supreme Court Justice’s didn’t agree with the majority in the court. Colorado Supreme Court Justice Carlos Samour writes in his dissent:
“Procedural due process is one of the aspects of America’s democracy that sets this country apart. The decision to bar former President Donald J. Trump (“President Trump”)—by all accounts the current leading Republican presidential candidate (and reportedly the current leading overall presidential candidate)—from Colorado’s presidential primary ballot flies in the face of the due process doctrine.”
“I have been involved in the justice system for thirty-three years now, and what took place here doesn’t resemble anything I’ve seen in a courtroom.”
This is because what the court ruled in Colorado only happens in Communist China.
In this brief prelude segment, Tucker Carlson discusses the bigger picture of the Colorado Supreme Court decision to block Donald Trump from the 2024 republican presidential primary ballot. {Direct Rumble Link}
As accurately noted by Tucker, the terms used by professional leftists are always coordinated for a purpose. This seems glaringly obvious with the repeated use of the term “insurrection” as applied to the events on January 6, 2021. The hardline leftists are now moving to phase two, the actionable elements of the word use. WATCH:
Trump Urges SCOTUS to Reject Jack Smith Request For Expedited Ruling on Immunity Argument – 18 Republican AGs including MO AG Andrew Bailey File Brief in Support of Trump
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R) on Thursday filed a brief at the US Supreme Court to halt Special Counsel Jack Smith’s move to circumvent the appellate court in his January 6 case against President Trump.
Alabama and 18 other states joined in support of President Trump.
BREAKING: We have filed a brief at the United States Supreme Court to halt Jack Smith’s move to circumvent the appeals process in his prosecution of President Trump.
The DOJ’s attempt to accelerate the prosecution is blatantly partisan, and SCOTUS must reject it. pic.twitter.com/kJw2krar6U
— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) December 21, 2023
President Trump on Wednesday urged the US Supreme Court to reject Jack Smith’s request to expedite the ruling on his immunity argument.
Jack Smith last Monday asked the US Supreme Court to weigh in on Trump’s immunity claims.
In September Trump was hit with 4 counts in Jack Smith’s January 6 case up in DC: Conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
Trump’s lawyers argued that Trump is immune from federal prosecution for alleged ‘crimes’ committed while he served as US President.
Jack Smith skipped over the appellate court and went straight to the US Supreme Court on Trump’s immunity claims.
“This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office,” Smith wrote in last Monday’s filing.
In a filing on Wednesday, Trump’s lawyers asked the Supreme Court to reject Jack Smith’s appeal.
“In 234 years of American history, no president ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in Wednesday’s filing, according to CBS News. “To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.”
In a brief order, the Supreme Court signaled it would grant Jack Smith’s request for an expedited consideration.
“The court’s brief order did not signal what it ultimately would do.” – the AP reported.
According to the AP, the Supreme Court is scheduled to meet next on January 5, 2024.
#1) It was a 4-3 decision. Meaning it was the politics of the court, literally the political makeup and perspective therein, that determined the outcome of the decision. This is showcased in point #3, which is the funniest part.
#2) The entire framework of the case against Trump in the Colorado decision is predicated on this: “[the complainants] asserted that he was ineligible under Section Three because he engaged in insurrection on January 6, 2021, after swearing an oath as President to support the U.S. Constitution.” [pdf, page 6] REMINDER – President Donald Trump was not charged with “insurrection,” is not accused of “insurrection,” does not fit the complaint under the definitions of “insurrection,” and has never been found guilty of insurrection. The complaint is moot before the court. But hey, it’s Lawfare… and we all know Lawfare is created for public media consumption, so that takes us directly to the biggest point.
#3) Instead of me writing it, let me screengrab it so we can all laugh together [pdf page 9].
Wait, what?
Yes, that’s correct. As long as President Trump appeals the decision to the Supreme Court, the appeals court stays their own ruling – essentially indefinitely. The Colorado primary ballots printed, and the primary election will be over, before the Supreme Court puts this on their docket.
In addition to the virtual guarantee the high court will overrule this political nonsense, SCOTUS can make the entire issue moot before them by following their own normal schedule for submissions, arguments, deliberation and opinions delivered by the court.
The Colorado appellate court knows this, that’s why they put this self-stay into their 4-3 ruling. It’s a politically correct way of giving the optics of telling their tribe, ‘hey we’re with you,’ without the ramifications of the political backlash. In other words, psychological lawfare stuff – intended for media consumption.
Making the issue that much better for Donald Trump, the efforts of the Prescott-Bush clan (look it up – they live in CO) will backfire bigly. The public backlash against a judicial ruling that interferes with the right of the citizens to determine their own election candidates plays perfectly into the sunlight operation against the Lawfare left.
This backlash will be epic, albeit hidden by MSNBC and the rest of the insufferable media. Why? Because it doesn’t fit the Lawfare narrative.
I’m not even going to highlight the nonsense from the leftists who are in a frenzy over this one. Just smile, pretend it’s the end of the world, eat your favorite foods and live your best life while trying not to laugh. Seriously, this is just that level of goofy.
Remember what I said about Ron DeSantis in 2022, and everyone looked at me funny. Well, this is way more predictable than me saying DeSantis will collapse in sunlight.
That said, Vivek Ramaswamy is not silly, and he sees a great opportunity.
VIA TWITTER – This is what an *actual* attack on democracy looks like: in an un-American, unconstitutional, and *unprecedented* decision, a cabal of Democrat judges are barring Trump from the ballot in Colorado. Having tried every trick in the book to eliminate President Trump from running in this election, the bipartisan Establishment is now deploying a new tactic to bar him from ever holding office again: the 14th Amendment.
I pledge to *withdraw* from the Colorado GOP primary unless Trump is also allowed to be on the state’s ballot, and I demand that Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie, and Nikki Haley to do the same immediately – or else they are tacitly endorsing this illegal maneuver which will have disastrous consequences for our country.
Today’s decision is the latest election interference tactic to silence political opponents and swing the election for whatever puppet the Democrats put up this time by depriving Americans of the right to vote for their candidate of choice.
The 14th Amendment was part of the “Reconstruction Amendments” that were ratified following the Civil War. It was passed to prohibit former Confederate military and political leaders from holding high federal or state office. These men had clearly taken part in a rebellion against the United States: the Civil War. That makes it all the more absurd that a left-wing group in Colorado is asking a federal court to disqualify the 45th President on the same grounds, equating his speech to rebellion against the United States.
And there’s another legal problem: Trump is not a former “officer of the United States,” as that term is used in the Constitution, meaning Section 3 does not apply. As the Supreme Court explained in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (2010), an “officer of the United States” is someone appointed by the President to aid him in his duties under Article II, Section 2. The term does not apply to elected officials, and certainly not to the President himself.
The Framers of the 14th Amendment would be appalled to see this narrow provision—intended to bar former U.S. officials who switched to the Confederacy from seeking public office—being weaponized by a sitting President and his political allies to prevent a former President from seeking reelection. Our country is becoming unrecognizable to our Founding Fathers. (read more)
I mean, c’mon man. Have we forgotten when Trump won the Colorado primary in 2016, and the delegates all promised to vote for Ted Cruz at the convention anyway.
Watchdog group Judicial Watch has received 44 pages of government records showing a close collaboration between Department of Homeland Security (DHS’s) Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and the leftist Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to engage in “real-time narrative tracking” on all major social media platforms in the days leading up to the 2020 election.
The records discuss “takedowns” of social media posts and the avoidance of creating public records subject to FOIA.
The records also show that the EIP, which was initially called the Election Misinformation Partnership in the days leading up to the November 3, 2020, election, tasked staffers with monitoring online election content 24 hours a day with a priority being “disinfo that is going viral.”
Judicial Watch is asking for the following information:
All records of communication between the CISA and the EIP. This includes all “tickets” or notifications to the Partnership regarding election-related disinformation on any social media platform.
All records regarding the July 9, 2020, meeting between DHS officials and representatives of the EIP.
All records of communication between the CISA and the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public and/or Stanford University’s Internet Observatory regarding any of the following:
The consortium is comprised of four member organizations: Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and social media analytics firm Graphika. It set up a concierge-like service in 2020 that allowed federal agencies like Homeland’s Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and State’s Global Engagement Center to file “tickets” requesting that online story links and social media posts be censored or flagged by Big Tech.
Three liberal groups — the Democratic National Committee, Common Cause and the NAACP — were also empowered like the federal agencies to file tickets seeking censorship of content. A Homeland-funded collaboration, the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center, also had access.
The newly obtained records include an undated PowerPoint presentation titled “Election Misinformation Partnership.”
There are several pages in the presentation discuss “takedowns,” including the examples posted below.
Example Flow 5: Sourced from Platform [formatting in original]
Days after 11/03, Facebook notifies EMP of an impending takedown of a group of pages exhibiting coordinated inauthentic behavior. Since the election, these pages have consistently pushed a narrative encouraging Americans in key states to call for invalidation of election results. Facebook will take these pages down in one hour, and is already briefing relevant state and local election officials.
***
Notes: Given that information is platform-verified, and Facebook has a direct relationship with local election officials, EMP’s involvement can be smaller with the initial dump. EMP should follow up with election officials and the platform in case either stakeholder wants for further research.
The presentation discusses the avoidance of creating public records subject to FOIA:
Best way to collaborate
What’s the best way to collaborate?
CISA can’t create their own Slack channels, but can participate in others’.
Listservs are bad (public records requirements).
Jira is fine.
CISA has privacy concerns: can’t monitor people’s individual accounts; ensure CISA doesn’t participate in discussions or notes concerning U.S. persons.
Setup:
SIO will have dedicated Slack, something like Jira or Salesforce (will ask for donation), separate from Stanford and destroyed once over.
We’ll intake info by email, but direct people to private forms SIO and CISA have distributed.
Info from there will go into queue -> be triaged, assigned SLA.
A slide in the presentation titled “Stanford Internet Observatory Calendar” details its monitoring plan: “November: Full Time, Election: 24/7 monitoring in shifts. Heightened monitoring during voting times. Emphasis on voter suppression tactics. Election November 3, 2020. December: Full Time, Post-Election: Full time monitoring continues, but not 24/7. Emphasis on narratives around election legitimacy (EX: mail in ballot theories). Release brief post-mortem.”
A portion of the presentation labeled “Summarized notes” states:
Overview: CISA has limited capabilities to identify, track disinfo narratives + attempts to undermine confidence in elections
SIO does = good partnership
Major goal: prevent a crisis of confidence in 2020 elections
E.g., where Russia doesn’t change any votes (or changes just a few), but claims they changed many more and hysteria is blown out of proportion
Scope: Keep scope narrow: focus on election-related disinfo that has the potential to impact the public’s voting patterns
Mutual trust is key: don’t want to need NDAs, legal red tape.
Need to build out workflow management system: JIRA/Slack/other communications channels, shared processes and definitions, etc.
[Redacted] envisions Tier 1 and Tier 2 partners:
Tier 1 is intake (of tips, disinfo reports, etc.): consisting of people either digging for narratives, or processing info received from other partners.
Think students, election officials, etc. who are looking for disinfo.
Workflow: check that info against protocols, do some initial data aggregation, triage it into the workflow management system.
o Tier 2 is the 4 orgs [redacted] I team at Stanford, Graphika, etc.
Workflow: take stuff off the workflow management queue, process it.
Need to sketch that out.
SLA for different times of the calendar based on the level of severity obtained by triage.
E.g., a report from the general public will have less priority than a report from an on-the-ground election official; a report for disinfo that is not popular will have less priority than disinfo that is going viral.
General public = more turnaround time, but election officials = less turnaround time: need to get back to them fast.
· SIO has good relationship w/ platforms who already care.
See the Secondary Infektion (Russian disinfo op) report.
Think through all the platforms that might have been useful there (e.g.,
communicating with Twitter at stage x would have stopped the spread).
Meanwhile, CISA has strong relationships w/ election officials.
CISA is happy to introduce SIO to them, do outreach.
Just keep CISA in the info-sharing pipeline.
***
CISA’s concern starts 45 days out operationally, when military/overseas voters start mailing.
Start hunting, messaging at beginning of September.
Lower SLA (higher turnaround time/less priority), but start looking for search terms and taking tips.
The days leading up to/right after Election Day will be much more intense.
It’ll be an effective SOC, maybe a physical one, but in a much larger space.
A July 10, 2020, email sent from a redacted sender to CISA officials Allison Snell, Brian Scully, Matthew Masterson, Geoffrey Hale, and several other persons whose names are redacted, states:
July will be big to get things going on both the CISA and SIO front, so we will be sure to keep open lines of communication. Thank you again for everyone’s help in getting this going, looking forward to getting to work here!
The Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) is a cross-disciplinary program of research, teaching, and policy engagement for the study and abuse in current information technologies, with a focus on social media.
Key capabilities:
Experienced disinformation research team of analytical and technical talent.
Real-time narrative tracking capabilities for all major platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit, potential for TikTok).
Additional API or historical access to ‘fringe’ platforms (Gab, Parler, 4Chan).
Established and collaborative node within the third-party misinformation research ecosystem.”
The presentation gives an example of a scenario the CISA-EIP collaborators could be faced with:
Example Flow 3: Stickier [formatting in original]
#BidenStoleMichigan is trending on Twitter on election day. Groups of seemingly-local accounts tweet @MISecofState to demand the Michigan election results be declared invalid, citing a fresh Epoch Times article alleging shady connections between Michigan’s SoS, Bill Gates, and Joe Biden. Their tweets are relatively few, but see high engagement shortly after posting and spread around right-leaning Twitter. Researchers trace the origin of the article to posts on 4chan and Parler encouraging Michiganders to confront @MlSecOfState on Twitter over the story and calling for the Michigan results to be declared invalid.
***
Notes: This scenario has a geographical component, but seems targeted to ideological groups online. While particular election officials are targeted, the political nature of the content makes counter-messaging difficult. A government-only response would be even stickier however.
In a June 26, 2023 report, the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government writes about CISA:
Founded in 2018, CISA was originally intended to be an ancillary agency designed to protect “critical infrastructure” and guard against cybersecurity threats. In the years since its creation, however, CISA metastasized into the nerve center of the federal government’s domestic surveillance and censorship operations on social media. By 2020, CISA routinely reported social media posts that allegedly spread “disinformation” to social media platforms. By 2021, CISA had a formal “Mis-, Dis-, and Malinformation” (MDM) team. In 2022 and 2023, in response to growing public and private criticism of CISA’s unconstitutional behavior, CISA attempted to camouflage its activities, duplicitously claiming it serves a purely “informational” role.
“These records show the lengths to which a ‘Homeland Security’ Deep State agency went in its effort to censor and suppress Americans during and after the 2020 election. That it took a federal lawsuit to extract these disturbing records should raise additional worries about what else this Biden administration is up to.”Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch President
History of Judicial Watch’s filings and actions posted below.
Separately, in August 2023, Judicial Watch filed two FOIA lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies for communications between the agencies and Facebook and Twitter regarding the government’s involvement in content moderation and censorship on the social media platforms.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch sued DHS for all records of communications tied to the Election Integrity Partnership. Based on representations from the EIP (seehere and here), the federal government, social media companies, the EIP, the Center for Internet Security (a non-profit organization funded partly by DHS and the Defense Department) and numerous other leftist groups communicated privately via the Jira software platform developed by Atlassian.
In February 2023, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing cooperation between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and social media platforms to censor and suppress free speech.
Judicial Watch in January 2023 sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
A very strong and deliberate interview of Representative Clay Higgins (R-LA) by Lara Logan. Rep Higgins has been very critical of DHS, DOJ and FBI conduct in the January 6th insurrection narrative. {Direct Rumble Link}
In this interview, Representative Higgins gets very deliberate and stern about “uncharted waters, as it relates to the weaponization of government.” The tone of Higgins is in direct proportion to his anger at those within federal law enforcement who have usurped the constitution. As a result, Higgins himself has become the target by those in the administrative state who participate in the weaponization. WATCH:
(MSM) – Republican Congressman Clay Higgins issued a warning to FBI officials investigating the Capitol Riots, saying that they are “going down.”
Higgins, a Louisiana Republican, has been a vocal proponent of the theory that federal agencies planted people at the scene and provoked the riot as an excuse to arrest conservatives.
Speaking to Lara Logan, a former CBS News correspondent turned right-wing commentator, Higgins, a former law enforcement officer himself, advanced his theories, claiming the FBI is tracking Trump supporters who were in Washington over the days leading up to the Capitol Riots and treated as suspected terrorists. He said those on a supposed list are still tracked by air marshals to this day despite not being convicted of crimes.
“We are in uncharted waters as it relates to the weaponization of our government against American people,” he said, adding: “I am not frightened of these people. “They are not going to take us without a fight. I am going to fight legally and peacefully and within the parameters of the U.S. Constitution.
“But they’re going down. These men in their high perch and their position of power and authority that are walking upon our entire history, our deepest core principles. They’re not going to get away with it.” (read more)
Georgia Gov. Kemp’s legal staff has notified Ga Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger that 17,852 invalid 2020 votes were counted in Fulton County, GA, alone.
A public meeting will be held next week at the Georgia State Capitol building.
Joe Rossi talks on the election fraud and the meeting here:
GREAT NEWS – Senate Majority Predicts Donald J. Trump Will Win 2024 Election – Constructs Bill To Prevent Trump Exiting NATO Alliance, Includes in Recent NDAA
[Some of you guys think I am downtrodden by recent events and outlines. You could not be further from accurate; I’m living the best days of my life – ever. ¹See after current article. ~ SD]
There is good news again within this story, but only if you fully comprehend what the institution of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) represents as an outcome of the Fourth Branch of Government, and what the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is in place to do.
The SSCI is the facilitating institution that collaborates with the intelligence state to facilitate the construct of the surveillance walls around us. The SSCI is the mechanism that permits the Deep State to function without impediment. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the mechanism for the Senate to enrich the members. If you don’t grasp that reality, you cannot fathom the enemy we face, nor the ramifications of how the DC control system shows their outlook.
Within this story, you discover the CIA, NSA, DNI, DIA, DOJ-NSD, Pentagon and State Dept all believe President Donald J. Trump is going to win the 2024 election. If they didn’t fear and anticipate his victory, the Senate would not be taking action to control the ramifications of his pending victory. That’s the context. Smile.
WASHINGTON DC – Congress has approved legislation that would prevent any president from withdrawing the United States from NATO without approval from the Senate or an Act of Congress.
The measure, spearheaded by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), was included in the annual National Defense Authorization Act, which passed out of the House on Thursday and is expected to be signed by President Biden. (read more)
¹People keep asking me what can be done to shift events and stop/block the trajectory of the control system that is collapsing our constitutional republic.
Let me share something that is apparently being missed by most. I have spent the past several years deeply engaged with the people and systems you see espoused as defenders in the conservative-sided media. All of the familiar names; all of them held in esteem as persons of significant influence that could ultimately change things.
Allow me to call the baby ugly. Your opinion of their ability is vastly overrated.
This perspective is driven in part by the incapacity of most to understand how the silo system of control inside the matrix of our governmental institutions works.
Everything is compartmentalized…. Everything.
Every aspect of what you know in totality is unknown to every participant who operates inside each compartment.
That’s a fancy way of saying, you know more than they do.
Yes, that’s correct.
The proverbial “they” have no grasp on the issues we face at the same level of understanding that you do.
Each individual works inside a compartment, a specifically constructed silo of information. They have no concept of what is taking place in other compartments that ultimately connect to their stake-holding.
None of them have the big picture, because the system that operates in Washington DC does not permit it.
Maybe, m.a.y.b.e, a total of 50 elected representatives, across both chambers, including staff, have any idea how FISA 702 is currently weaponized or used. [I am being exceptionally generous, in this one example.] That’s just FISA-702.
If you were to take the issue of DHS surveillance and coordination with social media, that number would be significantly fewer; that’s just another example amid tens of thousands.
The private sector, the ordinary high information consuming American, has far more knowledge than the elected official that represents them. The politicians and staff therein, just don’t put the same level of importance behind it that you do. That’s the reality of the thing, and too few people grasp what I am talking about, even as you read this.
This is also why they hold oversight hearings but never seem to know the questions that need to be asked. They don’t know what questions to ask because they don’t know the context or baseline of the bigger picture issue that needs the question.
Not to get too prickly with names, but when it comes to the larger constructs of how it all ties together and what it means; you… yes you… the person reading this…. knows more than Devin Nunes, the former House Intelligence Committee chairman and former Gang of Eight member. And this reality is truer after you accept that Nunes is likely near the top of the modern pyramid for Deep State institutional knowledge.
You know more than Ron Johnson, Chuck Grassley, Mike Johnson, Mike Turner (current HPSCI chair) and Marco Rubio (current SSCI vice-chair). Each of the aforementioned relies on officials, spokespeople from the institutions, to tell them (briefing) what they need to know. The compartmentalized control institutions only tell them what they pre-filter and determine those in oversight need to know.
The people in charge are not names we know.
The people in charge, don’t even know they are in charge. That’s a reflection of how many compartments exist.
The CIA director, NSA director, ODNI, FBI Director, etc are not in charge of the compartments they represent. They are simply functionaries -middle men- who operate in the space between where the compass points are directed, where the data originates, and oversight of that data that is ultimately filtered and delivered to the functionaries, who then brief the representatives…. who then create policy… albeit flawed policy…. based on a very specific, controlled, compartmented and skewed information flow.
Semi-related. The backbone code of Twitter is old and not optimized. That is what makes the data processing costly to handle and operate.
Twitter runs like the DMV. Why? Because Twitter has to remain DHS compatible. Why does Twitter need to remain DHS compatible? Because private company Twitter/X has data processing interfaces with the DHS surveillance system. Making sense now?
Asking elected representatives to deconstruct the network of compartmented surveillance is akin to asking stage actors to create a new stage performance. The problem is the actors only have access to one script…. and each actor only gets the lines they are individually responsible for repeating.
Sum it all up this way:
You, the person reading this, knows more about the problem than any name you can think of as a person of influence.
That’s the reality of it.
Start there.
Now, you tell me the solution.
Additionally, if you start your mental response by saying, “wait, I don’t believe it,” unbeknownst to you you’re actually affirming the scope of the problem.
I am not the least bit overwhelmed, downtrodden or dismayed by this problem. Factually, as an outcome of my inherent disposition, I find joy in knowing/accepting the truth and then structuring my efforts accordingly.
I am incredibly thankful to a loving God and to you, while feeling optimistic and filled with abundant purpose.
This compartmented control system cannot sustain itself much longer, because it requires ever expanding control in order to maintain operation.
What to do about it becomes simple. Ignore it.
Engage in living your best life. If they put a roadblock in front of you, walk around it. Go live.
If people enjoy life, I mean really embrace and enjoy their God given right to liberty and freedom, they will not accept control. So, go live life and teach those around you to live their best life. If you take your children to experience freedom, liberty, fun and fulfillment, they will not enjoy or accept isolation. It really is that simple.
Engage in deliberate fellowship whenever you can. Share the joy of freedom and point out -loudly- how that experience is contingent upon the retention of freedom. Emphasis the obvious; embrace liberty and ignore the despondent requirements created by those who need isolation as a form of control.
People who enjoy freedom will not accept control. So, spread it. Teach it. Show your tribe what it looks like.
The irony and hypocrisy is thick. Charles McGonigal was an FBI counterintelligence official in charge of the FBI New York field office. McGonigal was tasked with investigating Russian collusion and Russian sanction violations.
McGonigal was sentenced to four-years in federal prison today for colluding with a Russian (Oleg Deripaska) to avoid sanctions.
As noted by Politico, “McGonigal, who lives in New York, was separately charged in federal court in Washington, D.C., with concealing at least $225,000 in cash he allegedly received from a former Albanian intelligence official while working for the FBI. He faces sentencing in that case on Feb. 16.”
NEW YORK — A former top FBI counterintelligence official was ordered Thursday to spend over four years in prison for violating sanctions on Russia by going to work for a Russian oligarch seeking dirt on a wealthy rival after he finished his government career.
Charles McGonigal was sentenced to four years and two months in prison in Manhattan federal court by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden, who said McGonigal harmed national security by repeatedly flouting sanctions meant to put economic pressure on Russia to get results without military force. He was also fined $40,000. (read more)
“They’re Going Down! These People On Their High Perch!” – MUST SEE: Lara Logan Releases New J6 Video with GOP Lawmaker and Crime Fighter Clay Higgins who TELLS ALL (VIDEO)
Investigative journalist Lara Logan released the latest episode in her much anticipated investigation into the January 6, 2021 “Fed-surrection” today on Truth in Media website.
In her latest episode, Logan brings on former Louisiana police officer and current US Congressman Clay Higgins to discuss the events that tragic day back in January 2021.
Representative Higgins is famous for confronting FBI Director Chris Wray back in November 2022 on the confidential human sources dressed as Trump supporters INSIDE the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2023 Rep. Higgins confronted Chris Wray again about the FBI’s confidential human sources that were brought to the January 6, 2021 protests. But this time Clay Higgins brought a photo of the government assets boarding buses before the rally.
Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) releases photo of alleged FBI “ghost buses” in Union Station on Jan. 6, 2021 during questioning of FBI Director Chris Wray on 11-15-2023.
On Thursday Lara opened the interview with a questions on the letter Rep. Benny Thompson sent to DHS following the January 6, 2021 protests. According to Rep. Clay Higgins this resulted in innocent Trump supporters being placed on the terrorist watch list. This practice still takes place today.
Rep. Clay Higgins: was the beginning of a executive action by the TSA to use its authority to instruct America’s air marshals to track and follow Trump supporters that have been charged with no crime. They were guilty only of arriving by air into DC on January 4, 5th or 6th, and those manifest were turned over to the FBI. The FBI went through those manifests and every American that they identified, that the FBI identified as a Trump supporter that was on those manifests was added to the FBI’s suspected domestic terrorist watchlist… The TSA administrator used his authority to instruct the air marshals of America to track those Americans wherever they fly. Still today, it’s still happening.
The letter was signed by top Republican Rep. John Katko. He approved of this.
This has been going on since January 2021.
Rep. Higgins then makes this promise–
Rep. Clay Higgins: “I’m telling you, we’re in uncharted waters as it relates to the weaponization of our government against the American people. I am not frightened of these people. I’ve spent my life serving others, and I love my country. This thing is not going to just slip away. They’re not going to take us without a fight. I’m going to fight legally and peacefully and within the parameters of the constitution that I’ve sworn to serve. But they’re going down. These men and their high perch and their position of power and authority that are walking upon our entire history, our deepest core principles. They’re not going to get away with it.”
This was an exceptional video – only at Truth in Media.
Watch the entire episode here.
Clay Higgins brought his investigative skills from the streets of Louisiana where he was a cop for years to the halls of congress, where he’s been investigating January 6th ever since it happened.
We sat down for a tough, far-reaching interview to explore what he’s learned… pic.twitter.com/engaZJp0np
46 Deep State Officials Including Rosenstein, Clapper and Morell Urge Congress to Pass HPSCI Version of FISA-702 Renewal to Expand Domestic Surveillance
For those confused. There are two bills to modify the FISA702 reauthorization in the House. (1) HR 6611 from the House Intel Committee and (2) HR 6570 from the House Judiciary Committee. The intel committee bill expands domestic surveillance authority under the modifications; the judiciary committee bill requires the DOJ to get a search warrant before they can look at the incidental collection of American citizens.
Both bills came out of committee and were scheduled for a floor vote tomorrow, which has been cancelled due to public outcry (good job). Speaker Mike Johnson initially planned to let both bills get voted tomorrow and the bill with the most votes advances to the Senate. That’s a hot mess.
The House Intel Committee bill organized by Chairman Mike Turner is absolutely horrible. It expands FISA702 surveillance and makes things much worse. The House Judiciary Bill organized by Chairman Jim Jordan is not structurally that much better, but it does put strong curtailments on the 702 surveillance authority by forcing the DOJ to get actual court approved search warrants on American citizens.
It should not come as a surprise to see a panel of 46 experts in Deep State weaponization come out in support of the Intelligence Committee bill, and then decry the insufferable 702 limitations put into place in the Judiciary Committee bill. The bad guys want the House Intel version.
That’s a who’s-who list of 46 Deep State weaponization operatives, all supporting the Mike Turner version.
Turner lied when he said his HR 6611 bill was supported by John Ratcliffe and Devin Nunes. It’s not, and they don’t. Both Nunes and Ratcliffe support a panel within the process who have eyes on everything that is being done and can conduct immediate oversight. Chairman Mike Turner is a big fibber, and y’all can tell him I said that.
The Deep State folks love the Turner bill (6611) because it makes the surveillance even easier by granting even more authority in their warrantless searches. The Deep State folks do not like the Jordan bill (6570) because it requires a search warrant to look at the material, which means a predicate justification must exist.
Both bills stink, but the Jordan bill stink less.
Speaker Johnson abandoned the competing same-day floor vote effort, and no one is sure where it goes from here; but that’s probably why the Deep State guys are writing a letter trying to influence Johnson on what bill to permit a vote.
In the meantime, the current FISA-702 authorization will likely be “short-term” renewed through April 19, 2024, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), while congress figures out which long-term reform bill to send to the Senate.
It’s all a hot mess.
We The People just don’t want to be under surveillance, but we have no representation.
Special Counsel Jack Smith Asks Supreme Court to Decide Trump Immunity – Highest Court Immediately Drops All Business to Comply With Special Counsel Request
After years of assembling datapoints around the potential for the Supreme Court to be compromised, it was the discovery of Mary McCord’s husband Sheldon Snook deep in the office of Chief Justice John Roberts that finally sealed the deal for me personally. Yes, the Supreme Court is compromised.
Quick Context. Mary McCord was the architect of all Trump targeting efforts. The FISA on Carter Page, the weaponization of the DOJ-NSD, the installation of Michael Atkinson as Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), the companion to Sally Yates in the Flynn targeting, lead staff for the Schiff/Nadler impeachment effort, later appointment by FISA Presiding Judge Boasberg to be amicus to the FISC, in combination with Chief Justice John Roberts holding authority over the FISC, and the discovery that Sheldon Snook, McCord’s husband works in Robert’s office as “special assistant to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s counselor. The counselor’s office advises the chief justice not only on the management and budget of the Supreme Court but also on his interactions with the executive and legislative branches, along with numerous other public roles in which Roberts serves.” (link)
Mary McCord is the fulcrum point for all of the above issues. She connects all of the targeting operations. Mary McCord is the center of it, and John Robert’s office is compromised by the appointment of her husband Sheldon Snook. So, this story below does not surprise me.
Special Prosecutor Jack Smith jumped over the appeals court and asked the Supreme Court to decide on President Trump’s position of presidential immunity for his requests to secure the integrity of the 2020 election while in office. In the fastest turn around time in history, the Supreme Court [Robert’s office] said yes, they will hear the arguments.
WASHINGTON DC – Special counsel Jack Smith is urging the Supreme Court to urgently resolve Donald Trump’s claim that he’s immune from prosecution for charges related to his bid to subvert the 2020 election.
Without the Supreme Court’s swift intervention, Trump’s trial could be indefinitely delayed, the special counsel warned in a petition to the high court on Monday.
That’s because the trial, scheduled to begin March 4, is effectively suspended while Trump pursues his appeal of the trial judge’s ruling rejecting his immunity arguments, Smith wrote. Resolution of the novel legal question is necessary to ensure the case proceeds “promptly,” he argued.
By coming directly to the Supreme Court, Smith is hoping to bypass a federal appeals court and is mounting an aggressive bid to keep the timing of the election-focused trial on track. If the March 4 trial date sticks, it would be the first trial for Trump in the four criminal cases he is facing as he mounts a bid for re-election to the White House.
[…] The justices acted quickly on Smith’s motion. In a brief order Monday afternoon, they directed Trump’s lawyers to respond by Dec. 20 to the prosecutor’s request for the Supreme Court to add the case to its docket for this term. (read more)
There’s your inflection point timeframe.
The executive branch wants Trump on trial by Super Tuesday, March 5th the main primary election date. The legislative branch wants to extend warrantless surveillance, the mechanism to exploit the Trump supporter targeting operation, through April 19th. [Patriots Day ]
There’s the 2024 detonation timeframe, between March and mid-April.
Elon Musk herds all the MAGA groups and “domestic violent extremists” into the Twitter stadium. All seats are filled by March. Boom, everyone scrambles. Thousands of subpoenas released as part of the metadata hit list.
A new video from the January 6 protests was released this past weekend from inside the entrance to the US Capitol.
Capitol Hill police officers are seen ruthlessly beating an elderly man in footage from the Capitol riot on January 6 that was widely circulated across social media.
“The Capitol cops beat the hell out of innocent J6 protesters, and the videos are finally coming out. The cops should be charged and the protesters should be freed. This is why the uniparty didn’t want the videos released,” states the caption attached to a video of cops repeatedly striking and spraying a gray-haired man who appears trapped in a doorway between police and protesters.
The video of the cops beating the elderly man has been viewed 1.2 million times on Twitter at the time of this publication.
Footage of Capitol Police shoving an elderly woman down a set of stairs outside the US Capitol on January 6 is also making the rounds.
As the Gateway Pundit has reported, the police actually pushed this woman down a flight of stairs twice and according to our sources, this brutal display of police abuse ignited the crowd that day.
Did the Capitol Police intentionally antagonize J6 protesters? An officer brutally shoves an old lady down concrete stairs in this footage. What do you think? pic.twitter.com/LRakEC5Iqx
As TGP has reported, when the police started shooting people in the face and throwing flash grenades at the unarmed crowd, everything changed on January 6.
“Anyone who wants to get to the bottom of January 6 must focus on the key moment: The precise time the typical protest escalated into “the most investigated demonstration in FBI history,” defense attorney Steven Metcalf told TGP days after the Proud Boys were found guilty of seditious conspiracy.
“This is crucial — this is crucial — because this is where what everybody is saying about J6 being a ‘set-up’ and a ‘fedsurrection’ actually matters. But nobody is pinpointing the precise time,” he said. “Everyone is saying, ‘There’s FBI agents in the crowd,’ ‘There’s CHSs in the crowd.’ There’s blah blah blah — I’ll tell you exactly where shit went crazy.
“It went crazy at that precise time when the protesters were all standing in the west side terrace and then shots start going off and people started getting hit in the faces… There were a couple of agitators in the crowd don’t get me wrong, but what took it to a whole different level is people being shot in the face with rubber bullets.
“That’s where people who were angry got even angrier and rightfully so.”
Nearly 1200 Americans who protested on January 6 are being prosecuted by the Justice Department and the Biden regime and Chris Wray’s FBI continues to expand its J6 probe. Over 150 J6 defendants have been held in pre-trial detention.
#January6th 4 or 5 cops tackle a man and then to strike him in the head and repeatedly to the body in front of tens of thousand of election theft protestors which infuriates them. pic.twitter.com/RGRlwoJuXu
Demonstrators who walked through the Capitol Building would face misdemeaning trespassing charges punishable by up to a year in prison before and after January 6. But J6ers who peacefully strolled through the building are resoundingly charged with 1512 Obstruction of an Official Proceeding, punishable by a 20-year prison sentence, and designated as terrorists within the Bureau of Prisons system.
Seeking to increase prison sentences for wrongthink, the government made examples of the leaders of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers with charges of seditious conspiracy. Former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio is serving a 22-year prison sentence after the government persuaded an Antifa-supporting jury he conspired to overthrow the US government, even though Tarrio was not in Washington DC on January 6. His co-defendants were also handed the highest sentences to date for merely trespassing in the building and committing no violent crimes during the protest — 18 years for Ethan Nordean, 17 years for Joe Biggs, 15 years for Zachary Rehl and 10 years for Dominic Pezzola.
Murderers are being handed lighter sentences than J6 political hostages.
Meanwhile, so-called racial justice demonstrators are being awarded millions of dollars after getting arrested during their protests where they destroyed property, torched historic buildings, and attempted to storm the White House.
In September, New York City agreed to pay at least $35 million to settle allegations of police misconduct and civil rights violations by police against people protesting the 2020 death of George Floyd, including $10 million for protesters who were kettled during a demonstration in the South Bronx. More than 600 people have reportedly brought individual claims against the city, many of which are still pending.
In April 2022, a federal jury awarded $14 million to 12 Denver racial justice activists who sued police for hitting them with pepper balls and a bag filled with lead during the 2020 Floyd demonstrations. The jury found police used excessive force against protesters, violating their constitutional rights.
In April 2021, the city of Washington reached a $1.6 million settlement in two lawsuits that included excessive force on protesters and allegations of arrests without cause during the inauguration of former President Donald Trump in January 2017. The American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia, representing the plaintiffs warned in a statement about the settlement that the police “engaged in or supervised constitutional violations including mass arrests of demonstrators without probable cause, unlawful conditions of confinement for detainees, and/or use of excessive force.”
The ACLU said that even though just a few protesters caused damage and engaged in violence, police rounded up more than 200 protestors and “detained them without access to food, water, or restrooms for up to 16 hours.”The conduct of Metropolitan Police Department officers was investigated by the city’s Police Complaints Board.
In May 2020, Secret Service agents rushed President Donald Trump to a White House bunker as hundreds of Democrat-sanctioned “social justice warriors” gathered outside the executive mansion throwing rocks and tugging at police barricades. Despite sparking one of the highest alerts on the White House, the worldwide headquarters of the US military and the nation, since the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, none of the left-wing rioters were sentenced to decades in prison for endangering the sitting president.
Where are the lawsuits filed on behalf of all the January 6 protesters who were injured by rubber bullets, flashbang grenades, shrapnel, and teargas on January 6 and were mercilessly beaten by police? How many protesters had to make their way from the protest to the emergency room?
The Gateway Pundit spoke with former J6 defense attorney-turned-paralegal Jonathon Moseley, who is currently in the midst of J6 litigation, about the prospects of filing a lawsuit against the District of Columbia, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, the Metropolitan Police Department and the Capitol Police Department for civil rights abuses and police brutality on behalf of January 6 protesters.
Moseley cautioned, “There are way too many J6 defendants and not nearly enough lawyers.”
“In any other area, you’d expect lawyers to be lining up and wanting to take the case. But here there’s a there’s a chronic shortage of lawyers willing to do the work on January 6,” he told TGP in an exclusive interview. “It’s a matter it’s a matter of time, money and effort. When lawyers are defending these people who were injured by police during the protest, they are faced with the urgent problem of the defendant being sentenced to jail or prison.
“There are lots of lawsuits that people want to file over the use of the misuse of tear gas, but the civil lawsuits are being completely ignored because the criminal cases are too important,” he continued. “It’s just a matter of too much work and not enough time.
“What’s the legality of police beating unarmed protesters? It is illegal. Liberals have won lawsuits on that. They’ve won millions of dollars for groups of people. So, there’s your legality. The left files lawsuits against police brutality and unconstitutional detention all the time. The first thing you need is a plaintiff. The second thing you need is a lawyer who’s not afraid of his own shadow. ”
Mosely is calling on attorneys around the country to represent J6 defendants amid a judicial crisis that perils the First Amendment.
“Lawyers from any jurisdiction can practice law in DC federal court if a local lawyer waves them in — about half of the lawyers who are currently working for January 6, defendants are not local DC lawyers.”
Asked what it would cost to wage a legal battle against the District of Columbia over police brutality on January 6, akin to the lawsuits filed by the ACLU, Moseley cautioned “A lawyer has to be financially successful enough to have money available to litigate the case for years before they get a payday.”
“And they might never get paid,” he added. “They have to have enough money origin the bank to afford to gamble and lose.
“If your lawyer is not willing to do it on contingency, has enough money in the bank to risk losing, you would probably need at least $50,000 raised for this sort of lawsuit. And the other issue is, no matter how good the lawyer is, the factual research is a ton of work. There’s a lot of details that lawyers don’t know. We need people that want to just do research and volunteer to pull things together.”
The most seasoned attorneys with the most compelling presentations, exposing all the crimes committed by police on January 6, will still be confronted with the same biased federal judges who preside over the nearly 100 percent conviction rate of J6 defendants.
“Research is crucial, but the judges will ignore it. I’ve had judges practically scoff at the Constitution,” Mosely said. “We try to argue from the Constitution, they’ll kind of like throw their hands in the air and look disgusting. They pretend they pretend to listen to defense motions, and then always, you know, barely turn every issue in favor of the prosecution.”
President Trump’s Latest “Motion to Compel Discovery” Exposes Foreign Interference in 2020 Election in “One of the Worst Cybersecurity Incidents in History”
Yesterday, President Trump’s legal team submitted a motion to compel discovery in the Washington DC case in which he is charged with conspiring to overturn the 2020 Presidential Election. Trump’s attorneys state that the case in Washington DC “reflects little more than partisan advocacy designed to sabotage President Trump’s leading campaign for the 2024 Presidential Election.”
On October 26th, 2023, Trump’s legal team submitted a Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) Notice and Objection to Unauthorized Deletions of Classified Information objecting to certain redactions in certain classified discovery items:
“…the Special Counsel’s Office argued that “the classified discovery issues” in this case are “limited,” “tangential,” “narrow,” and “incidental” because the charges…do not rely on classified materials.”
To which Trump’s counsel responded:
“…the government appears to have looked with tunnel vision at limited issues it believed were relevant.”
and that
“The Indictment in this case adopts classified assessments by the Intelligence Community and others that minimized, and at times ignored, efforts by foreign actors to influence and interfere with the 2020 election. President Trump will offer classified information at trial relating to foreign influence activities that impacted the 2016 and 2020 elections, as well as efforts by his administration to combat those activities. President Trump will also present classified information relating to the biased and politicized nature of the intelligence assessments that he and others rejected during the events in question.”
On November 17th, 2020, President Trump fired Chris Krebs, the director of the Cybersecurity Infrastructure and Security Administration, regarding his “most secure election in American history,” claiming the statement was “highly inaccurate.”
In the Motion to Compel filing, regarding the “SolarWinds “SUNBURST” Attack, Trump’s counsel alleges that:
“…between January 2019 and at least December 2020, parties reportedly linked to Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Services…perpetrated what the SEC recently described as “one of the worst cybersecurity incidents in history.” In connection with what is now known as the “SUNBURST attack,”
[T]he threat actors inserted malicious code into three software builds [bold added] for SolarWinds’ Orion products. SolarWinds then delivered these compromised products to more than 18,000 customers across the globe. The malicious code provided the threat actors with the ability to access the systems of these compromised customers [bold added], provided certain other conditions were met, and became known as the SUNBURST attack.
During the attack:
[T]hreat actors conducted reconnaissance, exfiltration, and data collection; identified product and network vulnerabilities; harvested credentials of SolarWinds employees and customers; and planned additional attacks against SolarWinds’ products that would be deployed during later stages of the campaign.
They claim the malicious code provides a “backdoor” into the network’s of SolarWinds customers who were using the infected versions of the software. Once SolarWinds was made aware of the vulnerabilities and the ensuing “SUNBURST” attack, the SEC claimed “[SolarWinds] did not fully disclose its known impact.”
Following the discovery of the attack, the New York Times reported that it impacted the DOJ, DHS, State, Treasury, and Commerce Departments, the National Security Agency, and parts of the Pentagon, among others.
Ironically,Chris Krebs, after being fired, would go on to form the Krebs Stamos Group with Stanford Internet Observatory founder Alex Stamos. Stamos’s Stanford Internet Observatory, along with The University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, Graphika, and The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab were members of the Election Integrity Partnership. They infamously published “The Long Fuse” report, which explicitly admits to “engag[ing] with government stakeholders primarily to provide analytical capability and context around election-related misinformation.”
The Long Fuse Report also admits to a corroboration with the EI-ISAC, which was a “singular conduit for election officials to report false or misleading information to platforms.”
When Stamos and Krebs formed the Krebs Stamos Group, their first customer was…you guessed it…SolarWinds.
Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon have an interesting conversation about what happens within “Democratic” nations when the process of voting no longer generates the changes that are demanded by the citizens.
When elected officials put themselves in a position to stand above the citizens of the country, things start to get very unsustainable. The recent events in Ireland show what happens when the citizens finally say enough is enough. Direct Rumble Link – WATCH:
Conservative historian and professor Victor Davis Hanson has released a new video and it is basically a warning for America.
The essence of Hanson’s message is a reminder of how far the left went to stop Trump last time and that people should be prepared for them to do anything this time.
It’s an ominous warning but it’s important to think ahead and be mentally prepared for anything, because that’s what is on the table.
VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: They look at Trump as a vampire and they put a stake in his heart but they’re afraid that that stake could come out any time. That he’s undying and they’re afraid of him. They are terrified of him.
They are terrified of him because they think he’s smarter this time and he has just cause to really get angry because of what they did to him. They can write all of The Atlantic Monthly and New Yorker clever, glib little essays about “Donald Trump is a threat to democracy,” and their little Molly Ball in Time Magazine essays how clever and brilliant they were with their cabals and conspiracies to get rid of him.
But deep down inside they know that if the right ever did that to Barack Obama or Joe Biden, they could have really made something out of the fact that Barack Obama had a hot mic expose where he told the president of Russia, “You tell Vladimir that I will be flexible on missile defense.” That’s the security of the United States of America. “If he gives me space in my last election.” Putin did do that. That’s an impeachable offense if a phone call to Ukraine is. So they understand that, the right could have done that to them, and they understand now the right probably will do that to them for their own survival, and they are scared.
They’re saying that if a MAGA candidate wins, and they win the House and Senate, they’re cooked because they’re going to get special prosecutors and go after the Biden family like they’ve never gone after anybody.
Watch the whole thing below:
The left is terrified of another Trump victory. What wouldn’t they do to prevent it?
]
NarrowPathMinistries 
