Tucker Carlson Discusses the U.S. Dual Justice System and the Biden Family


Posted originally on the CTH on June 20, 2023 | Sundance 

For episode 5, Tucker Carlson again uses the Twitter platform to showcase a monologue outlining the dual justice dynamic amid the Biden family. {Direct Rumble Link}.  WATCH:

Question:  How can the DOJ possibly prosecute Joe & Hunter Biden for foreign bribes and money laundering, when the entire purpose of the Foreign Relations Committees in DC is to facilitate foreign bribes and money laundering for congress?

As a career DC person once mentioned to me:  Why does the Legislative branch, both the House and Senate, have a foreign relations committee, when all foreign policy is created by the executive branch?  Contemplating the question, I responded by referencing the constitutional role of the House in spending money and various nations requesting financial support from the USA.  The response I received was a simple one word, “exactly.”

If a foreign government wants money from congress, they play the game of hiring a family member, or giving a paid contract to the business of a family member, of a politician on either committee.  That is the primary function of the committee in both chambers; to ensure the equitable distribution of funds to the families of congress. That’s also the reason why Mitt Romney spent $10 million running for an elected office that pays $300k per year, and why Mitch McConnell assigned Mitt Romney to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

When he was a senator, Joe Biden was Chairman of what Senate committee?

Yup, you guessed it, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

World Events


Armstrong Economics Blog/World Events Re-Posted Jun 18, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

It Begins, DOJ Files Motion to Limit President Trump’s Ability to Defend Himself


Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2023 | Sundance 

One of the ways you can immediately detect federal Lawfare deployment is to look at how media articles are written when they outline court filings without direct citation for review.  The Hill began SEE HERE. The New York Times is similar, SEE HERE.

Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him.  Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured.  Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.

That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.

Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it.  THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE.  This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.

When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense.  Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic.  President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.

The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is.  This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge.  This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment.

WASHINGTON DC – The Justice Department on Friday filed a motion seeking to block former President Trump from releasing any classified materials that will be shared with his legal team during his prosecution for the mishandling of records at Mar-a-Lago, noting that some are still being used in the course of their investigation.

The documents “include information pertaining to ongoing investigations” which could be used to further cases against uncharged individuals, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wrote.

The suggested protective order, which will be reviewed by Judge Bruce Reinhart, would allow Trump to review the 31 documents the DOJ is using in the case only while in the presence of his attorneys.

“Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material. Defendants may take notes regarding Discovery Materials, but such notes shall be stored securely by Defense Counsel,” the DOJ wrote.

It also includes similar language to a protective order agreed to in another Trump case that bars the former president from disclosing evidence in the case. New York state prosecutors made that request as they pursue a 34-count indictment of Trump relating to a hush money scandal.

“The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court,” the department wrote. (read more)

Watch this interview with Devin Nunes and Kimbery Guilfoyle – Start at 06:40 listening to Nunes:

I am correct about the documents grabbed.

I am correct about the nature of the DOJ/FBI intentions and motives.

I am correct about the Lawfare manipulation of the material to present the illusion of illegal where nothing illegal is taking place…

…and I am increasingly certain that Mary McCord is part of TEAM Jack Smith!

Wait for it!

The first two defense approaches will likely be: (1) the Presidential Records Act supersedes the issues of document holding as noted in the use of the Espionage Act. (2) However, if the Espionage Act [Statute 793(e)] has to be defended, the originating issue of “unauthorized possession” will be the second approach heading to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Some baselines are needed to understand what is happening.

First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents.  They requested a return of documents containing classification markings.  These are two entirely different things.

Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings.  Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.

Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved.  In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security. {GO DEEP}

Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes has stated about the way the language is being deployed.   Now we turn to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.

♦ During testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials were asked specifically about Trump documents and how they could *KNOW* fulsome return of documents had not taken place.  The response from the NARA officials is enlightening:

[Source pdf, testimony transcript – page 43 and 44]

Notice that NARA had knowledge these documents were in the possession of Trump and were pertinent to their archive retrieval.  It was interesting at the time that NARA would know the content of the President Obama letter, and further interesting they would know there was more than one piece of correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim [Jong-un].  CNN even wrote about it HERE.

[Irrelevant note: Mr Bonsanko got the name wrong, Jong-il is dead]

Reminder, keep in mind the DOJ ferocity in not wanting anyone to know what documents they retrieved and/or defined.

We know, from President Trump describing the letter left to him by the former president, that Obama told Trump in the letter that the number one foreign policy and intelligence threat perceived by Obama (at the time of his exit) was a nuclear armed North Korea.  This is where you overlay the Jack Smith writing in the indictment of national defense secrets and nuclear security issues.

We know, from President Trump speaking publicly about his communication and diplomacy with Chairman Kim Jong-un, that the two leaders exchanged letters relating to aligned national security interests that centered around DPRK nuclear ambitions and status.

Trump and Kim formed a geopolitical truce, a friendship of sorts, based on respect and trust around the nuclear issue.  Chairman Kim decreased hostilities; President Trump no longer used inflammatory language about “Little Rocket Man.”  A diplomatic détente was created.

NARA was looking for the letter written by Obama that described DPRK nukes, and NARA was looking for letters between Trump and Kim that touched on DPRK nukes.

Now, does the wording in the Jack Smith indictment that pertains to “nuclear concerns” and “national security matters” make more sense?

Would all of this “nuclear national defense” hullaballoo really stem from President Trump not giving up personal letters written to him by President Obama and Chairman Kim?  YES!  Would President Trump even characterize those letters as government property?  NO!

♦ The indictment accuses President Trump of withholding documents containing “classified markings,” a very specifically deployed obtuse wording intended to create the implication of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists.  It is entirely possible for a person, any person, especially a person who follows the news, to possess documents containing “classified markings.”

[SOURCE page 41]

There is a big difference between a classified document and a document containing classified markings.  As an example, anyone who has looked at the Carter Page FISA application, made public in July 2018, has reviewed a document containing “classified markings.”  When a document is declassified, they do not remove the markings.

This language is the underpinning of the entire DOJ/FBI framework that predicated the raid on Mar-a-Lago.   Specifically, neither NARA nor the DOJ-NSD requested President Trump or his team to return Classified Documents.  The DOJ demanded the return of any documents that contained “classified markings.” [SEE BELOW]

[Indictment Source, page 4]

Because the verbiage is so intentionally obtuse (ie. Lawfare), a fulsome production in compliance with this DOJ demand would include any newspaper or magazine articles that had a picture of the Carter Page FISA application, or any printed online article that might contain the same or similar elements.  There is a big difference between asking for a classified document return, and asking for a return of documents that contain “classified markings.”

Can you see the way it unfolds?   Of course, when you apply the Lawfare lingo, an approach entirely based on maintaining the targeting of Trump, then suddenly the seemingly innocuous becomes horribly nefarious.

In order to pull this off two things would be needed: (1) the DOJ would need to write about it in a certain way in the indictment√; and (2) simultaneously, the DOJ would need to stop anyone from viewing the actual documents, as they misleadingly described them√.  Hey, wait… that’s exactly what they did.

♦ In a previous court ruling by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the court ruled in favor of the U.S. Dept of Justice – National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and blocked the lower court order instructing a Special Master to review the DOJ claimed, “classified documents.” [pdf Ruling Here]

Essentially the order of the appellate court was based on the DOJ defining Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents as “classified” and “vital to national security”, and the court’s determination said they have no authority to question the decision of the executive branch when it comes to how they DEFINE matters of national security.

The court (judicial branch) openly stated they defer to the DOJ (executive branch) regarding any/all claims of harm to national security that may be caused by a review of documents the DOJ-NSD determined, on their own authority, to be identified as classified or matters of “national security.”

In the prior opinion of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, if the DOJ states sharing the “classified documents” with a special master may harm national security, the court must accept that position without challenge and stop the special master review.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals did what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) does with the DOJ-NSD and any matters defined by the originating Main Justice officials as “national security.”   The 11th Circuit is deferred to the DOJ.

The DOJ was granted legal benefit of the doubt on all matters of national security, which puts the DOJ-NSD in ultimate control over the star chamber they operate.

This ridiculous ruling meant the DOJ could define any document as a document of “national security interest” and there is no countervailing review of their definitions.  As soon as this decision was reached the DOJ then moved to appoint a special counsel.  Can you see how this works?

With this ruling in his briefcase, Special Counsel Jack Smith could now define the Mar-a-Lago documents according to the legal intention of his targeting.  That’s exactly what he did.  The case against Trump is not a case about classified documents, it is a case about the DOJ defining unilaterally what documents are considered “vital to national security.”

With the DOJ getting to define those documents, the special counsel then moves to claim national security threats created by Trump’s ownership.  The overlay of “vital to the nuclear capabilities of the defense dept,” can then be shifted to include letters from President Obama and Kim Jong-un about DPRK nuclear capabilities.

The Rebellion Is Alive and Thriving


Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2023 | Sundance 

We live with a new type of tyranny, where we find ourselves dissidents.  It is not like any previous tyranny. It is not revolutionary in nature. Instead, it operates very scientifically and technocratically by convincing those it tyrannizes to demand their own enslavement, under the guise of comfort.

Prior dissidents were at least dissidents of a tangible, kinetic revolution. We are dissidents of what the willfully tyrannized perceive as their secure position within the rightful order of things. This needs to be factored into how we think about “converting” and “awakening” others amid the ongoing insurgency.

(Via Daily Mail) – A Fox News producer who resigned over a chyron that described Joe Biden as a ‘wannabe dictator’, has broken his silence.

Alexander McCaskill posted a photo of himself on Instagram holding a cardboard box outside the corporation’s New York offices.

He told his followers ‘Today was my last day at Fox’ and described his time there as a ‘wild 10 years’.

McCaskill is thought to have been responsible for the chyron which claimed President Biden was intent on locking up his 2024 rival, Donald Trump on Tuesday.

Fox had it on screen for less than 30 seconds, and then apologized. Dailymail.com has approached Fox News and McCaskill for comment.

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson claimed the producer had resigned during his new show, now being broadcast on Twitter, on Thursday.

He did not name the producer but The Daily Beast reported that it was McCaskill, who worked with Carlson on Tucker Carlson Tonight for many years.

McCaskill seemed to confirm news of his resignation on his private Instagram account in a lengthy post.

‘Today was my last day at FOX. It was a wild 10 years and it was the best place I’ve ever worked because of the great people I met,’ he wrote.

‘But the time has come. I asked them to let me go, and they finally did. To all my friends there: I will miss you forever.’ (read more)

Well done Mr. McCaskill, well done!

The rebellion is alive and well!

Biden Wannabe Dictator? No Way.


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Jun 15, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Espionage Act & Abuse of Power


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Jun 16, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Many people have written in and asked how can Trump be charged under the Espionage Act. There is probably no other Act that has been so abused than this statute. It has been responsible for witch hunts and the deliberate execution of people the prosecutors knew were innocent. This Act has silenced people, been used to imprison people for speaking against the government in times of war, and even imprisoned Japanese for simply being Japanese under nothing more than an executive order Public Proclamation No. 4, 7 Fed.Reg. 2601. And on May 19, 1942, eleven days before the time a Japanese petitioner was charged with unlawfully remaining in the area, Civilian Restrictive Order No. 1, 8 Fed.Reg. 982, provided for the detention of those of Japanese ancestry in assembly or relocation centers. One of the top 5 worst decisions of the Supreme Court declaring Blacks were just property in Dred Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393 (1856), but so was the imprisonment of Japanese Americans during World War II solely based on their race –  Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)

Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892–1954) dissented writing “Korematsu … has been convicted of an act not commonly thought a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived.” Jackson argued that the nation’s wartime security concerns did not justify stripping Korematsu and the other internees of their constitutionally protected civil rights.

Nobody would listen to reason. Jackson declared that the exclusion order was “the legalization of racism” that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. He compared the exclusion order to the “abhorrent and despicable treatment of minority groups by the dictatorial tyrannies which this nation is now pledged to destroy.”  He concluded that the exclusion order violated the Fourteenth Amendment by “fall[ing] into the ugly abyss of racism.”

Welcome to reality. Whenever the self-interest of those in power is in conflict with the rule of law, the rule of law is ALWAYS ignored. They are doing that with Trump right now and all the RINOs cheering and arresting Trump on his birthday show just how evil these people truly are. With every cheer the RINOs make, they prove Mark Twain was always right.

t has always been IMPOSSIBLE to hand ANY power to the government under the pretense that it is necessary for some good. Any regulation carries some penalty for noncompliance. Then this opens the door to abuse as we see with Trump. When Congress passes a law, prosecutors make a career out of twisting the words to fit whatever they can dream up. On top of that Congress always expands its power and never was there any “intent” behind the Espionage Act to be used in this manner against a former president. In its current incarnation, the section Trump is charged with reads:

18 USC #793(e)

(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nationwillfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

The abuse of this law is mindboggling and the real problem here is that prosecutors have discretion so they can openly deny Equal Protection of the Law for they decide if they want to prosecute Trump but not Biden or Pence or Hillary who did have classified documents on her server and did transmit them. I believe that Jack Smith as the prosecutor has violated not just Trump’s civil rights, but he has violated everyone’s civil rights for his selective prosecution with the intent of preventing Trump from running for president.

The Supreme Court held in Armstrong v US, 517 U.S. 456 (1996) that to show selective prosecution, an individual must show that a prosecutorial policy had both a discriminatory purpose and a discriminatory effect. In other words, they must show that prosecutors did not charge similarly situated people and that can clearly be established with both Biden and Hillary Clinton.

There should be a class action lawsuit brought against Jack Smith and the Attorney General for deliberating targeting Trump to interfere in the 2024 election which violates everyone’s civil rights denying us that the 2024 election will be free and fair. It is an acknowledged violation of our Civil Rights for what the entire world now knows they are doing – interfering in the 2024 election.

Of course, all of these RINOs and disgusting people pretending to care about the country or the rule of law, are out in full force driving their knives and stabbing Trump like corrupt senators did to Julius Caesar 23 times. History will remember their names as it remembered Brutus and Cassius. This will be the day that truly lives in infamy. Mike Pence, who I would not vote for even being a local dog catcher, has joined the choir of attacking Trump to save the SWAMP. John Kelly, Trump’s pretend chief of staff who the Neocons put in place since he was previously in the Marine Corps Liaison Office. Remember all their names and NEVER vote for any of them EVER in the future. When you see them in someone’s cabinet, know that the administration can never be trusted. They are against the people, and the constitution, and only support the corruption that is destroying our nation from the inside out – the SWAMP.

The first Espionage Act was passed with the American Revolution. It was passed July 6, 1798, and this is all omitted from the Federal Criminal Code and Rules which are standard today. If Trump would declare he now identifies as a woman, or a lesbian because he enjoys women, then under the Espionage Act of 1798 he could not be guilty. Congress at the time was engaged in writing laws for the PURPOSE (Intent) of protecting the Government, growing out of serious friction with France. Interestingly, it did NOT apply to women. It only applied specifically to natives, citizens, denizens (an inhabitant of a particular place such as a forest), or subjects of a hostile nation of Government, “being males of the age of 14 years and upwards.”

Curiously, it was World War I before they passed a new Espionage Act in 1917, yet they did not repeal nor amend the 1798 Act. It addressed the loophole with women. It merely supplemented the Espionage Act of 1798 statute providing for punishments concerning a woman stating that she may then be interned or punished for violation of any of the espionage laws. The Espionage Act of 1798 gave the president the executive power to restrict certain areas. It even then allows a woman to be executed if she was caught trying to transmit any information which has for one of its purposes visiting an area that is restricted like taking photos of defense ships etc. By 1917, they figured out that some of the very best spies were actually women. That is when Mata Hari, the dancer, was executed by firing squad in France.

On June 15, 1917, some two months after America’s formal entrance into World War I against Germany, the United States Congress passed the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act essentially made it a crime for any person to convey information intended to interfere with the U.S. armed forces during the war effort or to promote the success of the country’s enemies. Anyone found guilty of such acts would be subject to a fine of $10,000 and a prison sentence of 20 years.

The Espionage Act was reinforced by the Sedition Act of the following year, which imposed similarly harsh penalties on anyone found guilty of making false statements that interfered with the prosecution of the war. That included insulting or abusing the U.S. government, the flag, the Constitution, or the military. Freedom of speech was restrained. It further included protesting and agitating against the production of necessary war materials as well as advocating, teaching, or defending any of these acts.

These acts they insisted were intended to target socialists, pacifists, and other anti-war activists during World War I. They were used with a very punishing effect instantly. This became the great Red Scare with people justifying these laws claiming that communists sought to influence and to infiltrate into American society changing the country from within. This was the first Red Scare with the second unfolding during the 1940s and 1950s, associated largely with Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908–1957) who was just manufacturing evidence against people he disliked.

This is when Alexander Mitchell Palmer (1872–1936), assumed the attorney general’s office during the Red Scare, and his right-hand man, J. Edgar Hoover (1895–1972), liberally employed the Espionage and Sedition Acts to persecute left-wing political figures and anyone he just disliked. It would be Hoover who would spy on members of Congress and strike fear in the hearts of everyone on Capital Hill. He had his secret files on everyone even President Kennedy. Abuse of power always follows a grant of power.

One of the most famous activists arrested during this period, labor leader Eugene V. Debs (1855–1926), was sentenced to 10 years in prison for a speech he made in 1918 in Canton, Ohio, criticizing the Espionage Act. Debs had also tried to run for President as the head of the Socialist Party. Debs appealed the decision, and the case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court upheld his conviction. Though Debs’ sentence was commuted in 1921 when the Sedition Act was repealed by Congress, major portions of the Espionage Act remain part of United States law to the present day and are subject to abuse of power as we are witnessing today.

It was April 5th, 1951 when Julius Rosenberg (1918-1953) and his 35-year-old wife Ethel (1915-1953) were sentenced to death using this Espionage Act. Today, everyone concedes that his wife’s crime was simply being married to Julius. The prosecutors charged her thinking it would force him to give up his contacts which he never did most likely because he had none.

A co-defendant of Julius and Ethel  Rosenberg, Morton Sobell (1917-2018), admitted for the first time that he was a Soviet spy on his deathbed at 91 after serving 30 years in prison but also made it clear that Ethel was innocent. Sobell passed military secrets to the Communists in World War II when the nations were still allies, he told the New York Times. Sobell, who served 18 years for espionage, said Julius did pass secrets but Ethel, executed with her husband in 1953, was guilty of nothing more than being Mrs. Rosenberg.

Under our legal system, the Jury can nullify the conviction using common sense based on their own sense of justice. Our corrupt judges will never instruct the jury that they have that power. The JURY can refuse to follow the corrupt law and acquit a defendant even when the evidence presented seems to point to an incontrovertible verdict of guilty. Personally, I think the Jury should be told that they have the power to nullify a conviction as well as to direct charges and reprimand the prosecutor in such a case for his abuse of power.

Just like Ponus Pilate tried washing his hands after sentencing Christ to death, these prosecutors and judges have so much blood on their hands that it takes a really different kind of person to take pleasure in inflicting pain on others. The injustices of so many people who have been executed under our laws only to be found that they were innocent are appalling and disgusting.

Just-us

Only an idiot accepts government allegations as fact in any case. The entire problem stems from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY! The US government cannot be sued, only the agents of the government and judges have bestowed that immunity simply because the king had that who we revolted against. But the courts granted the very same power to the government that sparked the American Revolution. Consequently, those in the Justice Department are not forthcoming about admitting a mistake. I do not believe that a prosecutor should be able to bring charges. There should be a panel set up where every prosecutor presents his case to them and they are the ones who bring an indictment. That would remove personal self-interests.

Wilson Edwin Paul

Edwin Paul Wilson (1928–2012) was a former CIA and U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. When one agency caught him, the CIA denied he worked for them since it was their secret operation. Wilson was tried and convicted. His daughter fought to get documents to prove her father worked for the CIA which they denied. What they did to Wilson should give anyone pause why they would work for the government.

You can tell Wilson was innocent because they kept him in solitary confinement – the ultimate torture. That is where most suicides take place. They did that to prevent him from having free communication outside the prison. It was later proven that the United States Department of Justice and the CIA had covered up evidence in the case. Wilson’s convictions were overturned in 2003 and he was freed the following year. Prosecutors KNEW he was innocent, but prosecuted him anyway.

Wilson filed a civil suit against seven former federal prosecutors, two of whom are now federal judges rewarded for wrongful prosecutions, and a past executive director of the CIA. On March 29th, 2007, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed his case on the grounds that all eight had immunity covering their actions – not that they were innocent or his claims were frivolous. They can kill you, rob you, and even rape your family. NO court will ever take your word over a prosecutor. That is why there is no longer any Justice in America. They read it as “JUST US” to always further their own self-interest.

Am On Trial Dersowitz

Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, discusses in America on Trial” several dozen cases that have indeed shaped the United States, transforming the country and its legal system from the colonial period to the present corrupt system of injustice.

Prosecutors abuse the system to win unjust convictions ALL THE TIME. There is the case of JOSEPH SALVATIwhere the jury awarded $102 million because the prosecutors KNEW they were convicting the wrong person. Anyone working for the government who does this sort of thing should be imprisoned. After all, they violate the civil rights of an individual and remain immune from criminal prosecution.

There is the case of Jack McCullough sentenced to life in prison in 1957 who was finally released in 2016. One Judge, U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May, ruled that the SEC courts established by Roosevelt are unconstitutional. The government just ignored the ruling.

The Supreme Court committed the worst crime against humanity ever recorded demonstrating its bias. They declared that those who are prosecutors or judges have ABSOLUTE immunity from being prosecuted for wrongful prosecution even if they know they are abusing their authority or committing a crime because they might be afraid to prosecute someone if they could be prosecuted in return.

Why Innocent Plead Guilty & Guilty Go Free

The Supreme Court’s most anti-Constitutional decision ever rendered implemented a nationwide policy declaring prosecutors must have absolute immunity for acts committed in their prosecutorial role. This decision has unleashed the most abusive legal system ever on the face of this Earth. The most notorious court in history had been that of Hitler which had a 90% conviction rate. The Supreme Court has stripped every possible human right we have fought for since the dawn of civilization with that decision.

The conviction rate now exceeds 98% in the US federal courts. Lawyers tell you to just plea because you cannot win! Federal Judge Jed Rakof’s review of a book – Why Innocent People Plead Guilty. Judge Rakof wrote in the New York Review of Books, “Over the past few decades, ordinary US citizens have increasingly been denied effective access to their courts.” Nobody pays attention and at least one-third of the people in prison are innocent charged with conspiracy so the government does not have to prove you actually did something, you just intended it somehow. Nobody reforms the judicial system so police just kill people without consequence.

Nobody will hold prosecutors accountable and then most judges are former prosecutors so good luck with pleading your case. There is not a vein of morality in most of these people. Even an honest judge is just overruled by the corrupt courts of appeal. When you stare into the eyes of a prosecutor or most judges, all you see is the coldness of evil stripped of all human emotion. They lose all humanity in order to do the job.

The Supreme Court has unleashed the total destruction of the Constitution upon all of us and there is a growing call to acknowledge and address an epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct in the United States, but nobody will listen. The case was Imbler v. Pachtman and its perverse holding is uncivilized in any democratic state for it is the decision of a totalitarian regime.

Shakespeare’s famous line “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” referred to the king’s lawyers we call prosecutors today. The question is when will the people stand up and say enough is enough! Thomas Jefferson included in the Declaration of Independence about injustice and how the government protected its agents as they do today: “For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:”

History repeats because those in power will always act in their self-interest. Nothing has ever changed since Thrasymachus warned Socrates who imposed the death penalty and Plota fled Athens saying he would not allow a second crime against Philosophy.

Many people have written in and asked how can Trump be charged under the Espionage Act. There is probably no other Act that has been so abused than this statute. It has been responsible for witch hunts and the deliberate execution of people the prosecutors knew were innocent. This Act has silenced people, been used to imprison people for speaking against the government in times of war, and even imprisoned Japanese for simply being Japanese under nothing more than an executive order Public Proclamation No. 4, 7 Fed.Reg. 2601. And on May 19, 1942, eleven days before the time a Japanese petitioner was charged with unlawfully remaining in the area, Civilian Restrictive Order No. 1, 8 Fed.Reg. 982, provided for the detention of those of Japanese ancestry in assembly or relocation centers. One of the top 5 worst decisions of the Supreme Court declaring Blacks were just property in Dred Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393 (1856), but so was the imprisonment of Japanese Americans during World War II solely based on their race –  Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)

Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892–1954) dissented writing “Korematsu … has been convicted of an act not commonly thought a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived.” Jackson argued that the nation’s wartime security concerns did not justify stripping Korematsu and the other internees of their constitutionally protected civil rights.

Nobody would listen to reason. Jackson declared that the exclusion order was “the legalization of racism” that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. He compared the exclusion order to the “abhorrent and despicable treatment of minority groups by the dictatorial tyrannies which this nation is now pledged to destroy.”  He concluded that the exclusion order violated the Fourteenth Amendment by “fall[ing] into the ugly abyss of racism.”

Welcome to reality. Whenever the self-interest of those in power is in conflict with the rule of law, the rule of law is ALWAYS ignored. They are doing that with Trump right now and all the RINOs cheering and arresting Trump on his birthday show just how evil these people truly are. With every cheer the RINOs make, they prove Mark Twain was always right.

t has always been IMPOSSIBLE to hand ANY power to the government under the pretense that it is necessary for some good. Any regulation carries some penalty for noncompliance. Then this opens the door to abuse as we see with Trump. When Congress passes a law, prosecutors make a career out of twisting the words to fit whatever they can dream up. On top of that Congress always expands its power and never was there any “intent” behind the Espionage Act to be used in this manner against a former president. In its current incarnation, the section Trump is charged with reads:

18 USC #793(e)

(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nationwillfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

The abuse of this law is mindboggling and the real problem here is that prosecutors have discretion so they can openly deny Equal Protection of the Law for they decide if they want to prosecute Trump but not Biden or Pence or Hillary who did have classified documents on her server and did transmit them. I believe that Jack Smith as the prosecutor has violated not just Trump’s civil rights, but he has violated everyone’s civil rights for his selective prosecution with the intent of preventing Trump from running for president.

The Supreme Court held in Armstrong v US, 517 U.S. 456 (1996) that to show selective prosecution, an individual must show that a prosecutorial policy had both a discriminatory purpose and a discriminatory effect. In other words, they must show that prosecutors did not charge similarly situated people and that can clearly be established with both Biden and Hillary Clinton.

There should be a class action lawsuit brought against Jack Smith and the Attorney General for deliberating targeting Trump to interfere in the 2024 election which violates everyone’s civil rights denying us that the 2024 election will be free and fair. It is an acknowledged violation of our Civil Rights for what the entire world now knows they are doing – interfering in the 2024 election.

Of course, all of these RINOs and disgusting people pretending to care about the country or the rule of law, are out in full force driving their knives and stabbing Trump like corrupt senators did to Julius Caesar 23 times. History will remember their names as it remembered Brutus and Cassius. This will be the day that truly lives in infamy. Mike Pence, who I would not vote for even being a local dog catcher, has joined the choir of attacking Trump to save the SWAMP. John Kelly, Trump’s pretend chief of staff who the Neocons put in place since he was previously in the Marine Corps Liaison Office. Remember all their names and NEVER vote for any of them EVER in the future. When you see them in someone’s cabinet, know that the administration can never be trusted. They are against the people, and the constitution, and only support the corruption that is destroying our nation from the inside out – the SWAMP.

The first Espionage Act was passed with the American Revolution. It was passed July 6, 1798, and this is all omitted from the Federal Criminal Code and Rules which are standard today. If Trump would declare he now identifies as a woman, or a lesbian because he enjoys women, then under the Espionage Act of 1798 he could not be guilty. Congress at the time was engaged in writing laws for the PURPOSE (Intent) of protecting the Government, growing out of serious friction with France. Interestingly, it did NOT apply to women. It only applied specifically to natives, citizens, denizens (an inhabitant of a particular place such as a forest), or subjects of a hostile nation of Government, “being males of the age of 14 years and upwards.”

Curiously, it was World War I before they passed a new Espionage Act in 1917, yet they did not repeal nor amend the 1798 Act. It addressed the loophole with women. It merely supplemented the Espionage Act of 1798 statute providing for punishments concerning a woman stating that she may then be interned or punished for violation of any of the espionage laws. The Espionage Act of 1798 gave the president the executive power to restrict certain areas. It even then allows a woman to be executed if she was caught trying to transmit any information which has for one of its purposes visiting an area that is restricted like taking photos of defense ships etc. By 1917, they figured out that some of the very best spies were actually women. That is when Mata Hari, the dancer, was executed by firing squad in France.

On June 15, 1917, some two months after America’s formal entrance into World War I against Germany, the United States Congress passed the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act essentially made it a crime for any person to convey information intended to interfere with the U.S. armed forces during the war effort or to promote the success of the country’s enemies. Anyone found guilty of such acts would be subject to a fine of $10,000 and a prison sentence of 20 years.

The Espionage Act was reinforced by the Sedition Act of the following year, which imposed similarly harsh penalties on anyone found guilty of making false statements that interfered with the prosecution of the war. That included insulting or abusing the U.S. government, the flag, the Constitution, or the military. Freedom of speech was restrained. It further included protesting and agitating against the production of necessary war materials as well as advocating, teaching, or defending any of these acts.

These acts they insisted were intended to target socialists, pacifists, and other anti-war activists during World War I. They were used with a very punishing effect instantly. This became the great Red Scare with people justifying these laws claiming that communists sought to influence and to infiltrate into American society changing the country from within. This was the first Red Scare with the second unfolding during the 1940s and 1950s, associated largely with Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908–1957) who was just manufacturing evidence against people he disliked.

This is when Alexander Mitchell Palmer (1872–1936), assumed the attorney general’s office during the Red Scare, and his right-hand man, J. Edgar Hoover (1895–1972), liberally employed the Espionage and Sedition Acts to persecute left-wing political figures and anyone he just disliked. It would be Hoover who would spy on members of Congress and strike fear in the hearts of everyone on Capital Hill. He had his secret files on everyone even President Kennedy. Abuse of power always follows a grant of power.

One of the most famous activists arrested during this period, labor leader Eugene V. Debs (1855–1926), was sentenced to 10 years in prison for a speech he made in 1918 in Canton, Ohio, criticizing the Espionage Act. Debs had also tried to run for President as the head of the Socialist Party. Debs appealed the decision, and the case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court upheld his conviction. Though Debs’ sentence was commuted in 1921 when the Sedition Act was repealed by Congress, major portions of the Espionage Act remain part of United States law to the present day and are subject to abuse of power as we are witnessing today.

It was April 5th, 1951 when Julius Rosenberg (1918-1953) and his 35-year-old wife Ethel (1915-1953) were sentenced to death using this Espionage Act. Today, everyone concedes that his wife’s crime was simply being married to Julius. The prosecutors charged her thinking it would force him to give up his contacts which he never did most likely because he had none.

A co-defendant of Julius and Ethel  Rosenberg, Morton Sobell (1917-2018), admitted for the first time that he was a Soviet spy on his deathbed at 91 after serving 30 years in prison but also made it clear that Ethel was innocent. Sobell passed military secrets to the Communists in World War II when the nations were still allies, he told the New York Times. Sobell, who served 18 years for espionage, said Julius did pass secrets but Ethel, executed with her husband in 1953, was guilty of nothing more than being Mrs. Rosenberg.

Under our legal system, the Jury can nullify the conviction using common sense based on their own sense of justice. Our corrupt judges will never instruct the jury that they have that power. The JURY can refuse to follow the corrupt law and acquit a defendant even when the evidence presented seems to point to an incontrovertible verdict of guilty. Personally, I think the Jury should be told that they have the power to nullify a conviction as well as to direct charges and reprimand the prosecutor in such a case for his abuse of power.

Just like Ponus Pilate tried washing his hands after sentencing Christ to death, these prosecutors and judges have so much blood on their hands that it takes a really different kind of person to take pleasure in inflicting pain on others. The injustices of so many people who have been executed under our laws only to be found that they were innocent are appalling and disgusting.

Just-us

Only an idiot accepts government allegations as fact in any case. The entire problem stems from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY! The US government cannot be sued, only the agents of the government and judges have bestowed that immunity simply because the king had that who we revolted against. But the courts granted the very same power to the government that sparked the American Revolution. Consequently, those in the Justice Department are not forthcoming about admitting a mistake. I do not believe that a prosecutor should be able to bring charges. There should be a panel set up where every prosecutor presents his case to them and they are the ones who bring an indictment. That would remove personal self-interests.

Wilson Edwin Paul

Edwin Paul Wilson (1928–2012) was a former CIA and U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. When one agency caught him, the CIA denied he worked for them since it was their secret operation. Wilson was tried and convicted. His daughter fought to get documents to prove her father worked for the CIA which they denied. What they did to Wilson should give anyone pause why they would work for the government.

You can tell Wilson was innocent because they kept him in solitary confinement – the ultimate torture. That is where most suicides take place. They did that to prevent him from having free communication outside the prison. It was later proven that the United States Department of Justice and the CIA had covered up evidence in the case. Wilson’s convictions were overturned in 2003 and he was freed the following year. Prosecutors KNEW he was innocent, but prosecuted him anyway.

Wilson filed a civil suit against seven former federal prosecutors, two of whom are now federal judges rewarded for wrongful prosecutions, and a past executive director of the CIA. On March 29th, 2007, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed his case on the grounds that all eight had immunity covering their actions – not that they were innocent or his claims were frivolous. They can kill you, rob you, and even rape your family. NO court will ever take your word over a prosecutor. That is why there is no longer any Justice in America. They read it as “JUST US” to always further their own self-interest.

Am On Trial Dersowitz

Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, discusses in America on Trial” several dozen cases that have indeed shaped the United States, transforming the country and its legal system from the colonial period to the present corrupt system of injustice.

Prosecutors abuse the system to win unjust convictions ALL THE TIME. There is the case of JOSEPH SALVATIwhere the jury awarded $102 million because the prosecutors KNEW they were convicting the wrong person. Anyone working for the government who does this sort of thing should be imprisoned. After all, they violate the civil rights of an individual and remain immune from criminal prosecution.

There is the case of Jack McCullough sentenced to life in prison in 1957 who was finally released in 2016. One Judge, U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May, ruled that the SEC courts established by Roosevelt are unconstitutional. The government just ignored the ruling.

The Supreme Court committed the worst crime against humanity ever recorded demonstrating its bias. They declared that those who are prosecutors or judges have ABSOLUTE immunity from being prosecuted for wrongful prosecution even if they know they are abusing their authority or committing a crime because they might be afraid to prosecute someone if they could be prosecuted in return.

Why Innocent Plead Guilty & Guilty Go Free

The Supreme Court’s most anti-Constitutional decision ever rendered implemented a nationwide policy declaring prosecutors must have absolute immunity for acts committed in their prosecutorial role. This decision has unleashed the most abusive legal system ever on the face of this Earth. The most notorious court in history had been that of Hitler which had a 90% conviction rate. The Supreme Court has stripped every possible human right we have fought for since the dawn of civilization with that decision.

The conviction rate now exceeds 98% in the US federal courts. Lawyers tell you to just plea because you cannot win! Federal Judge Jed Rakof’s review of a book – Why Innocent People Plead Guilty. Judge Rakof wrote in the New York Review of Books, “Over the past few decades, ordinary US citizens have increasingly been denied effective access to their courts.” Nobody pays attention and at least one-third of the people in prison are innocent charged with conspiracy so the government does not have to prove you actually did something, you just intended it somehow. Nobody reforms the judicial system so police just kill people without consequence.

Nobody will hold prosecutors accountable and then most judges are former prosecutors so good luck with pleading your case. There is not a vein of morality in most of these people. Even an honest judge is just overruled by the corrupt courts of appeal. When you stare into the eyes of a prosecutor or most judges, all you see is the coldness of evil stripped of all human emotion. They lose all humanity in order to do the job.

The Supreme Court has unleashed the total destruction of the Constitution upon all of us and there is a growing call to acknowledge and address an epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct in the United States, but nobody will listen. The case was Imbler v. Pachtman and its perverse holding is uncivilized in any democratic state for it is the decision of a totalitarian regime.

Shakespeare’s famous line “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” referred to the king’s lawyers we call prosecutors today. The question is when will the people stand up and say enough is enough! Thomas Jefferson included in the Declaration of Independence about injustice and how the government protected its agents as they do today: “For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:”

History repeats because those in power will always act in their self-interest. Nothing has ever changed since Thrasymachus warned Socrates who imposed the death penalty and Plota fled Athens saying he would not allow a second crime against Philosophy.

Tucker Carlson Outlines the New American Dictatorship


Posted originally on the CTH on June 16, 2023 | Sundance 

Comrades, dissident voice Tucker Carlson continues broadcasting his rebellious monologues on Twitter.  For his latest episode 4, Carlson notes the new American dictatorship. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:

Dear Leader does not appreciate the unauthorized broadcasts from dissident citizens.

The Russians Poke Fun at Western Sanctions


Posted originally on the TH on June 14, 2023 | Sundance 

Whatever else might be said about them, Russians have this weird little gremlin approach toward political humor that is actually quite funny.  I still think it was Oleg Deripaska who made up the Ritz Carlton Pee-Pee tapes Trump story just to see if the FBI would run with it.  Perhaps the snark is part of the reason why our ever serious and joyless state dept hates them so much. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:

Indictments, Republicans and Opposition to Donald Trump


Posted originally on the CTH on June 14, 2023 | Sundance 

As customary in this era of a great awakening, there are a lot more Republican masks dropping this week.  There is a great deal of sunlight upon the professional and institutional Republican politicians that hold office, when contrast against the indictment of Donald Trump.  As we bear witness to the establishment opposition of candidate Donald Trump, once again it is valuable to understand the motive at the heart of this opposition.

CTH can get down in the weeds of each specific issue to discuss the motives and intents (we will, and do), but the big picture MUST remain at the forefront of understanding. If we lose track of the big picture, the weeds are overwhelming.

…“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.”

Niccolò Machiavelli

♦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 interests, our position, is zero-sum. His DC opposition seeks to repel and retain the status-quo. They want to return to full economic control.

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 us.

There are trillions at stake. The need for control is a reaction to fear. The billionaire donor class fear losing control over economic policy and finance. They are funding every candidate, media resource, influencer operation, RNC, RGA, and every institution possible to retain their equity position. Opposition is based on economics; everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

Familiar faces, perhaps faces you previously thought were decent, are now revealing their alignment with larger entities that are our abusers. In an effort to awaken the victim to the cycle of self-destructive codependent behavior, allow me to cue an audio-visual example from March 2018 with U.S. Senator John Thune. WATCH:

.

What South Dakota Senator John Thune is showcasing here is his full alignment with big multinational corporate agriculture (BIG AG). Big AG is not supporting local farmers. Big AG does not support “free and fair markets.” Big AG supports the interests of multinational corporations and multinational financial interests.

For those interests the U.S. is the host; from our perspective they are the parasite.

It is critical to think of BIG AG in the same way we already are familiar with multinational manufacturing of durable goods.

We are already familiar how China, Mexico and Southeast Asia nations exported our raw materials (ore, coking coal, rare earth minerals and recycled aluminum etc.). The raw material to manufacture goods was exported from the U.S. and then shipped back into the U.S. as durable goods for purchase.  This is the origin of the “rustbelt” collapse.

To avoid tariffs and other restrictions, some of the finished goods are trans-shipped through other ports in order to hide the originating manifest.  It is within this decades-long process where we lost the manufacturing base, and the multinational economic planners (World Trade Organization) put us on a path to being a “service driven” economy.

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.

With that familiarity, did you think the multinationals would stop with only “DURABLE GOODS”?

They don’t.

They didn’t.

The exact same exfiltration and raw material exploitation has been happening, with increased speed, over the past 15 years with “CONSUMABLE GOODS“, ie food.

Raw material foodstuff is exported to China, ASEAN nations and Mexico, processed and shipped back into the U.S. as a finished product. This is the same design-flow with food as previously exploited by other economic sectors, including auto manufacturing.

Multinational corporations, BIG AG, are now invested in controlling the outputs of U.S. agricultural industry and farmers. This process is why food prices have risen exponentially in the past decade.

The free market is not determining price; there is no “supply and demand” influence within this modern agricultural dynamic. Food commodities are now a controlled market just like durable goods. The raw material (harvests writ large) are exploited by the financial interests of massive multinational corporations, known collectively as BIG AG.

Again, if we were to pull out of these export arrangements, our domestic food bill would drop 25% (or more) within the first year. Further, if U.S. supply and demand were part of the domestic market price for food, we would see the prices of aggregate food products drop by half almost immediately. Some perishable food products would predictably drop so dramatically in price, it is unfathomable how far the prices would fall.

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 reins of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of America First national economics.   They are 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 an 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.

Bullet point #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 extend to virtually every possible commodity and industry. From the very visible (wheat/corn), to the obscure (small minerals, and even flowers).

Bullet point #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.

Bullet point #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 policymakers 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, are aligned against President Trump.

Perhaps now we understand why he is uniquely qualified to begin the American restoration.

Perhaps now we understand why Donald Trump carries a very unique economic policy agenda that is entirely different from the other nine candidates.

Perhaps now you know why there are nine corporate Republicans trying to defeat him.

Perhaps now you know why I stand, steadfast…. with TRUMP!

There is only one candidate with an economic restoration platform.

[Support CTH HERE]