The Principals Outline Current Status of Law & Order Enforcement and Purpose of New Camp David Security Use


Posted originally on CTH on June 8, 2025 | Sundance 

President Trump and Secretary of State/National Security Advisor Marco Rubio depart New Jersey en route to Camp David for a principals group meeting, discussion and strategy session.  As President Trump notes, there will be “generals, and ¹others” in attendance at Camp David, using the additional term “better security.”

On the subject of whether he would trigger the Insurrection Act to quell violence in Los Angeles, President Trump replied, “that depends on if there’s an insurrection.”  lol  President Trump said he and his team are watching the events closely, but they will not permit law enforcement to be harmed in any way.  Violence will not be tolerated.

President Trump then asked the assembled pool if they had any questions for Marco Rubio, they did not – so the duo left.  WATCH:

.

¹Crazy impossible thought… what if, Putin or similar (Iran/Gaza?).  Nah,.. crazy thought. Nuts.  It’s all just coincidental alignments of stuff.  No way.  Ignore my rambling.

Kevin Hassett Outlines Current Status of White House on Senate BBB Debate and China Trade Negotiations


Posted originally on CTH on June 8, 2025 | Sundance

The blood slowly drains from the face of Margaret Brennan as she faces the indefatigable smiling truth that Kevin Hassett represents. The furrowed brows deepen, the lips pulsate to a purple posture, the accusatory sanctimony drips from her squints and failed constructs until ultimately, she is reduced to a sneering inflection of autonomous twitching.

Kevin Hassett smiles, thanks Ms. Brennan for her endeavors, outlines the White House position on the BBB and China trade negotiations, then happily orders an ice-cream cone for his walk back to the office on a bright sunny day.

[TRANSCRIPT] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re joined now by the Director of the National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett. He joins us from the White House. Good morning to you.

KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: Hey Margaret, good morning.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So I do want to allow you to respond to some of the very specific criticisms that Senator Klobuchar made. One of the things she brought up was something that, frankly, the Senate Majority Leader seemed to acknowledge was under discussion, and that was touching Medicare, making some kind of adjustment. He said anything we can do that’s waste, fraud, and abuse is open to discussion. Is the White House open to any discussion around Medicare?

HASSETT: Well, first of all, what’s happening is that the senators, respecting the legislative process, are discussing what they think that they can put on the table. And the President has made it clear that ending waste, fraud, and abuse, and giving benefits to illegals and giving benefits to people who are able-bodied workers, those are his high priorities. If the Senate comes up with other things they’d like us to look at, I guess- I guess we would have a look at them. But, there have been a lot of false stories about Medicare being on the table, and it’s totally not on the table.

The way that that was covered in the news a couple of weeks ago was that in the end, when the budget process ends, if they don’t waive the budget caps, then there’s going to be reductions across the board in spending. And that’s what no one would intend, and no Democrat would vote for that, but that was covered as our intent to go after Medicare, and it was just a big fake news story last week.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, so Leader Thune and leader Johnson have- and Speaker Johnson have said anything with waste, fraud, and abuse. But you right now, you are taking-

HASSETT: Waste, fraud and abuse. Waste, fraud and abuse–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But to be–

HASSETT: It’s the same.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood, but you were taking Medicare off the table. The White House says don’t do it-

HASSETT: No we- no, but, but, but, but I’ve not- I’ve seen a massive amount of waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, and I’ve not been briefed on Medicare waste, fraud and abuse. But if they find something then, of course, we would look at it.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You would look at it —

HASSETT: — Of Course

MARGARET BRENNAN: — Senator Hawley was also brought up by Senator Klobuchar- Klobuchar, and Missouri senator has made it clear he wants to see changes to the increased copayment requirements for Medicaid that was in the House version that was sent over to the Senate. Are you comfortable with this House bill as it is written? What do you want to see done to Medicaid?

HASSETT: Again, what we want to see done now is we want the Senate to pass the bill, and then we want the House and the Senate to work out their differences, while negotiating with us. And right now, the Senate has to get the votes they need to pass the bill, and we’re supporting them in that process. But you also need to be mindful when you’re thinking about this, that one of the things that we put out a report for the Council of Economic Advisers, that if the bill doesn’t pass, then they estimate that this would cause a reduction of GDP by 4 percent. We’d be in a deep recession. We’d lose six or seven million jobs of those people, almost all those people, would lose their insurance. And so this idea that the only person who ever is going to get insurance is someone who’s getting it from the government is just incorrect, and if we create the jobs that we have in the bill, then we’re going to create a heck of a lot more insurance than what we’re talking about in waste, fraud and abuse.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you’re open to what Senator Hawley is looking to change, though, that’s what I understand.

HASSETT: I’d, I’d have to go see what he has and I’d want to look at the high details before I say I’ll open it. And I also would want to talk to the President about the specific matter, which I’ve not done.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, so one of the other massive influences on the economy right now is the, the trade war, particularly with China. Tomorrow in London, the treasury secretary, the trade representative and the commerce secretary are going to meet with Chinese officials. Treasury Secretary Bessent told us last Sunday that the recent tension was around exports of critical minerals. When will those exports resume? And what do you expect to come from tomorrow’s meeting?

HASSETT: Right. Those, those exports of critical minerals have been getting released at a rate that is, you know, higher than it was, but not as high as we believe we agreed to in Geneva. And President Trump, being a deal maker, talked with President Xi, and he said, let’s take, you know, our senior guys, and the people who are the same level as you. Let’s have them meet somewhere, and let’s get these things cleared up, and then we’ll clear up what you don’t like that we have agreed to release on our side, and we’re going to shake hands about it. He literally said, I want to meet in London, and I want to shake hands on it, so that we know we’ve got a deal. And then after that, I think there was a very affable exchange about President Trump visiting China and President Xi coming here. And so, I’m very comfortable that this deal is about to be closed, and it’s going to be closed not with a bunch of staffers and bureaucratic language, but with handshakes. So that’s the way President Trump operates.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Same terms, nothing new.

HASSETT: Well, I think that there- we can’t talk about the terms that they’re coming out with throughout because they’re still working on it. But the point is, we want the rare earths, the magnets that are crucial for cell phones and everything else, to flow just as they did before the beginning of April. And we don’t want any technical details slowing that down, and that’s clear to them.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So our CBS News polling shows that most Americans don’t like the tariffs, and most Americans don’t think the Trump administration has a plan. We’re also hearing from top economists, including the head of the Philadelphia Federal Reserve who said the rules are really unclear, and business leaders need certainty. When will they get that certainty from the administration?

HASSETT: Well, you could be certain that there’s going to be some tariffs, and the stuff that folks have been saying that’s going to happen to tariffs is inconsistent with what you and I have talked about before, Margaret. So what’s going on, right, is that we’ve had a trade deficit with China forever and ever, because they just want to sell stuff here, so they create jobs in China and help, you know, control their government so people are unemployed, that it’s harder for a dictatorship to run. And so the point is just that, that if we put a tariff on them, then they’re going to bear the tariff. So what just happened? What just happened is that we had about 60 billion dollars in tariff revenue in the U.S., and inflation, inflation, every measure of inflation, is the lowest that it’s been for more than four years. And so all of our policies together are reducing inflation and helping reduce the deficit by getting revenue from other countries. And how much revenue, I think that you might have covered it, the Congressional Budget Office put out a 10-year estimate that says that the tariff revenue that’s already in place right now is going to raise 2.8 trillion dollars over the next 10 years. That’s more than their own estimate, their own static estimate. So this entire bill, so that that’s deficit reduction right there.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I’m glad you brought up that stat, because it made me wonder. You just said that one certainty is there will be tariffs. You are saying tariffs are staying put, that this is a constant source of–

HASSETT: –we’re, we’re negotiating reciprocal-

MARGARET BRENNAN: –of

HASSETT: –You’ve seen deals.

[CROSSTALK]

HASSETT: And exactly where they are. We’re working it out, and we’re opening up markets. So that–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah but the deals- this is where I’m stuck, because deals is about negotiating down the tariffs. So that’s a diminishing source of revenue over time. But, are you saying that there will be blanket tariffs–

HASSETT: –Last year–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –of what percent?

HASSETT: Last year, before we got here, we were raising 80 billion a year in tariffs. Right now, the CBO projects that we’re going to get 2.8 trillion over the next 10 years. Exactly where the number ends up is going to depend on how much foreign countries open up their markets to our products and how much- how well they treat our farmers and we’ll see–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –So you don’t know how much revenue you are going to have–

HASSETT: Revenue, revenue was 80 billion last year. Revenue- tariff revenue, is not going away. That’s what I’m saying.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But we don’t know what the tariffs are going to be. So-

HASSETT: We’re negotiating them on a country-by-country basis.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Exactly.

HASSETT: We’ve got a whole bunch of trade deals. We’ve got a trade deal with UK that’s already, you can see what the trade deal with the UK is now.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, so it’s a fluctuating number. It’s not- it’s not a constant. But before I let you go, the Senate Finance Chair, I know you were in this meeting at the White House this week, he indicated quadrupling the state and local tax deduction, or SALT tax, is not something he’s interested in doing. They don’t have the politics in the Senate like they do in the House that would require it, right. So is the White House committed to keeping this, this quadrupling of the SALT tax deduction as it is?

HASSETT: The- the President has said that he supports changing the law, the state and lo- local tax deduction. And this is a very, you know, it’s a horse trading issue with the Senate and the House. And again, the President has listed his priorities of the tax bill, and you know, it’s no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, you know them all. And the Senate and the House, they know that those priorities for the President are red lines. And then on the other side, they’re negotiating what they’re going to negotiate, because there’s a different level of support in the Senate that there was in the House. And in the end, the one thing we need, the President wants, is a bill that passes. It passes on the Fourth of July.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So Senator Crapo needs to prepare himself that that is staying as the House wrote it.

HASSETT: He’s got to work it out with the House.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay. Kevin Hassett, thank you for your time this morning. We’ll be back in a moment.

{END TRANSCRIPT}

ABC News Suspends Senior White House Correspondent for Revealing Extreme Media Bias Against President Trump


Posted originally on CTH on June 8, 2025 | Sundance

After agreeing to pay $15 million to President Trump from a previous lawsuit, apparently ABC executives are not in the mood for more anti-Trump bias revelations within their ranks.  ABC News has suspended Senior White House Correspondent Terry Moran for a Twitter rage against President Trump and Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller.

Moran sent the following Tweet last night, which -subsequent to the sunlight it contains about his bias- he apparently deleted.  However, not before several people noticed it, including the White House Press Secretary.

ABC Responded to the mask dropping by suspending Terry Moran for not concealing his bias.

WASHINGTON DC – Veteran ABC News correspondent Terry Moran was suspended Sunday after he posted a highly critical assessment of President Donald Trump and Trump’s deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller on the social media platform X.

In the missive, which was posted shortly after midnight, Moran said both Trump and Miller are “world-class haters.” For Trump, he said, hatred is “only a means to an end, and that end is his own glorification. That’s his spiritual nourishment.”

For Miller, on the other hand, “hatreds are his spiritual nourishment,” Moran charged. “He eats his hate.”

Moran — who landed a rare Oval Office interview with Trump in April — later deleted the tweet and didn’t post anything further.

On Sunday morning, Trump administration officials condemned Moran and said the post reflected poorly on ABC News as an institution. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt publicly pushed ABC to discipline Moran.

[…] About one hour later, the news division said Moran, its senior national correspondent and former “Nightline” anchor, had been suspended.

“ABC News stands for objectivity and impartiality in its news coverage and does not condone subjective personal attacks on others,” a spokesperson said in response to CNN’s inquiry about Moran. “The post does not reflect the views of ABC News and violated our standards — as a result, Terry Moran has been suspended pending further evaluation.” (MORE)

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem Discusses National Guard Deployment and Homeland Security Operation


Posted originally on CTH on June 8, 2025 | Sundance 

Dept of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appears on Face the Nation to discuss the escalation of violent protests in Los Angeles, California.

As President Trump called for the National Guard to enforce order in Los Angeles amid protests over ICE activity, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tells “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” that “we are not going to let a repeat of 2020 happen,” referring to the unrest in Minneapolis following the killing of George Floyd. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz deployed the state’s National Guard to deal with the 2020 riots in Minneapolis. Video and Transcript Below:

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We go now to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who joins us from her home state of South Dakota. Good morning to you, Madam Secretary.

SECRETARY KRISTI NOEM: Good morning. Thank you for inviting me, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we are seeing from the President’s proclamation that he can federalize- he says, 2000 California National Guard forces for 60 days under Title 10 authorities. Which units are being deployed? Are they military police, and exactly what are their orders?

SECRETARY NOEM: Yes, President Trump is putting the safety of the communities that are being impacted by these riots and by these protests that have turned violent, and he’s putting the safety of our law enforcement officers first. So these 2000 National Guard soldiers that are being engaged today are ones that are specifically trained for this type of crowd situation, where they’ll be with the public and be able to provide safety around buildings and to those that are engaged in peaceful protests, and also to our law enforcement officers so they can continue their daily work.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So our CBS team is reporting that the California National Guard officers are at that Edward Roybal Center in LA. This is a plaza with a federal building, courtrooms are there a processing center, a detention center, a veterans’ clinic. Are the soldiers going to remain around the federal building? Are you planning to have them go throughout the city of Los Angeles?

SECRETARY NOEM: I won’t speak specifically to all the locations where the national- National Guard soldiers will be deployed to, or where they will be conducting different operations as far as security concerns. They’re there at the direction of the President in order to keep peace and allow people to be able to protest, but also to keep law and order. That is incredibly important to the President. He recognizes he was elected to make sure that every single person in this country was treated exactly the same, and that we would enforce the laws. And that is what ICE is doing every day as they’re out on our streets and working to go after bad criminals and people that have perpetuated violence on these communities. The gang members we have picked up in LA because of their hard work are horrible people. Assault, drug trafficking, human trafficking. They are now off of those streets, and they are safer because these ICE operations are ongoing. Unfortunately, we’ve seen some violent protests happen, and that’s why these National Guard soldiers are being utilized to help with some security in some areas.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, California’s governor doesn’t want the federalized system here. He says he’s got it under control. There’s no shortage of law enforcement, Gavin Newsom said. He’s called in California Highway Patrol. He says the Trump administration is seeking a spectacle here. He’s saying to protesters, don’t get violent, don’t engage.

SECRETARY NOEM: Well, if he was doing his job, then people wouldn’t have gotten hurt the last couple of days. We wouldn’t have officers with a shattered wrist from bricks being thrown through their vehicles, their vehicles being burned, flags being burned in the street and Molotov cocktails being thrown. Governor Newsom has proven that he makes bad decisions. The President knows that he makes bad decisions, and that’s why the President chose the safety of this community over waiting for Governor Newsom to get some sanity. And that’s one of the reasons why these National Guard soldiers are being federalized so they can use their special skill set to keep peace. We’re not going to let a repeat of 2020 happen. And if you remember, it all happened in Tim Walz’s state in Minneapolis, [AUDIO CUTS OUT] neighboring state and a governor at the time. And Governor Tim Walz made very bad decisions and then tried to get the rest of us governors to send our National Guard in to bail him out when he let his city burn for days on end. We–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well he called the National Guard two days after the protests, but that was a point of contention, I know, in hindsight. President Trump–

SECRETARY NOEM: [AUDIO CUTS OUT] –in California won’t happen again.

MARGARET BRENNAN: President Trump said masks will not be allowed to be worn at protests. Who’s going to enforce that and how? And how can you justify it when law enforcement officials have their faces covered?

SECRETARY NOEM: You know what I would say is that the law is going to be enforced, and that I- what the laws are in this country is what we are doing, and our ICE officers and our law enforcement officers out there that are in these situations where people have questioned why they have their faces covered. It’s for the safety of those individuals or the work that they’re doing as far as protecting their identity so they can continue to do investigative work, so.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But are you tasking the National Guard soldiers with removing masks from protesters? I mean, are you trying to use them in that way?

SECRETARY NOEM: National Guard soldiers are there to provide security for operations and to make sure that we have peaceful protests. So that’s what their work is, and I won’t get more specific on that, just because we never do when it comes to law enforcement operations, we’re doing the same standard procedures we always do and have for years in this country with our National Guard and with our- you know, law enforcement folks that are on the ground working with these communities.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the Defense Secretary also tweeted last night that he put active-duty Marines at Camp Pendleton on high alert. We know, since you mentioned 2020 that President Trump, during those Black Lives Matter protests at the time, had wanted to use active-duty U.S. troops on the streets of a major city. The 82nd Airborne at the time was called up. They were not sent into the streets. What exactly do you set as Homeland Security Secretary as your benchmark for when you would counsel the President of the United States to send active duty troops in to police a domestic disturbance?

SECRETARY NOEM: Well, my hope is always that we work with local leaders that would do their jobs. And that is what has failed in LA, is that the mayor has refused to recognize the dangerous situation that she’s perpetuating, as well as the governor. When we ask for backup in a situation, LAPD has waited hours to respond, and they’ve waited until we have an officer in a dangerous situation, until they come in and help us bring peace. Oftentimes, in these cities, you have good leaders that help give back up to other law enforcement officers, but you have politicians who won’t give that kind of resource when it’s needed. Unfortunately, waiting several hours for LAPD to show up or telling them- them telling us that they’re not going to back us up until they have an officer in a dangerous situation is something that just isn’t workable when you have violent protests going on, so.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The U.S.–

SECRETARY NOEM: –work better with us, but that’s one of the reasons that you’ve seen the National Guard come in and help us with those security operations.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the US Attorney in LA told CBS that LAPD did help. LAPD, does not–

SECRETARY NOEM: That’s what stood out to me, Margaret, is hours later they- they waited until we had officers in dangerous situations, then they responded. Now, if that was my city and I was the mayor, I would be sending law enforcement in there to back up other law enforcement officers. That’s what America’s about is- is that we have rules and we have laws. If you don’t like the laws, go to Congress and change them. Someone should go to Congress and say, change the laws. If we don’t like what’s happening in this country, do that instead of throwing rocks and throwing Molotov cocktails and instead of attacking law enforcement officers. We’re just not going to do that anymore. This President cares deeply about family members that want to live in their communities and be safe.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Back to the question, though, of active-duty troops, different from the National Guard, what is your personal counsel here to the President? Because it’s you, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Defense, who are going to have a lot of responsibility here in implementing some of this call to do this?

SECRETARY NOEM: Well, let me be clear about something, ICE and Homeland Security are running these operations right now, and the advice and counsel of the Attorney General, the Department of Defense are extremely important to the President of the United States, and we never discuss our personal conversations and advice to the President of the United States. He makes the decisions he is the President that sits in that seat, and we are all very proud to work for him. So I’m grateful for the leadership- leadership of Pete Hegseth and- and Pam Bondi and I get the chance to work with them, and as ICE [AUDIO CUTS OUT] and does their job today, we’re thankful to have the partnership and the leadership of President Trump.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, some Republican senators, like Senator Lankford has- have said active-duty Marines are not going to be put into local law enforcement. So there are Republican lawmakers questioning this. To the question about where we are seeing the National Guard troops centered around this Roybal center, CBS is reporting undocumented immigrants attending their ICE check-ins were being detained and held overnight in the basement of that building. And there were lawyers for some of those detainees claiming it was illegal because the migrants were held in makeshift facilities with limited access to food and water. That was one of the sources of the protest. Can you vouch for these facilities? And do you understand what some of these protesters are concerned about?

SECRETARY NOEM: Well these protests started long before we ended up in the situations that we saw when we were trying to secure these individuals, and the law enforcement officers involved. What I would say is- is getting into individuals in and out of those facilities was extremely challenging when the violence broke out and when things were being thrown at vehicles, and people were rocking vehicles and shaking them, trying to break into them. In fact, we had to send a swift response team in to get a female officer out of her vehicle safely- when those situations. So we are following all the laws and procedures as we always do. But when you have violence like that, the safety of everybody involved is incredibly important, and we’ll make sure that we get people through them without injury as best to our ability.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Secretary Noem, we’re going to have to leave that there. Thank you for your time this morning, and we apologize to our viewers about any audio drops you may have heard there. I heard a few myself. ‘Face the Nation’ will be back in one minute. Stay with us.

{END TRANSCRIPT}

Congresswoman Harriet Hageman Outlines Background of Big Beautiful Bill


Posted originally on CTH on June 8, 2025 | Sundance 

Congresswoman Harriet Hageman from Wyoming outlines background and perspective on the Big Beautiful Bill in a brief statement uploaded to her social media accounts.  Rep Hageman walks through the important aspects of the bill as well as parliamentarian rules for its construct.  WATCH:

.

President Trump Authorizes National Guard to Activate in California and Defense Secretary/DHS Secretary to Support


Posted originally on CTH on June 8, 2025 | Sundance

With California Governor Gavin Newsom willfully and intentionally abdicating his responsibility to ensure law and order in Los Angeles, President Trump authorizes the National Guard, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Dept of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to take charge of protecting federal law enforcement operations.

President Donald Trump, acting in his capacity as Commander in Chief, signs and Emergency Order [SEE HERE], activating the national security apparatus, DoD and DHS to immediately dispatch 2,000 National Guard troops, with active military as support as needed.

SUBJECT: Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

Numerous incidents of violence and disorder have recently occurred and threaten to continue in response to the enforcement of Federal law by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions and supporting the faithful execution of Federal immigration laws. In addition, violent protests threaten the security of and significant damage to Federal immigration detention facilities and other Federal property. To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.

In light of these incidents and credible threats of continued violence, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.

Further, I direct and delegate actions as necessary for the Secretary of Defense to coordinate with the Governors of the States and the National Guard Bureau in identifying and ordering into Federal service the appropriate members and units of the National Guard under this authority. The members and units of the National Guard called into Federal service shall be at least 2,000 National Guard personnel and the duration of duty shall be for 60 days or at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense. In addition, the Secretary of Defense may employ any other members of the regular Armed Forces as necessary to augment and support the protection of Federal functions and property in any number determined appropriate in his discretion.

To carry out this mission, the deployed military personnel may perform those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary to ensure the protection and safety of Federal personnel and property The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security prior to withdrawing any personnel from any location to which they are sent. The Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security may delegate to subordinate officials of their respective Departments any of the authorities conferred upon them by this memorandum.

DONALD J. TRUMP – (link)

President Donald Trump Attends UFC Fight at Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey


Posted originally on CTH on June 7, 2025 | Sundance

The crowd erupts into cheers as President Donald Trump arrives to enter the Prudential Center in Newark, N.J, to attend UFC 316.  WATCH:

.

No Elon. No JD.  But Marco Rubio is beside him.

Subtle, like a brick through a window.

Poor video quality (satellite issue):

.

The Principals…

Things get urgent.

Things get serious.

The former Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee becomes a principal.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now National Security Advisor.

President Trump shifts strategic discussions to Camp David.

Keep watching.

Go back and watch Marco Rubio’s unscripted speech, totally impromptu from last week. 

President Trump Modifies Security and Principal Communication Strategy


Posted originally on CTH on June 7, 2025 | Sundance

This is super interesting on multiple levels.  Several key issues are rapidly approaching an inflection point at the same time.  Urgency scale 1-10: Trade deals (5), BBB (9), Russia-Ukraine conflict (9) and now domestic ICE operations which will require intervention against California (9).

In addition, thanks to work by National Security Advisor Marco Rubio and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, the corrupt Intelligence Community network has taken several hits below the waterline.

From a White House official to traveling press: “On Sunday, the President will depart Bedminster and spend the night at Camp David before returning to the White House on Monday. The White House has organized what will become a regular off campus retreat of principals attended by the President and Vice President. They will meet on a number of issues and topics.” (source)

It’s a smart move.

Remember, it’s Team MAGA facing down DC.

Quiet time, in a casual format, for tight, secure team-building focus on specific high priority issues as they increase in urgency.

The next outline will be directly related.

Governor Gavin Newsom Announces It’s Not His Job to Enforce the Law – Los Angeles Collapses into Chaos


Posted originally on CTH on June 7, 2025 | Sundance

California Governor Gavin Newsom has announced it is not his job to enforce the law, protect the citizens of California or provide for domestic tranquility.  He is giving the rioting mob carte blanche to continue the chaos:

[SOURCE]

As a consequence of the mayor, police commissioner and now Governor abdicating their responsibility to retain law and order, President Trump is now coordinating a full federal response to assist the citizens of Los Angeles.

[SOURCE] 

FBI

DHS

DOJ

FBI

Vice President

The Challenge for Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, Pam Bondi, Tulsi Gabbard, John Ratcliffe and Marco Rubio


Posted originally on CTH on June 7, 2025 | Sundance

Currently only DNI Tulsi Gabbard and Sec of State/Nat Sec Advisor Marco Rubio are rising to the challenge.  As collaborating NSA and DNI, they are slowly -but effectively- deconstructing the corrupt Intelligence Community tools.   DHS Secretary Kirsti Noem is also doing an effective job, but her focus is narrower on the IC elements.

Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, Pam Bondi and John Ratcliffe need to get their ass in gear!

Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; instead, what they did was take the preexisting system and retool it so the weapons only targeted one side of the political continuum.  This point is where many people understandably get confused.

In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats.  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became the target of the new national security system.  This is very important to understand as you dig deeper into this research outline.

Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01.  DHS came along in 2002 and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed.  When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

The preexisting Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security apparatus.  However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism based on political ideology.  The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four pillars of this new institution.  Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government.

We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake.  However, we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in 2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the design.  By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the aftermath.  The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch of Government was quietly created.

As time passed, and the system operators became familiar with their new tools, technology allowed the tentacles of the system to reach out and touch us. That is when we first started to notice that something very disconcerting was happening.  Those four pillars are the root of it, and if we take the time to understand how the Fourth Branch originated, questions about this current state of perpetual angst will start to make sense.

Grab a cup of your favorite beverage, and take a walk with me as we outline how this was put together.  You might find many of the questions about our current state of political affairs beginning to make a lot more sense.

Remember, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding fourth branch of government. Such an effort would be exhausting and likely take our discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.

History provided enough warnings from Dwight D. Eisenhower (military), to John F. Kennedy (CIA), to Richard Nixon (FBI), to all modern versions of warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell. None of those prior reference points are invalid, and all documented outlines of historic reference are likely true and accurate. However, a generational review is not useful, as the reference impacting us ‘right now‘ gets lost.

Instead, we pick up the expansive and weaponized intelligence system as it manifests after 9/11/01, and my goal is to highlight how the modern version of the total intelligence apparatus has now metastasized into a Fourth Branch of Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every facet of our life.

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

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

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

After days of research and meetings in DC during 2020; amid a town that was serendipitously shut down due to COVID-19; I found a letter slid under the door of my room in a nearly empty hotel with an introduction of sorts. The subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After many hours of specific questions and answers on specific examples, I realized why our nation is in this mess. That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.

I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works: (1) to control every other branch of government; (2) how it functions as an entirely independent branch of government with no oversight; (3) how and why it was created to be independent from oversight; (4) what is the current mission of the IC Branch, and most importantly (5) who operates it.

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

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

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

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

We begin….

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

Things to note:

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

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

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

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

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

[Sidebar: Every time I post this video it gets scrubbed from YouTube (example), so save it if you ever want to see it again.]

The video of James Clapper highlights how the ODNI position (created with good national security intention) ended up becoming the fulcrum for modern weaponization, and is now an office manipulated by agencies with a vested interest in retaining power. The Intelligence Branch holds power over the ODNI through their influence and partnership with the body that authorizes the power within it, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).

Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in their favor. The checks create silos of proprietary information, classified information, vaults of information that work around oversight issues. The silos are part of the problem.

Ironically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been prevented. The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the 9/11 commission.

The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside the Executive Branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to analyze threats to the U.S. This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.

The DNI office created a problem for those who operate in the shadows of proprietary information. You’ll see how it was critical to install a person uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the Intelligence Branch of Government.

• The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George W. Bush. Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing resolutions and individual spending bills.

Why does this matter? Because many people think defunding the Intelligence Community is a solution; it is not…. at least, not yet. Worse yet, the corrupt divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign entities).

• When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007, they took office with a plan. Nancy Pelosi became Speaker, and Democrats controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader. Barack Obama was a junior senator from Illinois.

Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting. Baseline budgeting means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the next year budget. All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within baseline budgeting.

Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation. This is the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect. TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery Program), auto bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were all part of the non budget spending. The federal reserve assisted with Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.

Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process since September of 2007.

• While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S. military was cut, but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded. We were all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican party wanted to keep us that way. However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.

The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control over specific elements inside the U.S. government. Eric Holder played a key role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.

AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were aware of the larger institutional objectives. One of those objectives was weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the DOJ that had no inspector general oversight. For most people the DOJ-NSD weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting candidate Donald Trump many years later. However, by then the Holder crew had executed almost eight full years of background work.

• The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI. Why was that important? Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone who needs or holds a security clearance. The removal of security clearances could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they were assembling. Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security clearances were easy to justify.

Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this filtration within the security clearance process. How does that issue later manifest?   Just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency has become, specifically including the FBI.

• At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making room for the next phase was being assembled. Names like Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.

Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional objective. Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his first foreign trip. The State Department worked with grassroots organizers (mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya. Obama leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan for contacts and support.

Why does this aspect matter to us? Well, you might remember how much effort the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources for the various mideast rebellions the White House and DoS supported. This was the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech social media.

In many ways, the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The U.S. intelligence community working with social media platforms and political operatives.

Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“. Where does this contractor activity manifest? In the FISA Court opinion of Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or MOU.

Hopefully, you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was. None of this was accidental, all of this was by design, and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally allowing most of this to take place.

That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the modern IC was created. Next we will go into how all these various intelligence networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the President from knowing their activity.

♦ When Barack Obama was installed in January 2009, the Democrats held a 60 seat majority in the U.S. Senate. As the people behind the Obama installation began executing their longer-term plan, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was a tool to create the Intelligence Branch; it was not an unintentional series of events.

When Obama was installed, Dianne Feinstein was the Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and Democrat operative Dan Jones was her lead staffer. Feinstein was completely controlled by those around her including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The CIA was in the process of turning over personnel following the Bush era, and as a result of a massive multi-year narrative of diminished credibility (Iraq WMD), a deep purge was underway. Obama/Holder were in the process of shifting intelligence alignment and the intensely political Democrat Leader Harry Reid was a key participant.

THE TRAP – Many people say that Congress is the solution to eliminating the Fourth and superseding Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. This is an exercise in futility because the Legislative Branch, specifically the SSCI, facilitated the creation of the Intelligence Branch. The SSCI cannot put the genie they created back in the bottle without admitting they too are corrupt; and the background story of their corruption is way too intense to be exposed now.

Every member of the SSCI is compromised in some controlling manner. Those Senators who disliked the control over them; specifically disliked because the risk of sunlight was tenuous and, well, possible; have either left completely or stepped down from the committee. None of the SSCI members past or present would ever contemplate saying openly what their tenure involved.

[Note: You might remember when Vice Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages surfaced, there was a controlled Republican SSCI member who came to his defense in February of 2018. It was not accidental that exact Senator later became the chair of the SSCI himself. That Republican Senator is Marco Rubio, now vice-chair since the Senate re-flipped back to the optics of Democrat control in 2021.]

All of President Obama’s 2009 intelligence appointments required confirmation from the Senate. The nominees had to first pass through the Democrat controlled SSCI, and then to a full Senate vote where Democrats held a 60 vote majority. Essentially, Obama got everyone he wanted in place easily. Rahm Emmanuel was Obama’s Chief of Staff, and Valerie Jarrett was Senior Advisor.

Tim Geithner was Treasury Secretary in 2010 when the joint DOJ/FBI and IRS operation to target the Tea Party took place after the midterm “shellacking” caused by the Obamacare backlash. Mitch McConnell was Minority Leader in the Senate but supported the targeting of the Tea Party as his Senate colleagues were getting primaried by an angry and effective grassroots campaign. McConnell’s friend, Senator Bob Bennett,  getting beaten in Utah was the final straw.

Dirty Harry and Mitch McConnell saw the TEA Party through the same prism. The TEA Party took Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts (Scott Brown); Sharon Angle was about to take out Harry Reid in Nevada; Arlen Spector was taken down in Pennsylvania; Senator Robert Byrd died; Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary to Joe Miller in Alaska; McConnell’s nominee Mike Castle lost to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware; Rand Paul won in Kentucky. This is the background. The peasants were revolting…. and visibly angry Mitch McConnell desperately made a deal with the devil to protect himself.

In many ways, the TEA Party movement was/is very similar to the MAGA movement. The difference in 2010 was the absence of a head of the movement, in 2015 Donald Trump became that head figure who benefited from the TEA Party energy. Trump came into office in 2017 with the same congressional opposition as the successful TEA Party candidates in 2011.

Republicans took control of the Senate following the 2014 mid-terms. Republicans took control of the SSCI in January 2015. Senator Richard Burr became chairman of the SSCI, and Dianne Feinstein shifted to Vice-Chair. Dirty Harry Reid left the Senate, and Mitch McConnell took power again.

Republicans were in control of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2015 when the Intelligence Branch operation against candidate Donald Trump was underway. [Feinstein’s staffer, Dan Jones, left the SSCI so he could act as a liaison and political operative between private-sector efforts (Fusion GPS, Chris Steele) and the SSCI.] The SSCI was a participant in that Fusion-GPS/Chris Steele operation, and as a direct consequence Republicans were inherently tied to the problem with President Trump taking office in January of 2017. Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats was a member of the SSCI.

Bottom line…. When it came to the intelligence system targeting Donald Trump during the 2015/2016 primary, the GOP was just as much at risk as their Democrat counterparts.

When Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, the SSCI was shocked more than most. They knew countermeasures would need to be deployed to protect themselves from any exposure of their intelligence conduct. Dianne Feinstein stepped down, and Senator Mark Warner was elevated to Vice Chairman.

Indiana’s own Mike Pence, now Vice President, recommended fellow Hoosier, SSCI Senator Dan Coats, to become President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). [Apply hindsight here]

• To give an idea of the Intelligence Branch power dynamic, remind yourself how House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Chairman Devin Nunes, tried to get access to the DOJ/FBI records of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign via Carter Page.

Remember, Devin Nunes only saw a portion of the FISA trail from his review of a Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) previously given to President Obama. Chairman Nunes had to review the PDB at the White House SCIF due to compartmented intelligence, another example of the silo benefit.

Remember the massive stonewalling and blocking of the DOJ/FBI toward Nunes? Remember the back and forth battle over declassification surrounding the Nunes memo?

Remember, after Nunes went directly to House Speaker Paul Ryan for help (didn’t get any), the DOJ only permitted two members from each party within the HPSCI to review the documents, and only at the DOJ offices of main justice?

Contrast that amount of House Intel Committee railroading and blocking by intelligence operatives in the DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI, with the simple request by Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner asking to see the Carter Page FISA application and immediately a copy being delivered to him on March 17th 2017.

Can you see which intelligence committee is aligned with the deepest part of the deep state?

Oh, how quickly we forget:

The contrast of ideological alignment between the House, Senate and Intelligence Branch is crystal clear when viewed through the prism of cooperation. You can see which legislative committee holds the power and support of the Intelligence Branch. The Senate Intel Committee facilitates the corrupt existence of the IC Branch, so the IC Branch only cooperates with the Senate Intel Committee. It really is that simple.

• The Intelligence Branch carefully selects its own members by controlling how security clearances are investigated and allowed (FBI). The Intelligence Branch also uses compartmentalization of intelligence as a way to keep each agency, and each downstream branch of government (executive, legislative and judicial), at arms length as a method to stop anyone from seeing the larger picture of their activity. I call this the “silo effect“, and it is done by design.

I have looked at stunned faces when I presented declassified silo product from one agency to the silo customers of another. You would be astonished at what they don’t know because it is not in their ‘silo’.

Through the advise and consent rules, the Intelligence Branch uses the SSCI to keep out people they consider dangerous to their ongoing operations. Any appointee to the intelligence community must first pass through the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, before they get a full Senate vote. If the SSCI rejects the candidate, they simply refuse to take up the nomination. The president is then blocked from that appointment. This is what happened with President Trump over-and-over again.

• Additionally, the Intelligence Branch protects itself, and its facilitating allies through the formal classification process. The Intelligence Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} This is something 99.9% of the people on our side get totally and frustratingly wrong.

No one can declassify, or make public, anything the Intelligence Branch will not agree to. Doubt this?  Ask Ric Grenell, John Ratcliffe, or even President Trump himself.

• The classification process is determined inside the Intelligence Branch, all by themselves. They get to choose what rank of classification exists on any work-product they create; and they get to decide what the classification status is of any work product that is created by anyone else. The Intelligence Branch has full control over what is considered classified information and what is not. The Intelligence Branch defines what is a “national security interest” and what is not. A great technique for hiding fingerprints of corrupt and illegal activity.

[For familiar reference see the redactions to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The Intelligence Branch does all redactions.]

• Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control. If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEPHow does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member?  They have to go through the SSCI confirmation.  See the problem?

Yes, there are ways to break up the Intelligence Branch, but they do not start with any congressional effort. As you can see above, the process is the flaw – not the solution. Most conservative pundits have their emphasis on the wrong syllable. Their cornerstone is false.

For their own self-preservation, the Intelligence Branch has been interfering in our elections for years. The way to tear this apart begins with STATE LEVEL election reform that blocks the Legislative Branch from coordinating with the Intelligence Branch.

The extreme federalism approach is critical and also explains why Joe Biden has instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the full power of the DOJ to stop state level election reform efforts. The worry of successful state level election control is also why the Intelligence Branch now needs to support the federal takeover of elections.

Our elections have been usurped by the Intelligence Branch. Start with honest elections and we will see just how much Democrat AND Republican corruption is dependent on manipulated election results. Start at the state level. Start there…. everything else is downstream.

♦ People want examples, reference points for work the Intelligence Branch conducts, specifically how it protects itself.

Here is an example: Julian Assange.

Yes, the history of the U.S. national security apparatus goes back decades; however, the weaponization of that apparatus, the creation of an apex branch of government, the Intelligence Branch, originated –as we currently feel it– under President Barack Obama.

Obama took the foundational tools created by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and used the intelligence system architecture to create a weapon for use in his fundamental transformation. An alliance of ideologues within government (intel community) and the private sector (big tech and finance) was assembled, and the largest government weapon was created. Think about this every time you take your shoes off at an airport.

After the weapon was assembled and tested (Arab Spring), the Legislative Branch was enjoined under the auspices of a common enemy, Donald J. Trump, an outsider who was a risk to every entity in the institutional construct of Washington DC. Trillions were at stake, and years of affluence and influence were at risk as the unholy alliance was put together.

To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to U.S. Intelligence Branch interests, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the FBI/CIA were in 2016.

It is within the network of foreign and domestic intel operations where Intelligence Branch political tool, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, was working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI counterintelligence operations.

By now, people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor generally identified as a western intelligence operative who was tasked by the FBI/CIA to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}

In a similar fashion, the FBI tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor, Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Halper also targeted Papadopoulos.

The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets much easier.

HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes outlined how very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also mentions George Papadopoulos. The FBI also fabricated information in the FISA.

However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears the fingerprints of the international intelligence apparatus; only this time, due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S., the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies was important.

Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok had a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, former CIA Director John Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and Peter Strzok wrote the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane.” Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief allied intelligence officials connected to the Australian Ambassador to the U.K, Alexander Downer.

In short, Peter Strzok acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for the Intelligence Branch and CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.

Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons, the 2015 GOP candidates for President.

It was also Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskaya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S.

Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash.

Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s private sector handler [NOTE: remember, the public-private sector partnership], it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Patrick Byrne the instructions on where to send Butina. {Go Deep}

All of this context outlines the extent to which the FBI/CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that eventually settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. The international operations of the Intelligence Branch were directed by the FBI/CIA; and the domestic operations were coordinated by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]

Recap: ♦Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be a Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Donald Trump Jr (FBI). All of these activities were coordinated.

Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. However, Deripaska refused to participate.

All of this foreign and domestic engagement was directly controlled by collaborating U.S. intelligence agencies from inside the Intelligence Branch. And all of this coordinated activity was intended to give a specific Russia influence/interference impression.

♦ The key point of all that background context is to see how committed the Intelligence Branch was to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ and DOJ-NSD, put a hell of a lot of work into it.

We also know that John Durham looked at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talked to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.

On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

(Link to pdf)

On Tuesday April 15th more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, and it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigationApril 2019.

Why the delay?

What was the DOJ waiting for?

Here’s where it gets interesting….

The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after Congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

Knowing how much effort the Intelligence Branch put into the false Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange, monitor all activity, and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.

Within three months of the EDVA grand jury, the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018.

The DOJ sat on the indictment while the Mueller/Weissmann probe was ongoing.

As soon as the Mueller/Weissmann probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).

As a person who has researched this fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against Assange is too coincidental.

It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange. The Weissmann/Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes for justification, and that narrative was contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.

♦ This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements.

The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC and FBI contractor.

The CIA holds a self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim; the FBI holds an interest in maintaining that claim; the U.S. media hold an interest in maintaining that claim. All of the foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.

Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack.

This “Russian hacking” claim was ultimately important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus, it forms the corner of their justification. With that level of importance, well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Julian Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the Weissmann/Mueller report was going to be public.

…. and that’s exactly what they did. They threw a bag over Assange.

♦ COLLAPSED OVERSIGHT – The modern system to ‘check’ the Executive Branch was the creation of the legislative “Gang of Eight,” a legislative oversight mechanism intended to provide a bridge of oversight between the authority of the intelligence community within the Executive Branch.

The Go8 construct was designed to allow the President authority to carry out intelligence operations and provide the most sensitive notifications to a select group within Congress.

The Go8 oversight is directed to the position, not the person, and consists of: (1) The Speaker of the House; (2) The Minority Leader of the House; (3) The Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI; (4) The Ranking Member (minority) of the HPSCI; (5) The Leader of the Senate; (6) The Minority Leader of the Senate; (7) The Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, SSCI; and finally (8) the Vice-Chair of the SSCI.

Example: When the Chief Executive (the President) initiates an intelligence operation on behalf of the United States, the President triggers a “finding memo.” In essence, the instruction to the intel agency or agencies to authorize a covert operation. When that process takes place, the Go8 are the first people notified. Depending on the sensitivity of the operation, sometimes the G08 are notified immediately after the operation is conducted. The notification can be a phone call or an in-person briefing.

Because of the sensitivity of their intelligence information, the Gang of Eight hold security clearances that permit them to receive and review all intelligence operations. The intelligence community are also responsible for briefing the Go8 with the same information they use to brief the President.

~ 2021 Gang of Eight ~

The Go8 design is intended to put intelligence oversight upon both political parties in Congress; it is designed that way by informing the minority leaders of both the House and Senate as well as the ranking minority members of the SSCI and HPSCI. Under the concept, the President cannot conduct an intelligence operation; and the intelligence community cannot carry out intelligence gathering operations without the majority and minority parties knowing about it.

The modern design of this oversight system was done to keep rogue and/or corrupt intelligence operations from happening. However, as we shared in the preview to this entire discussion, the process was usurped during the Obama era. {GO DEEP}

Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, that the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for over a year without informing the Go8. Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

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

Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact he said exactly the opposite, he said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC). The implication, the very direct and specific implication; the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was totally informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor.

Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?

Again, no one saw the immediate issue. What Comey just described on that March day in 2017 was the total usurpation of the entire reason the Gang of Eight exists; to eliminate the potential for political weaponization of the Intelligence Community by the executive branch. The G08 notifications to the majority and minority are specifically designed to make sure what James Comey admitted to doing was never supposed to happen.

Team Obama carried out a political operation using the intelligence community and the checks-and-balances in the system were intentionally usurped. This is an indisputable fact.

Worse still, the entire legislative branch of Congress, which specifically includes the Republicans that now controlled the House and Senate, did nothing. They just ignored what was admitted. The usurpation was willfully ignored.  The mechanism of the G08 was bypassed without a twitch of condemnation or investigation…. because the common enemy was Donald Trump.

This example highlights the collapse of the system. Obama, the executive branch, collapsed the system by usurping the process; in essence the process became the bigger issue and the lack of immediate legislative branch reaction became evidence of open acceptance. The outcomes of the usurpation played out over the next four years, Donald J. Trump was kneecapped and lost his presidency because of it. However, the bigger issue of the collapse still exists.

The downstream consequence of the Legislative Branch accepting the Executive Branch usurpation meant both intelligence committees were compromised. Additionally, the leadership of both the House and Senate were complicit. Think about this carefully. The Legislative Branch allowance of the intelligence usurpation meant the Legislative Branch was now subservient to the Intelligence Branch.

That’s where we are.

Right now.

That’s where we are.

Term-3 Obama is now back in the White House with Joe Biden.

Term-1 and Term-2 Obama usurped the ‘check and balance‘ within the system and weaponized the intelligence apparatus. During Trump’s term that weaponization was covered up by a compliant congress, and not a single member of the oversight called it out. Now, Term-3 Obama steps back in to continue the cover up and continue the weaponization.

Hopefully, you can now see the scale of the problem that surrounds us with specific citation for what has taken place. What I just explained to you above is not conspiracy theory, it is admitted fact that anyone can look upon. Yet….

Have you seen this mentioned anywhere? Have you seen this called out by anyone in Congress? Have you seen anyone in media (ally or adversary) call this out? Have you seen any member of the Judicial Branch stand up and say wait, what is taking place is not okay? Have you seen a single candidate for elected office point this out? Have you seen anyone advising a candidate point this out?

This is our current status. It is not deniable. The truth exists regardless of our comfort.

Not a single person in power will say openly what has taken place. They are scared of the Fourth Branch. The evidence of what has taken place is right there in front of our face. The words, actions and activities of those who participated in this process are not deniable.

There are only two members of the Gang of Eight who have existed in place from January 2007 (the real beginning of Obama’s term, two years before he took office when the Congress flipped). Only two members of the G08 have been consistently in place from January of 2007 to right now, today. All the others came and went, but two members of the Gang of Eight have been part of that failed and collapsed oversight throughout the past 15 years, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.

♦ TECHNOLOGY – On a global scale – the modern intelligence gathering networks are now dependent on data collection to execute their intelligence missions. In the digital age nations have been executing various methods to gather that data. Digital surveillance has replaced other methods of interception. Those surveillance efforts have resulted in a coalescing of regional data networks based on historic multi-national relationships.

We have a recent frame of reference for the “U.S. data collection network” within the NSA. Through the allied process the Five Eyes nations all rely on the NSA surveillance database (U.K, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and U.S.) The NSA database provides the digital baseline for intelligence operations in defense of our allies. The portals into the NSA database are essentially an assembly of allies in like-minded ideological connection to the United States.

Unfortunately, there have been some revelations about the NSA database being used to monitor our allies, like in the example of Germany and surveillance on Angela Merkel’s phone. As long as “the good guys” are operating honorably, allies of the United States can feel confident about having protection from the NSA surveillance of global digital data. We warn our friends if we detect something dangerous etc.

The U.S. has nodes on communication pipelines to intercept and extract data. We have also launched hundreds, perhaps thousands, of satellites to conduct surveillance and gather up data. All of this data is fed into the NSA database where it is monitored (presumably) as a national security mechanism, and in defense of our allies.

However, what about data collection or data networks that are outside the NSA database? What do our enemies do? The NSA database is just one intelligence operation of digital surveillance amid the entire world, and we do not allow access by adversaries we are monitoring. So what do they do? What do our allies do who might not trust the United States due to past inconsistencies, ie. the Middle East?

The answers to those questions highlight other data collection networks. So a brief review of the major players is needed.

♦ CHINA – China operates their own database. They, like the NSA, scoop up data for their system. Like us, China launches satellites and deploys other electronic data collection methods to download into their database. This is why the issues of electronic devices manufactured in China becomes problematic. Part of the Chinese data collection system involves the use of spyware, hacking and extraction.

Issues with Chinese communication company Huawei take on an added dimension when you consider the goal of the Chinese government to conduct surveillance and assemble a network of data to compete with the United States via the NSA. Other Chinese methods of surveillance and data-collection are less subversive, as in the examples of TicTok and WeChat. These are Chinese social media companies that are scraping data just like the NSA scrapes data from Facebook, Twitter and other Silicon Valley tech companies. [ Remember, the Intelligence Branch is a public-private partnership. ]

♦ RUSSIA – It is very likely that Russia operates their own database. We know Russia launches satellites, just like China and the USA, for the same purposes. Russia is also very proficient at hacking into other databases and extracting information to store and utilize in their own network. The difference between the U.S., China and Russia is likely that Russia spends more time on the hacking aspect because they do not generate actual technology systems as rapidly as the U.S. and China.

The most recent database creation is an outcome of an ally having to take action because they cannot rely on the ideology of the United States remaining consistent, as the administrations ping-pong based on ideology.

 SAUDI ARABIA – Yes, in 2016 we discovered that Saudi Arabia was now operating their own intelligence data-gathering operation. It would make sense, given the nature of the Middle East and the constant fluctuations in political support from the United States. It is a lesson the allied Arab community and Gulf Cooperation Council learned quickly when President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 and launched the Islamist Spring (Arab Spring) upon them.

I have no doubt the creation of the Saudi intelligence network was specifically because the Obama administration started supporting radical Islamists within the Muslim Brotherhood, and threw fuel on the fires of extremism all over the Arab world.

Think about it., What would you do if you were Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan, Oman or Yemen and you knew the United States could just trigger an internal uprising of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood to seek your destruction?

Without a doubt, those urgent lessons from 2009, 2010, 2011 triggered the formation of the Arab Intelligence Network as a network to defend itself with consistency. They assembled the network and activated it in 2017 as pictured above.

 Israel – Along a similar outlook to the Arab network, no doubt Israel operates an independent data collection system as a method of protecting itself from ever-changing U.S. politics amid a region that is extremely hostile to its very existence. Like the others, Israel launches proprietary satellites, and we can be sure they use covert methods to gather electronic data just like the U.S. and China.

As we have recently seen in the Pegasus story, Israel creates spyware programs that are able to track and monitor cell phone communications of targets. The spyware would not work unless Israel had access to some network where the phone meta-data was actually stored. So yeah, it makes sense for Israel to operate an independent intelligence database.

♦ Summary: As we understand the United States Intelligence Branch of government as the superseding entity that controls the internal politics of our nation, we also must consider that multiple nations have the same issue. There are major intelligence networks around the world beside the NSA “Five-Eyes” database. China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel all operate proprietary databases deploying the same tools and techniques for assembly.

The geopolitical conflict that has always existed has now shifted into a digital battle-space. The Intelligence Agencies from these regions are now operating as the backbone of the government that uses them, and has become dependent on them. [<- Reread that].

Once you accept the digital-era intelligence apparatus of China, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, The United States and Israel, are now the primary national security mechanisms for stabilization of government; then you accept the importance of those intelligence operations.

Once you understand how foundational those modern intelligence operations have become for the stability and continuity of those governments…… then you begin to understand just how the United States intelligence community became more important than the government that created it.

♦ Public Private Partnership – The modern Fourth Branch of Government is only possible because of a Public-Private partnership with the intelligence apparatus. You do not have to take my word for it, the partnership is so brazen they have made public admissions.

The biggest names in Big Tech announced in June their partnership with the Five Eyes intelligence network, ultimately controlled by the NSA, to: (1) monitor all activity in their platforms; (2) identify extremist content; (3) look for expressions of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE); and then, (4) put the content details into a database where the Five Eyes intelligence agencies (U.K., U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand) can access it.

Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft are all partnering with the intelligence apparatus. It might be difficult to fathom how openly they admit this, but they do. Look at this sentence in the press release (emphasis mine):

[…] “The Group will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.”

Think about that sentence structure very carefully. They are “adding to” the preexisting list…. admitting the group (aka Big Tech) already have access to the the intelligence-sharing database… and also admitting there is a preexisting list created by the Five Eyes consortium.

Obviously, who and what is defined as “extremist content” will be determined by the Big Tech insiders themselves. This provides a gateway, another plausible deniability aspect, to cover the Intelligence Branch from any oversight.

When the Intelligence Branch within government wants to conduct surveillance and monitor American citizens, they run up against problems due to the Constitution of the United States. They get around those legal limitations by sub-contracting the intelligence gathering, the actual data-mining, and allowing outside parties (contractors) to have access to the central database.

The government cannot conduct electronic searches (4th amendment issue) without a warrant; however, private individuals can search and report back as long as they have access. What is being admitted is exactly that preexisting partnership. The difference is that Big Tech will flag the content from within their platforms, and now a secondary database filled with the extracted information will be provided openly for the Intelligence Branch to exploit.

The volume of metadata captured by the NSA has always been a problem because of the filters needed to make the targeting useful. There is a lot of noise in collecting all data that makes the parts you really want to identify more difficult to capture. This new admission puts a new massive filtration system in the metadata that circumvents any privacy protections for individuals.

Previously, the Intelligence Branch worked around the constitutional and unlawful search issue by using resources that were not in the United States. A domestic U.S. agency, working on behalf of the U.S. government, cannot listen on your calls without a warrant. However, if the U.S. agency sub-contracts to say a Canadian group, or foreign ally, the privacy invasion is no longer legally restricted by U.S. law.

What was announced in June 2021 is an alarming admission of a prior relationship along with open intent to define their domestic political opposition as extremists.

July 26 (Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.

Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes, adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.

The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove it. (read more)

The influence of the Intelligence Branch now reaches into our lives, our personal lives. In the decades before 9/11/01 the intelligence apparatus intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize.

After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after 9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence apparatus being granted a massive amount of power. The problem with assembled power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own malicious benefit. That is exactly what the installation of Barack Obama was all about.

The Obama network took pre-assembled intelligence weapons we should never have allowed to be created, and turned those weapons into tools for his radical and fundamental change. The target was the essential fabric of our nation. Ultimately, this corrupt political process gave power to create the Fourth Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. From that perspective the fundamental change was successful.