Posted originally on the CTH on February 22, 2023 | Sundance
Putting aside the rules of grand juries speaking to media that do not apply because the Fulton County, GA, group was not a regular grand jury – but rather a “special grand jury”, you might be interested to watch the foreperson of the group speak to MSNBC.
No, really, trust me.… you need to see this. Pick your spot on the video, just about any spot, and watch it. I have it prompted to my favorite. WATCH:
.
Keep in mind Ms. Emily Kohrs was the “special grand jury” foreperson. lolol. Now that you have an idea about the, well, ‘flavor’ of what the Georgia “special grand jury” was all about, the reminder is below.
In May of 2022 Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis assembled what is called a “special grand jury” to review claims that President Donald Trump attempted to coerce Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to find votes and assist him in winning the November 2020 election.
The “special grand jury” exists outside the traditional justice system and as an outcome cannot produce indictments. It was assembled, for all intents and purposes, as a quasi-grand jury with the intent on creating a continual political effort through a process best described as lawfare.
Essentially, the “special grand jury” is a panel of 26 selected Fulton County, GA, citizens to give an opinion as to whether District Attorney Willis should move toward holding Trump era officials accountable for unlawful election interference. The ‘special grand jury‘ provided the media with feeder material to maintain a narrative; they also heard testimony from 75 witnesses. However, President Trump was never subpoenaed by this ‘special grand jury.’
Because the ‘special grand jury‘ is not necessarily subject to the same rules that apply to normal grand jury proceedings, which strictly forbid any traditional grand jury activity from public release (4th and 5th U.S. Amendment issue), Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney said parts of the narrative from the ‘special grand jury‘ assembly could be released to the public.
The excerpt of the ‘special grand jury‘ that was released did not assert any legal issue with the baseline for their formation, meaning no substantive finding of election interference. However, as you are likely aware, ‘lawfare’ focuses on the process side – and the strategy is to find unlawful activity within the process of a target defending himself/herself from the targeting itself.
To that end, the ‘special grand jury’ suspects that some of the witnesses who testified afore them may have lacked candor in their testimony. The potential for perjury in front of the ‘special grand jury‘ now becomes the issue of focus.
(GEORGIA) – […] “A majority of the grand jury believes that perjury may have been committed by one or more witnesses testifying before it,” the grand jury wrote in the report. “The Grand Jury recommends that the District Attorney seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling.”
The report does not list any names of those who grand jury members believe may have committed perjury.
Separately, the grand jury also found “by a unanimous vote that no widespread fraud took place in the Georgia 2020 presidential election that could result in overturning that election.”
Outside of this, in the few paragraphs that were released of the report’s introduction, conclusion, and section on perjury, there were no details revealed regarding whether or not the grand jury recommended changes for anyone related to efforts to overturn the election.
The report does not name any potential targets for indictment, nor does it offer any rationale for its allegations of perjury. It does not mention Trump by name, nor any of the 75 witnesses interviewed as part of their probe. (read more)
You did not hit the dog in downtown Atlanta on I-75 with your Mercedes on August 14th, 2020. You do not own a Mercedes and you were not in Georgia at all that year. However, your brother testified you were in the Bahamas on vacation in August 2020, and the evidence shows that vacation was in July. Therefore, while you are not guilty of hitting the dog, your brother is guilty of perjury. That’s lawfare. See how it works?
Sign the plea for misdemeanor endangerment of the dog, pay the fine, and the D.A. will leave your brother alone.
From the article: “[…] Norman Eisen, a senior fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institute who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee from 2019 to 2020, told ABC News that despite the judge shielding most of the report, “it’s clear from the judge’s order that the grand jury recommended charges.”
“The question is: I don’t think that if people are being charged, Trump can logically be left out, because he was the ringleader,” Eisen told ABC News. “He was the mastermind of the plots.”
Posted originally on the CTH on February 21, 2023 | Sundance
Speaking today in Poland, amid carefully managed stage theatrics, lighting and dramatic entrance for emphasis, Joe Biden said:
…”I speak once more to the people of Russia. The United States and the nations of Europe do not seek to control or destroy Russia. The West was not planning to attack Russia as Putin said today, and millions of Russian citizens who only want to live in peace with their neighbors are not the enemy”…
Given the reality that every foreign policy statement from the people around Joe Biden carries the exact opposite in both intent and outcome, we should now prepare for the Biden administration, CIA and U.S. State Department to begin open offensive military action directly targeting Russia. Yes, this statement means it is time to start worrying.
Posted originally on the CYH on February 20, 2023 | Sundance
Matt Taibbi is a smart guy, he’ll get there. I’m not sure why my gut says to trust him, but it does – and I do. Recently he’s been getting hit by the leftists who are asking why Taibbi is not looking at the Trump administration pressure on social media to control and manipulate public information [Twitter Here].
Taibbi has been hitting back against his detractors by saying, there’s no evidence of Trump doing that; yet there is massive evidence of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) contacting Twitter to do exactly that.
This is interesting to me and CTH readers because we outlined in real time what the SSCI and HPSCI were doing in order to promote the Trump-Russia conspiracy before and after the 2016 election.
What’s fascinating about this… is that the same people who are attacking Taibbi right now, are the same people who received and promoted the propaganda from the SSCI (Burr and Warner) in addition to the HPSCI (Schiff and Swalwell).
In essence, the ancillary media attack hounds are attacking Taibbi because at the end of the research trail Taibbi is following he will find the same names of the ancillary media who are attacking him.
In my opinion, Taibbi is on the right trail in following the SSCI and HPSCI manipulation of the social media platforms, specifically Twitter. In addition to the SSCI creating the structure that supports the intelligence weaponization by DHS and FBI, Senate Intel Chair Richard Burr and then Senate Intel Vice-Chair Mark Warner are at the epicenter of it.
I know I sound like a broken record on this, but it’s been true since the outset of my own research discoveries of the issue four years ago. The entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative couldn’t exist without the SSCI participating in it. This is why I have talked and written so much about it.
Factually, and I say this with no compunction for attribution, if you want to tell the public the story of the larger issue, the absolute best starting point is how SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner told SSCI Security Director James Wolfe to leak the Carter Page FISA application to then Politico journalist Ali Watkins. It’s an easy story to outline because there is ample evidence to highlight it, including open admissions by the DOJ and FBI (in documented court records) that the leak event on March 17, 2017, took place.
That week in mid-March, 2017, when Mark Warner leaked the Page FISA application followed two days later by James Comey testifying to congress (March 20th), was/is the most openly documented evidence-based story that leads to everything that follows.
On March 17, 2017, Senator Mark Warner leaked the FISA in order to stimulate the media to support the demand for a Trump-Russia special counsel. On March 20, 2017, holding the exact same motive, FBI Director James Comey first made the public admission that President Donald Trump was under FBI investigation for the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy. Senator Warner and Director Comey held the exact same motive.
Everything done by the SSCI before and after that mid-March event, touches everything before and after the special counsel was appointed. It’s like a fulcrum point that creates massive tentacles into the entire apparatus of the effort by the legislative branch, the executive branch, the intelligence community and the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel to cover it up.
Expose that moment on March 17, 2017, and the entire house of cards built by Weissmann/Mueller and the DC media apparatus collapses.
There is not another single moment during the entire arc of the Trump-Russia madness, that creates the inflection point as well as the March 17, 2017, leak. EXAMPLE:
Keep cheering on Matt Taibbi. Keep supporting him as he follows this trail. Yes, you know where it ends, but you are a select rare few who have followed this story. Taibbi can blow it wide open if he continues.
Additionally, remember and understand that the entirety of the media apparatus was in on this scheme.
Every single outlet promoted the narrative that was collectively pushed by Senator Mark Warner, Director James Comey, the corrupt intelligence apparatus and the Robert Mueller special counsel. They are all opposed to Taibbi following this trail.
Posted originally on the CTH on February 16, 2023 | Sundance
Apparently almost every media outlet buried the lead. According to analysis from combined intelligence operations of the U.S government, last week the Biden administration ordered U.S. military fighter jets to launch missiles and shoot down of what is now believed to be “balloons belonging to private companies, recreation, or research institutions.” WATCH (w/ transcript below):
[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. Last week, in the immediate aftermath of the incursion by China’s high-altitude balloon, our military, through the North American Aerospace Defense Command — so-called NOR- — NORAD — closely scrutinized the — our airspace, including enhancing our radar to pick up more slow-moving objects above our country and around the world.
In doing so, they tracked three unidentified objects: one in Alaska, Canada, and over Lake Huron in the Midwest.
They acted in accordance with established parameters for determining how to deal with unidentified aerial objects in U.S. airspace.
At their recommendation, I gave the order to take down these three objects due to hazards to civilian commercial air traffic and because we could not rule out the surveillance risk of sensitive facilities.
We acted in consultation with the Canadian government. I spoke personally with Prime Minister Trudeau and Ca- — from Canada on Saturday.
And just as critically, we acted out of an abundance of caution and at an opportunity that allowed us to take down these — these objects safely.
Our military and the Canadian military are seeking to recover the debris so we can learn more about these three objects. Our intelligence community is still assessing all three incidences. They’re reporting to me daily and will continue their urgent efforts to do so, and I will communicate that to the Congress.
We don’t yet know exactly what these three objects were. But nothing — nothing right now suggests they were related to China’s spy balloon program or that they were surveillance vehicles from other — any other country.
The intelligence community’s current assessment is that these three objects were most likely balloons tied to private companies, recreation, or research institutions studying weather or conducting other scientific research.
When I came into office, I instructed our intelligence community to take a broad look at the phenomenon of unidentified aerial objects.
We know that a range of entities, including countries, companies, and research organizations operate objects at altitudes for purposes that are not nefarious, including legitimate scientific research.
I want to be clear: We don’t have any evidence that there has been a sudden increase in the number of objects in the sky. We’re now just seeing more of them, partially because the steps we’ve taken to increase our radars — to narrow our radars. And we have to keep adapting our approach to delaying — to dealing with these challenges.
That’s why I’ve directed my team to come back to me with sharper rules for how we will deal with these unidentified objects moving forward, distinguishing — distinguishing between those that are likely to pose safety and security risks that necessitate action and those that do not.
But make no mistake, if any object presents a threat to the safety and security of the American people, I will take it down. I’ll be sharing with Congress these classified policy parameters when they’re completed, and they’ll remain classified so we don’t give our roadmap to our enemies to try to evade our defenses.
Going forward, these parameters will guide what actions we will take while responding to unmanned and unidentified aerial objects. We’re going to keep adapting them as the challenges evolve, if it evolves.
In addition, we’ve derived — I’ve directly my National Security Advisor to lead a government-wide effort to make sure we are positioned to deal safely and effectively with the objects in our airspace.
First, we will establish a better inventory of unmanned airborne objects in space — above the United States’ airspace and make sure that inventory is accessible and up to date.
Second, we’ll implement further measures to improve our capacity to detect unmanned objecti- — objects in our airspace.
Third, we’ll update the rules and regulations for launching and maintaining unmanned objects in the skies above the United States of America.
And fourth, my Secretary of State will lead an effort to help establish a global — a globa- — a common global norms in this largely unregulated space.
These steps will lead to safer and more secure skies for our air travelers, our military, our scientists, and for people on the ground as well. That’s my job as your President and Commander-in-Chief.
As the events of the previous days have shown, we’ll always act to protect the interest of the American people and the security of the American people.
Since I came into office, we’ve developed the ability to identify, track, and study high-altitude surveillance balloons connected with the Chinese military.
When one of these high-altitude surveillance balloons entered our airspace over the continental United States earlier in the month, I gave the order to shoot it down as soon as it would be safe to do so. The military advised against shooting it down over land because of the sheer size of it. It was the size of multiple school busses, and it posed a risk to people on the ground if it was shot down where people lived.
Instead, we tracked it closely, we analyzed its capabilities, and we learned more about how it operates.
And because we knew its path, we were able to protect sensitive sites against collection.
We waited until it was safely over water, which would not only protect civilians but also enable us to recover substantial components for further analys- — for further analytics.
And then we shot it down, sending a clear message — clear message: The violation of our sovereignty is unacceptable.
We will act to protect our country, and we did.
Now, this past Friday, we put restrictions on six firms that directly support the People’s Republic Liberation Army — the People’s Lib- — the People’s Liberation Army aerospace program that includes airships and balloons, denying them access to U.S. technology.
We briefed our diplomatic partners and our allies around the world, and we know about China’s program and where their balloons have flown.
Some of them have also raised their concerns directly with China. Our exports [experts] have lifted components of the Chinese balloon’s payload off the ocean floor. We’re analyzing them as I speak, and what we learn will strengthen our capabilities.
Now, we’ll also continue to engage with China, as we have throughout the past two weeks. As I’ve said since the beginning of my administration, we seek competition, not conflict, with China. We’re not looking for a new Cold War.
But I make no apologize — I make no apologies, and we will compete. And we’ll be res- — we’ll responsibly manage that competition so that it doesn’t veer into conflict.
This episode underscores the importance of maintaining open lines of communication between our diplomats and our military professionals. Our diplomats will be engaging further, and I will remain in communication with President Xi.
I’m grateful for the work over the last several weeks of our intelligence, diplomatic, and military professionals who have proved once again to be the most capable in the world. And I want to thank you all.
Now, look, the other thing I want to point is that we are going to keep our allies and the Congress contemporaneously informed of all we know and all we learn. And I expect to be speaking with President Xi, and I hope we have a — we are going to get to the bottom of this. But I make no apologies for taking down that balloon.
Thank you very much.
(Cross-talk by reporters.)
Q Mr. President, why did you wait so long to address the public on this matter, Mr. President?
Q Sir, there’s been a criticism — there’s been criticism of this —
Q When are you speaking to President Xi, Mr. President?
Q Is this deal with China compromised by your family’s business relationships in China, President Biden?
THE PRESIDENT: Give me a break, man. (Laughs.) (Inaudible.)
Q Sir — Mr. President — Mr. President, there’s been criticism —
Q Did you overreact?
Q — Mr. President, there’s been criticism that this was an overreaction that was done because of political pressure —
(Cross-talk by reporters.)
THE PRESIDENT: I can’t —
Q Is your son still (inaudible) —
THE PRESIDENT: You can come to my office and ask the question when you have more polite people (inaudible).
There’s a press briefing for 1:00pm today, scheduled to include National Security Council coordinator for strategic communications at the White House, John Kirby, explaining the latest developments in the ongoing U.S. aerial battles with unidentified flying objects.
Normally, I would not find these propaganda sessions with the stenographers too interesting; however, the bizarre stupidity of the entire UFO fiasco has even the most ardent regime stenographers starting to be embarrassed about the narrative engineering they are being tasked to advance. So, the briefing is at 1:00pm ET.
Posted originally on the CTH on February 13, 2023 | Sundance
The statements by National Security Council coordinator for strategic communications at the White House, John Kirby, could not be more incredulous if he tried. “The truth is that we haven’t been able to gain access to the objects that were shot down Friday, Saturday and yesterday because of the weather conditions. The third one was shot down yesterday over Lake Huron so it’s underwater,” Kirby declared earlier this morning.
According to John Kirby, the pentagon has no idea what objects they have shot out of the sky, no idea what they are used for, no idea where they came from and not a single one of the three this weekend has been recovered. At this point all of these government officials are beclowning themselves.
Kirby even says these objects could be commercial in nature, belonging to some tech company doing mapping etc and do not have to be ‘nefarious at all’. Yet if that were the case, the people who launched them would need licenses and would likely be making some form of admission. This is well beyond silly.
According to Kirby, “there could be totally explainable reasons for why these objects are flying around all there,” he said, adding, “there are corporate entities that operate these kind of things, we just don’t know as soon as we can get to the debris we’ll share what we can. It doesn’t have to be nefarious.“
Pentagon officials held a press conference Sunday night in the middle of the Super Bowl. They failed to answer any questions. General Glen VanHerck was specifically asked if it’s possible the objects are indicative of extraterrestrial life; yes, aliens. General VanHerk’s response, “I’ll let the intel community and the counterintelligence community figure that out. I haven’t ruled out anything,” he said.
Goofy. All of it.
Kirby will deliver another briefing from the White House at 1:00pm ET.
Posted originally on the CTH on February 12, 2023 | Sundanc
It’s not just random data points. It is an alignment of multiple datapoints, appearing at random intervals, that all align in one very specific direction.
The key is being able to spot them. WATCH (1 min):
[BACKGROUND] … “This is where the RGA looks to have been recruited for a larger role in 2024 than was deployed in 2016. Keep an eye on Republican governors and how they position their advocacy and endorsements.” {GO DEEP}
An ideological alignment of individual people, institutions and organizations working in concert toward a common goal is not a conspiracy. Once the objective of the common interest is identified, all benefactory components operate individually. What becomes visible is the similarity of the actions.
This is where we see patterns and common actions taken toward a common goal. This reality is the context to understand how the political dynamic is constructed in opposition to Donald Trump, and more specifically how the America First policy platform of Presidential candidate Donald Trump is viewed as a common threat.
Individuals, institutions, government ‘stakeholders’, and generally all status-quo interests stand in opposition, as reflected in the historic Niccolò Machiavelli quote:
“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”
When the new system is constructed to the benefit of the many yet disrupts the status of the few (the proverbial elite) who benefit from retention of the old, those in the at-risk minority must pretend not to know things. Additionally, through passive aggressive undermining that same elite group frame their opposition to provide themselves plausible deniability.
It is in this political mix of eclectic interests where a person needs an intellectual filtration system, tuned to the granular nuances, in order to make sense of the landscape and see the big picture.
Posted Originally on the CTH on February 12, 2023 | Sundance
If you accept the likelihood of the 2024 Wall Street Republican roadmap being the defining difference between 2016 and 2024, then you can easily see how the Republican Governor’s Association (RGA), the state level system where the policy of GOP governors are purchased by big money, will be the driving influence. It is into this mixed manipulation where New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu becomes of strategic value.
Someone has to try and maintain the narrative of “free markets” as a Republican priority, enter Chris Sununu. Readers here and middle-class workers of America have decades of experience seeing exactly what the outcome of Republican “free market” capitalism creates. Selling out the U.S. worker and manufacturing base in favor of globalism, multinational corporate exploitation and profits at any cost are the result. In modern economic reality, there is no such thing as a “free market,” there are only controlled markets {GO DEEP}.
Pushing the conservative ‘free market’ narrative, the corporate controlled Chris Sununu appears on Face the Nation to gaslight the base republican voter with old catchphrases that used to work; they no longer do. People can now see through the rustbelt prism and identify the destruction created by the Wall Street funded UniParty apparatus. This is what 2024 presidential candidate Chris Sununu is trying to lie about. However, no republican candidate is an economic nationalist, except President Donald Trump. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We’re joined now by the Republican governor of New Hampshire, Chris Sununu. And it’s good to have you here…
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU (R-New Hampshire): Thanks.
MARGARET BRENNAN: … in person.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Great to be here. Better here than the rest of Washington, because this whole town gives me the — it gives me the chills sometimes.
(LAUGHTER)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, you might need to go get over that if you’re going to run for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, as, apparently, you are considering doing.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Well, look, a lot of opportunity to change things, right?
I think New Hampshire has this awesome model of live free or die, limited government, local control, individual responsibility, really putting the voters first, send them some money, which is nice, but send them the regulatory authority too.
So a little decentralizing out of Washington and maybe a little better attitude would be — would be a good thing for America.
MARGARET BRENNAN: What’s the proactive reason you want to be president, not something that President Biden is doing wrong…
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Sure.
MARGARET BRENNAN: … but something you want to achieve?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Yes, which is the right question you’re asking, by the way, because I — it drives me crazy when Republicans talk in an echo chamber about how bad the president is, and Democrats.
We got the memo, as Republicans. You got to be for something. What I’m trying to do is kind of show that New Hampshire model, show the opportunity to get stuff done. I have had Republicans in my legislature. I have Democrats in my legislature. I always get my conservative agendas done.
We always cut taxes. We always balance a budget. And I can explain to folks in Washington what a balanced budget actually means. So, there are paths. And I think America is looking for results. We need results-driven leadership, not just leadership that…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Like what?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Look, whether it’s cutting taxes, being pro- business, the regulatory reform, the immigration stuff that we were told was going to happen in 2017 and 2018 as Republicans, and it didn’t.
We were told health care reform would happen. It didn’t. We were told we were going to secure the border, and we didn’t. So, there’s all this great opportunity that has a domino effect. They’re not just things to check off a list, but those things have huge impacts on the American economy and, most importantly, American families, right?
They just want flexibility to do what they do. And, frankly, they’re tired of the nonsense in D.C. They’re tired of — of extreme candidates. They’re tired of gridlock. They want somebody to come to the table. And it could be myself. It could be other governors. It could — but it has to be leadership with proven results.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: I have been in the private sector as an engineer and a business leader. I have been in the public sector. You got to be able to deliver.
And you got to, hopefully, be inspirational and hopeful, as opposed to all this negativity you see.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But you still have to get the Congress to work with you to do that very long laundry list of things you just read off to us.
So, when you were here in November, you told us that President Biden would not run for president, in your estimation. You just saw him up close for the past few days.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that still what you believe?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Well, I know other people will definitely run. They’re going to get in the race.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Democrats, you believe, will challenge him?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Oh, absolutely, yes, yes, because…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Why do you say that? Did someone tell you that in the last few days?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Well, Joe Biden has tried to move the first-in-the- nation primary from New Hampshire, right? But we’re going to — we’re going first, whether the president likes it or not.
And so that’s going to be a huge opportunity for anybody who wants to step up and challenge him. And if you look at the polls across the country, the average Democrat says, yes, thanks for your service on one term, but let’s keep it to one term, President Biden.
And I just don’t believe the Democrat left-wing elite is going to sit on the sidelines, knowing you could come to New Hampshire, get all the earned media, all the attention…
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: … without a whole lot of money, all that political momentum. He’s opened up his political flank, so to say, to give someone else a huge opportunity to charge right through and take that nomination from him.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we’ll see if your — if your projection plays out.
You’ve been talking about trying to sort of remind the party that Republicans are about limited government.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You said recently: “Republicans are almost trying to outdo Democrats at their own game of being big government and having a solution and a say on everything.”
Who were you thinking of when you say that?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Oh, there’s a lot — look, I think there’s a lot of leadership out there that forget — that forgets.
At heart, I’m a principled free market conservative. Let the markets decide. So there’s no individual, per se, but there’s a lot of leadership that says, you know what, when we’re not getting that result out of a private business or locality, we’ll just impose from the top down our conservative will.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re not talking…
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: … about the Florida governor and Disney, for example, are you?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Well, that’s a bad example. Yes, that’s — that’s an example, one of the many examples you see out there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Ron DeSantis may be running for president as well.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Sure. Yes.
Yes, look, Ron’s a very good governor. He is. But I’m just trying to remind folks what we are at our core. And if we’re trying to beat the Democrats at being big government authoritarians, remember what’s going to happen. Eventually, they’ll have power in a state or in a position, and then they’ll start penalizing conservative businesses and conservative nonprofits and conservative ideas.
That is the worst precedent in the world. That’s exactly what the founding fathers tried not to — tried to avoid. And so I’m trying to remind my conservative friends about federalism, free markets, and being for the voter first, being for the individual.
Do I like what every private business says? No, I hate this woke cancel culture. But it’s a cultural…
MARGARET BRENNAN: What does that mean to you then?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Woke cancel culture?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Oh, it’s — it’s — look, it’s…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because you’re not a culture warrior, really.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: No, no, no. No, but it’s there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: What does woke cult — what does that mean in your platform?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: It’s the — it’s the divisiveness — divisiveness we see not just in our schools, but in our communities, where it is me vs. you, whereas, if you are not adhering to my ideals, then I’m going to cancel you out.
It is us vs. them. It is this binary where everything’s a war. That’s a cultural problem we have to fix in America. And it starts with good leadership, good messaging, more hopeful and optimistic. But government never solves a cultural problem.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK. Well…
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: We can lead on it, but we never solve it.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Interesting idea, but you are contradicted by the Republican governor of Arkansas, who gave the response for your party after the State of the Union, who embraced culture war.
She says America’s in one.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Yes, we are.
MARGARET BRENNAN: She says it’s been waged by the left wing, “a woke mob that can’t even tell you what a woman is.”
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: That’s absolutely right. And that’s…
MARGARET BRENNAN: I mean, are you going to engage on things like this, like — like Sanders and DeSantis has in terms of issues on gender and issues of race?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: There should be absolute leadership on that about what that’s about.
And this idea that you have to — you know, we have forced language, that we have forced ideas on our kids, that we’re going to force anything…
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you are going to be a culture warrior?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: No, we have to talk about that, but it isn’t the government’s role to solve it.
The government is not here to solve your problems. It’s not. The government is here to include as many…
(CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, governors shouldn’t be actually talking and engaging and telling school boards and doing things like this or trying to pass laws like they are?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: I don’t think governors should be trying to pass laws to subvert the will of the voters that know better than us.
Voters are — know more than I do. The voters on that school board know, the voters in those towns know a lot more. And if — that’s the free market of politics. If they don’t like the school board, they get — they go to a town meeting, they fire them.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You are — you call yourself a pro-choice Republican.
You still have to win in a Republican primary.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Sure.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is there room for someone who calls himself a pro-choice Republican?
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: Oh, yes, look, that issue is — look, that issue is going to change three different ways now that Dobbs has happened, right? States can decide what they want to do, right?
So, I think the definition of pro-life and pro-choice and pro-abortion are — are going to be very different, because if you’re a pro-life Republican, that’s fine. That’s — as a governor, you can do that. You can ban it in your state, and you can stay — stand behind those ideals. And maybe that’s exactly what your state wants. No problem.
I’m a pro-choice Republican in a very pro-choice state. But, at the end of the day, you’re going to have the pro-lifer over here…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: .. pro-abortion over here, and then the rest of us are, well, we have a 24-week ban, and you have a 22-week…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
GOVERNOR CHRIS SUNUNU: … and an 18-week ban.
So, the rest of us are kind of in this spectrum of debating about weeks. So that the whole conversation is going to change.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We want to talk about some of these issues in-depth with you in a moment, so stay with us, Governor.
And we’re going to bring in a panel of bipartisan governors with us.
Positive debate on solutions and constructive criticism of approach is always appropriate for our elected officials; heck, that is the essence of our discussion. However, recently there have been many critics of President Trump; many people only just now understanding the problem and proclaiming that President Trump specifically did not do enough to block, impede, stop and counteract the globalist forces that were/are aligned against his effort to Make America Great Again.
Hindsight is 20/20, but there are people who proclaim that Donald J Trump should have been more wise in his counsel; more selective in his cabinet; more forceful in his confrontation of corporate globalists. Let me be clear….
I will never join that crew of Trump critics because I have understood his adversary for decades. CTH did not just come around to the understanding of the enemy. CTH has been outlining the scope of the enemy, the scale of the specific war and the financial and economic power of the opposition for over a decade. We understand the totality of the effort it will take to stop decades of willful blindness amid the American people. We also see with clear eyes exactly what they are doing now, even with President Trump forcefully removed from office, to destroy the threat he still represents.
Donald J Trump was/is a walking red-pill; a “touchstone”: a visible, empirical test or criterion for determining the quality or genuineness of anything political. I have been deep enough into the network of the Deep State to understand the scale and scope of this enemy. To think that President Trump alone could carry the burden of correcting four decades of severe corruption of all things political, without simultaneously considering the scale of the financial opposition, is naive in the extreme.
♦ POTUS Trump was disrupting the global order of things in order to protect and preserve the shrinking interests of the U.S. He was fighting, almost single-handed, at the threshold of the abyss. Our American interests, our MAGAnomic position, was/is essentially zero-sum. His DC and Wall-Street aligned opposition (writ large) needed to repel and retain the status-quo. They desperately wanted him removed so they could return to full economic control over the U.S, because it is the foundation of their power.
You want to criticize him for fighting harder against those interests than any single man has ever done before him? If so, do it without me.
I am thankful for the awakening Donald J Trump has provided.
I am thankful now for the opportunity to fight with people who finally understand the scale of our opposition.
Without Donald J Trump these entities would still be operating in the shadows. With Donald J Trump we can clearly see who the real enemy is.
In these economic endeavors President Trump was disrupting decades of financial schemes established to use the U.S. as a host for their endeavors. President Trump was confronting multinational corporations and the global constructs of economic systems that were put in place to the detriment of the host (USA) ie YOU. There are trillions at stake; it is all about the economics; everything else is chaff and countermeasures.
The road to a “service-driven economy” is paved with a great disparity between financial classes. The wealth gap is directly related to the inability of the middle-class to thrive.
Elite financial interests, including those within Washington DC, gain wealth and power, the U.S. workforce is reduced to servitude, “service”, of their affluent needs.
The destruction of the U.S. industrial and manufacturing base is EXACTLY WHY the middle class has struggled, and exactly why the wealth gap exploded in the past 30 years.
Behind this dynamic we find the international corporate and financial interests who are inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.
When we understand how trade works in the modern era we understand why the agents within the system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.
♦The biggest lie in modern economics, willingly spread and maintained by corporate media, is that a system of global markets still exists.
It doesn’t.
Every element of global economic trade is controlled and exploited by massive institutions, multinational banks and multinational corporations. Institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Bank control trillions of dollars in economic activity.
Underneath that economic activity there are people who hold the reigns of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of America-First national economics. Collectively known as “The Big Club”.
The modern financial constructs of these entities have been established over the course of the past three decades. When you understand how they manipulate the economic system of individual nations you begin to understand why they are so fundamentally opposed to President Trump.
In the Western World, separate from communist control perspectives (ie. China), “Global markets” are a modern myth; nothing more than a talking point meant to keep people satiated with sound bites they might find familiar. Global markets have been destroyed over the past three decades by multinational corporations who control the products formerly contained within global markets.
The same is true for “Commodities Markets”. The multinational trade and economic system, run by corporations and multinational banks, now controls the product outputs of independent nations. The free market economic system has been usurped by entities who create what is best described as ‘controlled markets’.
U.S. President Trump understood what had taken place. He used economic leverage as part of a broader national security policy; and to understand who opposes President Trump specifically because of the economic leverage he creates, it becomes important to understand the objectives of the global and financial elite who run and operate the institutions. The Big Club.
Understanding how trillions of trade dollars influence geopolitical policy we begin to understand the three-decade global financial construct they seek to retain and protect.
That is, global financial exploitation of national markets.
FOUR BASIC ELEMENTS:
♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national outputs (harvests and raw materials), and ancillary industries, of developed industrial western nations. {example}
♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks. (*note* in China it is the communist government underwriting the purchase)
♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.
Against the backdrop of President Trump confronting China; and against the backdrop of NAFTA renegotiated; and against the necessary need to support the key U.S. steel and aluminum industries; revisiting the economic influences within the modern import/export dynamic will help conceptualize the issues at the heart of the matter.
There are a myriad of interests within each trade sector that make specific explanation very challenging; however, here’s the basic outline.
For three decades economic “globalism” has advanced, quickly. Everyone accepts this statement, yet few actually stop to ask who and what are behind this – and why?
Influential people with vested financial interests in the process have sold a narrative that global manufacturing, global sourcing, and global production was the inherent way of the future. The same voices claimed the American economy was consigned to become a “service-driven economy.”
What was always missed in these discussions is that advocates selling this global-economy message have a vested financial and ideological interest in convincing the information consumer it is all just a natural outcome of economic progress.
It’s not.
It’s not natural at all. It is a process that is entirely controlled, promoted and utilized by large conglomerates, lobbyists, purchased politicians and massive financial corporations.
Again, I’ll try to retain the larger altitude perspective without falling into the traps of the esoteric weeds. I freely admit this is tough to explain and I may not be successful.
Bulletpoint #1:♦ Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.
This is perhaps the most challenging to understand. In essence, thanks specifically to the way the World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, national companies expanded their influence into multiple nations, across a myriad of industries and economic sectors (energy, agriculture, raw earth minerals, etc.). This is the basic underpinning of national companies becoming multinational corporations.
Think of these multinational corporations as global entities now powerful enough to reach into multiple nations -simultaneously- and purchase controlling interests in a single economic commodity.
A historic reference point might be the original multinational enterprise, energy via oil production. (Exxon, Mobil, BP, etc.)
However, in the modern global world, it’s not just oil; the resource and product procurement extends to virtually every possible commodity and industry. From the very visible (wheat/corn) to the obscure (small minerals, and even flowers).
Bulletpoint #2 ♦ The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.
During the past several decades national companies merged. The largest lemon producer company in Brazil, merges with the largest lemon company in Mexico, merges with the largest lemon company in Argentina, merges with the largest lemon company in the U.S., etc. etc. National companies, formerly of one nation, become “continental” companies with control over an entire continent of nations.
…. or it could be over several continents or even the entire world market of Lemon/Widget production. These are now multinational corporations. They hold interests in specific segments (this example lemons) across a broad variety of individual nations.
National laws on Monopoly building are not the same in all nations. Most are not as structured as the U.S.A or other more developed nations (with more laws). During the acquisition phase, when encountering a highly developed nation with monopoly laws, the process of an umbrella corporation might be needed to purchase the targeted interests within a specific nation. The example of Monsanto applies here.
Bulletpoint #3 ♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
With control of the majority of actual lemons the multinational corporation now holds a different set of financial values than a local farmer or national market. This is why commodities exchanges are essentially dead.
In the aggregate the mercantile exchange is no longer a free or supply-based market; it is now a controlled market exploited by mega-sized multinational corporations.
Instead of the traditional ‘supply/demand’ equation determining prices, the corporations look to see what nations can afford what prices. The supply of the controlled product is then distributed to the country according to their ability to afford the price. This is essentially the bastardized and politicized function of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is also how the corporations controlling WTO policy maximize profits.
Back to the lemons. A multinational corporation might hold the rights to the majority of the lemon production in Brazil, Argentina and California/Florida. The price the U.S. consumer pays for the lemons is directed by the amount of inventory (distribution) the controlling corporation allows in the U.S.
If the U.S. lemon harvest is abundant, the controlling interests will export the product to keep the U.S. consumer spending at peak or optimal price. A U.S. customer might pay $2 for a lemon, a Mexican customer might pay .50¢, and a Canadian $1.25.
The bottom line issue is the national supply (in this example ‘harvest/yield’) is not driving the national price because the supply is now controlled by massive multinational corporations.
The mistake people often make is calling this a “global commodity” process. In the modern era this “global commodity” phrase is particularly nonsense.
A true global commodity is a process of individual nations harvesting/creating a similar product and bringing that product to a global market. Individual nations each independently engaged in creating a similar product.
Under modern globalism this process no longer takes place. It’s a complete fraud. Massive multinational corporations control the majority of production inside each nation and therefore control the global product market and price. It is a controlled system.
EXAMPLE: Part of the lobbying in the food industry is to advocate for the expansion of U.S. taxpayer benefits to underwrite the costs of the domestic food products they control. By lobbying DC these multinational corporations get congress and policy-makers to expand the basis of who can use Food Stamps, EBT and SNAP benefits (state reimbursement rates).
Expanding the federal subsidy for food purchases is part of the corporate profit dynamic.
With increased taxpayer subsidies, the food price controllers can charge more domestically and export more of the product internationally. Taxes, via subsidies, go into their profit margins. The corporations then use a portion of those enhanced profits in contributions to the politicians. It’s a circle of money.
In highly developed nations this multinational corporate process requires the corporation to purchase the domestic political process (as above) with individual nations allowing the exploitation in varying degrees. As such, the corporate lobbyists pay hundreds of millions to politicians for changes in policies and regulations; one sector, one product, or one industry at a time. These are specialized lobbyists.
It is ironic when we discuss corporate financial payments to government officials in foreign countries we call them corrupt. However, in the United States we call it lobbying, the process is exactly the same.
EXAMPLE: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)
CFIUS is an inter-agency committee authorized to review transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person (“covered transactions”), in order to determine the effect of such transactions on the national security of the United States.
CFIUS operates pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) (section 721) and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.
The CFIUS process has been the subject of significant reforms over the past several years. These include numerous improvements in internal CFIUS procedures, enactment of FINSA in July 2007, amendment of Executive Order 11858 in January 2008, revision of the CFIUS regulations in November 2008, and publication of guidance on CFIUS’s national security considerations in December 2008 (more)
Bulletpoint #4 ♦ With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.
The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth. This is the basic premise, the cornerstone, behind the catch-phrase ‘globalism’.
It is never discussed.
To control the market price some contracted product may even be secured and shipped with the intent to allow it to sit idle (or rot). It’s all about controlling the price and maximizing the profit equation. To gain the same $1 profit a widget multinational might have to sell 20 widgets in El-Salvador (.25¢ each), or two widgets in the U.S. ($2.50/each).
Think of the process like the historic reference of OPEC (Oil Producing Economic Countries). Only in the modern era massive corporations are playing the role of OPEC and it’s not oil being controlled, thanks to the WTO it’s almost everything.
Again, this is highlighted in the example of taxpayers subsidizing the food sector (EBT, SNAP etc.), the corporations can charge U.S. consumers more. Ex. more beef is exported, red meat prices remain high at the grocery store, but subsidized U.S. consumers can better afford the high prices.
Of course, if you are not receiving food payment assistance (middle-class) you can’t eat the steaks because you can’t afford them. (Not accidentally, it’s the same scheme in the ObamaCare healthcare system)
Agriculturally, multinational corporate Monsanto says: ‘all your harvests are belong to us‘. Contract with us, or you lose because we can control the market price of your end product. Downside is that once you sign that contract, you agree to terms that are entirely created by the financial interests of the larger corporation; not your farm.
The multinational agriculture lobby is massive. We willingly feed the world as part of the system; but you as a grocery customer pay more per unit at the grocery store because domestic supply no longer determines domestic price.
Within the agriculture community the (feed-the-world) production export factor also drives the need for labor. Labor is a cost. The multinational corps have a vested interest in low labor costs. Ergo, open border policies. (ie. willingly purchased republicans not supporting border wall etc.).
This corrupt economic manipulation/exploitation applies over multiple sectors, and even in the sub-sector of an industry like steel. China/India purchases the raw material, coking coal, then sells the finished good (rolled steel) back to the global market at a discount. Or it could be rubber, or concrete, or plastic, or frozen chicken parts etc.
The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upset the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focused exclusively on bilateral trade deals, with specific trade agreements targeted toward individual nations (not national corporations).
‘America-First’ is also specific policy at a granular product level looking out for the national interests of the United States, U.S. workers, U.S. companies and U.S. consumers.
Under President Trump’s Trade positions, balanced and fair trade with strong regulatory control over national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped.
This puts many current multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding contracted interest of an asset they can no longer exploit.
Perhaps now we understand better how massive multi-billion multinational corporations, and the political institutions they pay for, were/are aligned against President Trump; and they will never relent in their need to see the risk he/we represents destroyed.
I will never relent in my support for anyone who fights this enemy.
I will align with and encourage anyone who joins this fight.
If you are looking for criticism against the only person I have ever witnessed who actually fought our correct enemy, look elsewhere.
Posted originally on the CTH on February 12, 2023 | Sundance
According to multiple media reports, the U.S. military has engaged another Unidentified Flying Object over Lake Huron (Michigan) and shot it down. This represents the fourth UFO targeted and destroyed by the U.S. military in the past eight days.
The dogfight between an F-16 and the mysterious object took place just hours after Montana Representative Matt Rosendale confirmed the sighting yesterday over Northern Montana was not “an anomaly” and was indeed an unknown flying object in the sky. [Tweet Link]
(Reuters) – The U.S. military on Sunday shot down an unidentified flying object above Lake Huron, the third such shootdown in as many days, following a week-long Chinese balloon spying saga that has intensified the hunt for violations of North American airspace.
Two U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters that the military had shot down the object. They also did not say whether it was maneuverable or simply floating with air currents.
[…] Meanwhile, Canadian investigators are hunting for the wreckage of an unidentified flying object that was shot down by a U.S. jet over Yukon territory on Saturday.
[…] U.S. Representative Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat who represents a district in Michigan, said the military had an “extremely close eye” on an object above Lake Huron, which is east of Lake Michigan on the U.S.-Canada border.
Canada also closed airspace on Sunday near Tobermory, Ontario, which is on Lake Huron near the U.S. border, according to Nav Canada, a private non-profit that operates Canada’s air traffic control system.
China denies the first balloon was being used for surveillance and says it was a civilian research craft. It condemned the United States for shooting it down off the coast of South Carolina last Saturday.
With military and intelligence officials newly focused on airborne threats, at least two other flying objects have since been destroyed over North America.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told U.S. broadcaster ABC that U.S. officials think the two latest objects were also balloons. The original balloon was brought down off the coast of South Carolina on Feb. 4. A second was shot down over sea ice near Deadhorse, Alaska, on Friday. The third was destroyed over the Yukon on Saturday. (read more)
1) smaller than a car
2) shot down at 40000 ft
3) reportedly interfered with one of the jet fighters’ electronics
4) reportedly had no obvious means of propulsion or means to fly
5) silver grey
6) US officials described the object as a “small metallic balloon with a tethered payload,” while other media reports described it as “cylindrical” in shape. [*ability to evade detection]
7) Canada Minister of defense said they “defeated” object. Strange choice of words.
No pics of wreckage. Object over Lake Huron “decommissioned”. Rectangular structure. Taken out at 20,000 ft by F-16 with missile. Another object reported over China port.
Posted originally on the CTH on February 12, 2023 | Sundance
Appearing on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, Mike McCaul, discusses the ongoing Biden administration battle in the sky with balloons, objects and various Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO’s).
McCaul identifies China as the most likely culprit for sending the spy and surveillance equipment over North America, claiming the timing of the spycraft arrival against the backdrop of the military revealing the latest stealth bomber, the “B-21 Raider,” does not seem coincidental.
Additionally, because of course he does, Chairman McCaul notes that if we do not continue to send billions to Ukraine, then China and Russia will continue sending spy missions over the United States. The way we defeat the UFO’s is to send more money to Ukraine. That’s his logic, and he’s sticking to it. WATCH:
MARGARET BRENNAN: We go now to Congressman Michael McCaul. He is the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Good morning to you.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL (R-Texas): Morning, Margaret. Thanks for having me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to start on this unusual activity, three takedowns in eight days. In the case of the spy balloon, this was Chinese surveillance, according to the administration. On Friday, they put restrictions on six Chinese companies that allegedly helped China’s military build that balloon. Is this the right move, to just try to make it harder for them to get U.S. technology, or does Congress need to do something that’s more broad?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: Well, it’s certainly the right move.
It will be one of my number one priorities, as the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in this Congress, to stop the export of technology to China that then goes into their most advanced weapons systems, in this case, a sophisticated spy balloon that went across three nuclear sites, I think it’s important to say, in plain view of the American people, you know, in Montana, the triad site, air, land, and sea nuclear weapons.
In Omaha, the spy balloon went over our Strategic Command, which is our most sensitive nuclear site. It was so sensitive that President Bush was taken there after 9/11. And then, finally, Missouri, the B-2 bomber, that’s where they are placed. It did a lot of damage.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that what U.S. intelligence told you? They have been saying they mitigated the impact.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: They say they mitigated it.
But my assessment, and — and I can’t get into the detail of the intelligence document — is that, if it was still transmitting going over these three very sensitive nuclear sites, I think — I think, if you look at the flight pattern of the balloon, it tells a story as to what the Chinese were up to as they controlled this aircraft throughout the United States.
Going over those sites, in my judgment, would cause great damage. Remember, a balloon could see a lot more on the ground than a satellite.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, you said you want to try to stop the export of technology that can be used by China’s military.
As a conservative, though, how much — this has to make you a little uncomfortable to have government try to control private business investment. How do you do that?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: Well, we have what’s called an entities list. The Department of Commerce had jurisdiction over the office within their — the Department of Defense has one.
We need to harmonize those, make it more security-focused. You know, capital flows is one issue, but technology exports into China that they use to turn — that maybe eventually turn against us, we have to stop doing that.
And I think we can do it by sectors. They do it by companies now. Obviously, they identified the six. I think, shockingly, when the balloon was recovered, it had American-made component parts in there with English on that. It was made — you know, parts made in America that were put on a spy balloon from China. I don’t think the American people accept that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you believe that this was a strategic choice by Xi Jinping’s government in Beijing, or do you believe that it was just the left and right hand not knowing what was going on?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: When I saw the sites that it was flying over, it was very clear to me this was an intentional act. It was done with provocation to gather intelligence data and collect intelligence on our three major nuclear sites in this country.
Why? Because they’re looking at what — what is our capability in the event of a possible future conflict in Taiwan? They’re really assessing what we have in this country. I find it extraordinary the timing of this flight as well, right before the State of the Union speech, and also right before Secretary Blinken was scheduled to meet with Chairman Xi.
I think it was very much an act of belligerence on their part. And perhaps they don’t care what — what the American people think about that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Before I let you go, I want to ask you.
You voted in the last Congress to provide a lot of assistance to Ukraine. But, this past week, at least 10 of your members, Republican members, introduced a bill called the Ukraine Fatigue Resolution to try to cut off aid.
How hard is it going to be to have a Republican-led House continue to help Ukraine?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: I still believe, Margaret, there are many, on both sides of the aisle, a majority of the majorities in support of this.
We have — we have factions on the left and right that do not support Ukraine…
MARGARET BRENNAN: This WAS a Republican bill.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: … assistance, and that will probably continue.
Right. And I do think, for me, particularly, it’s — we have to educate, where has the money gone? You know, the audits that are in place right now, there are four of them on Ukraine funding. And we have to explain, why is Ukraine so important?
You know, what happens in Ukraine impacts Taiwan and Chairman Xi, that China’s aligned with Russia, Iran and North Korea against freedom, democracy in the West. And I think that’s a debate we’ll have, but I still feel very confident that we will give them the assistance they need.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: I would like to see it faster, so they can win this faster.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, you — you think Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, others who signed this need to be educated?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: I — you know, look, we took Marjorie Taylor Greene into a briefing.
She was satisfied, I thought, with what — the controls that have been put in place on the spending. But I don’t think that they will be — ever be persuaded that this cause is something that they would support.
I think they have this false dichotomy that somehow we can’t help Ukraine beat back the Russians, who invaded their country and — and secure the border. We can do both. We’re a great nation. And the fact of the matter is, unfortunately, this administration has chosen not to secure the border. He can’t even control and secure our airspace now, it looks like.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Congressman McCaul, thank you for your time today.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL MCCAUL: Thanks, Margaret. Thanks for having me.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 