Category Blogger C0nservative Tree House

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Announces SD Governor Kristi Noem as Nominee for Dept of Homeland Security


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance

…And just like that, President Trump opens the door of possibility for a special election, and John Thune to fulfill Kimberly’s hope returning to Sioux Falls, South Dakota, with a full-throated gubernatorial endorsement from the Great MAGA King.   But I’ll get to that in a moment….

First, President Trump has announced his nomination of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

[Source]

Keeping in mind that Tom Homan is already assigned the one task that Governor Noem would not like to be responsible for, controlling the border and deporting illegal aliens. Both matters are of interest to the Big Ag industry back home.

So, with a streamlined responsibility portfolio, at DHS Noem would be more focused on national security matters that are not tied to border security. The types of national security issues that Noem has a tendency to frame around constitutional freedoms, liberties, and the removal of systems that directly restrict the rights of Americans.   Something, shall we say, directly in her wheelhouse.

Simultaneously, this appointment opens the door for Senator John Thune to return to South Dakota and run for Governor.  This possibility directly fits into the wish list of his wife Kimberly Thune, together they have grandkids now. The family dynamic caused Senator Thune to seriously contemplate retiring two-years ago.

From 2021 – “during a casual discussion at Crossroads Book & Music, a Sioux Falls store that sells Christian books and items, he seemed weary. If he runs and wins, he noted, it means a six-year commitment. [Thune] said his wife Kimberley wants him to come home. “She is done with it,” Thune said.

At the time Thune seriously was thinking about retiring, the opportunity for Senate Leadership was just as well-known as it is today.  As we sit here on the eve of the Senate leadership vote, perhaps a discussion with President Trump about helping Thune return to Sioux Falls for a run at the governorship would fulfill an objective on many levels.

Noem’s early exit could create a special election, and with a full-throated Trump endorsement, Thune would be a shoo-in despite some opposition from the grassroots.  Perhaps an insurance MAGA rally or two on Thune’s behalf would be too good to pass up.

Now we enter the real chess game.  With Rubio removed from SSCI Chair, there’s an opening for a senior member of the Senate Intel Committee to assume that pretty cushy and important Gang of Eight job.

John Cornyn is a senior member of that SSCI committee, who also happens to be running for Senate Majority Leader.

If Thunes take the carrot of South Dakota Governor, and Cornyn takes the consolation carrot of SSCI Chairman, who does that leave for Senate Leader?

.

lol.. nah. Couldn’t be.. nah, wait… hmmmm. lol

Toodles.

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Announces Steven C. Witkoff as Special Envoy to the Middle East


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance

If you look at the structure of the announcements, there does appear to be a strategy at play; yes, including the likelihood of Marco Rubio as Secretary of State.

Using the announcement of Steven C. Witkoff to be Special Envoy to the Middle East, I’ll try to put it together.

[SOURCE]

If President Trump pulls Marco Rubio out of the Senate, he opens up the position of Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).  Rubio would love the opportunity to load his presidential aspiration resume with Secretary of State, for later use. However, this also opens the opportunity for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to appoint an interim senator who would be more MAGA-minded, trustworthy and loyal (dare I say Gaetz).

With Rubio removed from the equation of the IC problem, the issue becomes mitigating (think neutering) the Secretary of State from undermining the Trump Doctrine; which, as you know, is the key Trump foreign policy approach using economic power combined with diplomacy.

President Trump has long expressed being sick and tired of U.S. mid-east policy, endless wars, endless spending etc.  President Trump in term-1 created the Abraham Accords to establish long-term peace and stability in the region, as a countermeasure to all the prior administrations stirring shit up there.  Essentially, the Abraham Accords create peace, get us out and allow policy to focus on more pressing foreign concerns, vis-a-vis China.

President Trump constrains Rubio in the mid-east by putting Steven C. Witkoff as Special Envoy to the Middle East.  Essentially, neutering any intervention that might be launched by the IC agenda supported by the neocon wing of Rubio.  Trump does this directly from the White House.

That puts Rubio’s role as Secretary of State focused on Europe and Asia, both regions where President Trump has already outlined the benefits of the Trump Doctrine in creating a peace deal in Ukraine and economically neutering Chinese aggression (like he did in North Korea).

While many of us do not like the thought of Rubio as Secretary of State, the value in removing Rubio from the SSCI is quite significant.

While the Rubio announcement has not been officially made, the likelihood of it increases with this appointment of Steven C. Witkoff to be Special Envoy to the Middle East.  It just makes sense.

Secretary Rubio becomes the Maître d’ to a newly branded restaurant with a private dining room he is not permitted to enter.  Meanwhile, CIA Director John Ratcliffe is the new chef in the back of the house, changing the menu and charting a new, fresher culinary experience.  It becomes likely everyone gets the same menu and experience now.

I can find cautious optimism in this strategy.  Frankly, getting Rubio out of the Chair position is a pretty big deal.

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Announces Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to Lead New Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance 

Deadline for Swamp Draining, July 4th, 2026! It’s in the announcement.

President Trump has announced the creation of a new department. The Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE (tongue in cheek head nod to the Dogecoin cryptocurrency created by Musk).  Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy will be tasked with reducing the size and scope of government and completing the agenda by July 4th, 2026.

[SOURCE]

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Announces Nomination of Pete Hegseth for Defense Secretary


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance 

Understandable selection.  President Trump has announced the nomination of Pete Hegseth to be Secretary of Defense.

[Source]

Remember, under the Trump Doctrine, the use of the military takes a backseat to the deployment of economic weapons to achieve national security objectives.  From this fundamental outlook, the Secretary of Defense needs to maintain a strong military, but only for use as a last resort when called upon.

If triggered for reasons of extreme national security, the Defense Department under Commander in Chief Donald Trump is expected to deliver much faster, harsher and a more directed forceful response.  This was on display in Syria, 2017, when ISIS was destroyed in weeks; and then followed up with the first ever dropping of a ‘MOAB’, the Mother of All Bombs.

With this intent in mind, Pete Hegseth needs to harden the warriors and prepare them only in the event that all other approaches by President Trump have not led to the optimal outcome.  This approach scares the crap out of militaristic nations who were stuck in the old ‘red line’ paradigm.

The Trump Doctrine – President Trump executed a foreign policy, a clear doctrine of sorts, where national security is achieved by leveraging U.S. economic power. It is a fundamental shift in approaching both allies and adversaries; summarized within the oft repeated phrase: “economic security is national security.”

Initially, given the nature of multiple military entanglements, a traditional military approach toward national security could not easily be reversed or dispatched. Defense Secretary James Mattis became a bridge to a new path forward.

President Trump removed military constraints, allowed rules of engagement that were much stronger, and let Secretary Mattis work on confronting and stamping out terror threats. In essence, an aggressive “let’s get this over with” approach. However, that strong-arm military approach cannot continue indefinitely because it just never ends.

Secretary Mattis was one voice who did not want it to end. Hammers are useless without nails. War and intervention have a long history of unnecessarily expanding if not constrained. The war machine turns into a military business. So, President Trump removed him.

President Trump, campaigned on a desire to bring U.S. troops home from all the “stupid wars”, in part because they are also “expensive wars.” And as a direct consequence the time for Defense Secretary Mattis’s of the world was sure to come to an end. Many of the Generals hated him for it.

Two large elements played out when Trump was in office.  First, economic security is national security.  Second, “peace is the prize.”

Through both elements the Trump Doctrine was born and the effectiveness, while downplayed and ignored, was unmistakable.

♦President Trump’s foreign policy approach brought North and South Korea together away from the table of conflict.  ♦President Trump’s foreign policy approach brought Serbia and Kosovo together away from the table of conflict.  ♦President Trump’s foreign policy rallied the Gulf Cooperation Council to stop Qatar’s support for Islamic extremists via the Muslim Brotherhood. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy brought Turkey and the Kurdish forces together away from war and conflict.  ♦President Trump’s foreign policy created a ceasefire to stop the bloodshed in Syria.  President Trump mediated a cessation of hostilities between India & Pakistan in the Kashmir region. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy brought Israel and the UAE together… and then Bahrain… and then Sudan in the Abraham Accords.

President Trump executed a clear foreign policy, a unique doctrine of sorts, where national security is achieved by leveraging U.S. economic power. It was a fundamental shift in approaching both allies and adversaries; summarized within the oft repeated phrase: “economic security is national security.”

The Trump Doctrine of using economics to achieve national security objectives was a fundamental paradigm shift.  Modern U.S. history provided no easy reference for the effective outcome.

The nature of the Trump foreign policy doctrine, as it became visible, was to hold manipulative influence agents accountable for regional impact(s); and simultaneously work to stop any corrupted influence from oppressing free expression of national values held by the subservient, dis-empowered, people within the nation being influenced.

There were clear examples of this doctrine at work. When President Trump first visited the Middle East, he confronted the international audience with a message about dealing with extremist influence agents. President Trump simply said: “drive them out.”

Toward that end, as Qatar was identified as a financier of extremist ideology, President Trump placed the goal of confrontation upon the Gulf Cooperation Council, not the U.S.

The U.S. role was clearly outlined as supporting the confrontation. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates needed to confront the toxic regional influence; the U.S. would support their objective. That’s what happened.

Another example: To confront the extremism creating the turmoil in Afghanistan, President Trump placed the burden of bringing the Taliban to the table of governance upon primary influence agent Pakistan.

Here again, with U.S. support. Pakistan was the leading influence agent over the Taliban in Afghanistan; the Trump administration correctly established the responsibility and gave clear expectations for U.S. support.

If Pakistan doesn’t change their influence objective toward a more constructive alignment with a nationally representative Afghanistan government, it was Pakistan who will be held accountable.

Again, the correct and effective appropriation of responsibility upon the influence agent who can initiate the solution, Pakistan.

The process of accurate regional assignment of influence comes with disconcerting sunlight. Often these influences are not discussed openly. However, for President Trump the lack of honesty is only a crutch to continue enabling poor actors. This is a consistent theme throughout all of President Trump’s foreign policy engagements.

The European Union is a collective co-dependent enabler to the corrupt influences of Iran. Therefore, the assignment of responsibility to change the status was placed upon the EU.

The U.S. would fully support the EU effort, but as seen in the withdrawal from the Iran Deal, President Trump would not enable growth of toxic behavior. The U.S. stands with the people of Iran, but the U.S. will not support the enabling of Iranian oppression, terrorism and/or dangerous military expansion that will ultimately destabilize the region.

President Trump made the policy clear, then held the EU accountable for helping to influence change. Again, we saw the Trump Doctrine at work.

Perhaps the most obvious application of the Trump Doctrine was found in how the U.S. administration approached the challenging behavior of North Korea. Rather than continuing a decades-long policy of ignoring the influence of China, President Trump directly assigned primary responsibility for a DPRK reset to Beijing.

China held, and holds, all influence upon North Korea and has long treated the DPRK as a proxy province to do the bidding of Beijing’s communist old guard.

By directly confronting the influence agent and admitting openly for the world to see (albeit with jaw-dropping tactical sanction diplomacy) President Trump positioned the U.S. to support a peace objective on the entire Korean peninsula and simultaneously forced China to openly display their closely guarded influence.

While the Red Dragon -vs- Panda influence dynamic was quietly playing out in the background, the benefit of this new and strategic approach brought the possibility of peace between the two Koreas’ closer than ever in history.

No longer was it outlandish to think of North Korea joining with the rest of the world in achieving a better quality of life for its people.

Not only was President Trump openly sharing a willingness to engage in a new and dynamic future for North Korea, but his approach is removing the toxic influences that have held down the possibility for generations.

By leveraging China (through economics) to stop manipulating North Korea, President Trump was opening a door of possibilities for the North Korean people. This is what I meant when I said Trump was providing North Korea with an opportunity to create an authentic version of itself.

What ultimately came from the opportunity President Trump constructed was lost in the 2020 U.S. election outcome.  However, the opportunity itself was stunning progress creating a reasonable pathway to prosperity for the North Korean people.

Chairman Kim Jong-un had the opportunity to be the most trans-formative leader within Asia in generations; but it was always only an ‘opportunity’ that could exist if President Trump remained in place to provide it.

Whether Kim Jong-un could embrace openness, free markets and prosperity was never seen. But we saw the opportunity that was nonexistent without Trump’s guiding hand to create it.

♦The commonality in those foreign policy engagements was the strategic placement of responsibility upon the primary influence agent; and a clear understanding upon those nation(s) of influence, that all forward efforts must ultimately provide positive results for people impacted who lack the ability to create positive influence themselves.

One of the reasons President Trump was able to take this approach was specifically because he was beholden to no outside influence himself.

It is only from the position of complete independence that accurate assignments based on the underlying truth can be made; and that took us to the ultimate confrontations – the trillion-dollar confrontations.

A U.S. foreign policy that provides the opportunity for fully realized national authenticity was a paradigm shift amid a world that had grown accustomed to corrupt globalists, bankers and financial elites who have established a business model by dictating terms to national leaders they control and influence.

We had/have our own frame of reference with K-Street lobbyists in Washington DC. Much of President Trump’s global trade reset was based on confronting these multinational influence agents.

When you take the influence of corporate/financial brokers out of foreign policy, all of a sudden, those global influence peddlers are worthless. Absent of their ability to provide any benefit, nations no longer purchase these brokered services.

As soon as influence brokers are dispatched, national politicians become accountable to the voices of their citizens. When representing the voices of citizens becomes the primary political driver of national policy, the authentic image of the nation is allowed to surface.

In western, or what we would call ‘more democratized systems of government‘, the consequence of removing multinational corporate and financial influence peddlers presents two options for the governing authority occupying political office:

♦ One option was to refuse to allow the authentic voice of a nationalist citizenry to rise. Essentially to commit to a retention of the status quo; an elitist view; a globalist perspective. This requires shifting to a more openly authoritarian system of government within both the economic and social spheres. Those who control the reins of power refuse to acquiesce to a changed landscape.

♦The second option is to allow the authentic and organic rise of nationalism. To accept the voices of the middle-class majority; to structure the economic and social landscape in a manner that allows the underlying identity to surface naturally.

Fortunately, we are living in a time of great history, and we had multiple examples surfacing around the world.  Prior national elections in Poland, Hungary, Italy, Brazil and right here in the U.S. via Donald Trump highlighted responses to dysfunctional multiculturalism and financial influences from corrupt elites within the institutions of globalist advocacy: The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Two specific reference points played out in real time.  One was the U.K. and voices of the British people who voted to Brexit the European Union.  The second was Mexico, and the July 1st, 2018, election of Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador (aka AMLO), a nationalist.

In the U.K. we saw the government turning more authoritarian and distancing itself from the voices of the majority who chose to rebuke the collective association of the EU. Initially, the U.K. government took a harsher approach toward suppressing opposition, and as a consequence oppressing free speech and civil liberties. [Insert the example of Tommy Robinson here – there are many others.]

This did not come as a surprise to those who follow the arc of history when the collective global elite are challenged or rejected. Globalism can only thrive amid a class structure where the elites, though few in number, have more controlling power over the direction of government.

It is not accidental the EU has appointed officials and unelected bureaucrats in Brussels as the primary decision-making authority.  By its very nature the EU collective requires a central planning authority who can act independent of the underlying national voices.

As the Trump Doctrine clashed with the European global elite, the withdrawal of the U.S. financial underwriting created a natural problem. Subsidies are needed to retain multiculturalism.  If a national citizenry has to pay for the indulgent decisions of the influence class, a crisis becomes only a matter of time.

Wealth distribution requires a host.

Since the end of World War II, the U.S. had been a bottomless treasury for EU subsidy. The payments have been direct and indirect. The indirect have been via U.S. military bases providing security, the NATO alliance, and also by U.S. trade policy permitting one-way tariff systems. Both forms of indirect payment were being reversed as part of the modern Trump Doctrine.

Similarly, in Mexico the Trump Doctrine extended toward changed trade policies, this time via NAFTA.

The restructuring of NAFTA into the USMCA disfavors multinational corporations and financial holdings who have exploited structural loopholes that were designed into the original agreement.

With President Trump confronting the NAFTA fatal flaw, and absent of the ability of corporations to influence the direction of the administration, the trade deal ultimately presented the same outcome for Mexico as it does the EU – LESS DOLLARS.

However, in Mexico, the larger systems of government were not as strongly structured to withstand the withdrawal of billions of U.S. dollars. The government of Mexico is not in the same position as the EU and cannot double-down on more oppressive controls. Therefore, the authentic voice of the Mexican people was more likely to rise.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) is a nationalist, but he is not a free-market capitalist. AMLO is more akin to soft-socialist approach with a view that when the central governing authority is constrained, and operates in the best interests of its citizens, equity can be achieved.

The fabric of socialism runs naturally through the DNA strain of Mexico, and indeed much of South America. This is one of the reasons why previous Mexican governments were so corrupt. Multinational corporations always find it easier to exploit socialist minded government officials.

When bribery and graft are the natural way of business engagement, the multinationals will exploit every opportunity to maximize profit. Withdraw the benefit (loophole exploitation) to the financial systems, and the bribery and graft dries up quickly. A bottom-up nationalist like AMLO, is the ultimate beneficiary.

The authentic-sense of the Mexican people rises in the persona of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador – who actually does personify the underlying nature of the classic Mexican class-struggle.

Thus, we saw two similar yet distinct outcomes of the Trump Doctrine. Within a highly structured U.K. parliamentary government the leadership becomes more authoritarian and rebukes the electorate; and in Mexico a less structured government becomes more nationalist, more prideful, and embraces the underlying nature of the electorate.

It is not accidental the historic nature of the U.K. is a monarchy (top down), and the historic nature of Mexico is populist (bottom up). Revolution notwithstanding, both countries responded to the Trump doctrine by returning to their roots.

REMINDER April, 2018  – SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korean President Moon Jae-in said U.S. President Donald Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to end the standoff with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program, a South Korean official said on Monday.

“President Trump should win the Nobel Peace Prize. What we need is only peace,” Moon told a meeting of senior secretaries, according to a presidential Blue House official who briefed media.

Moon and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Friday pledged at a summit to end hostilities between their countries and work toward the “complete denuclearization” of the Korean peninsula.

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Announces William Joseph McGinley as White House Counsel


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance 

A key position.  President Trump has announced his selection of William Joseph McGinley to serve as White House Counsel for the second term.

[Source]

The White House Counsel (WHC) is a critical component to the Office of the Presidency.

In term-1 the WHC was the primary hurdle to much of the corrupt information the public wanted President Trump to address.  It was White House Counsel who warned President Trump that any unilateral action taken by him would be construed by the silos within the IC, FBI and DOJ to be interference with their investigations.  President Trump deferred to that counsel.

The WHC doesn’t represent the President, the WHC represents the Office of the Presidency. It is the WHC primary function to protect the power of the President within the Executive Branch.  This generally leads to many misinterpretations of risk, and the President is often hamstrung by overly cautious counsel in the position.

Thankfully, a recent Supreme Court decision over “presidential immunity” affirmed the absolute and plenary power of the person who is President, as the authority of all actions that take place within the executive branch during their officials acts as President.  As SCOTUS affirmed there is no power greater than President Trump.  The President is the executive branch in everything, and the President has no boss.

For Term-2 that recent SCOTUS decision and affirmation will play a significant part in a change of tone that should allow the White House Counsel to be less cautious about the office itself.  Hopefully, this will empower President Trump to extend his authority over the Executive Branch and target any issues he may deem appropriate within his official acts.

President Trump’s priorities are his “official acts” and they exist without question or oversight within the Executive Branch.  If the President deems an issue of vital national interest, that issue is a vital national interest – period.  This approach applies toward everything within the executive branch.

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Announces Nomination of John Ratcliffe to CIA Director


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance 

President Trump announces via Truth Social, his intent to nominate former ODNI official John Ratcliffe to the position of Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

[Source]

Former DNI Ratcliffe passed through the Senate Intel Committee nomination process in 2019 after being blocked by Mitch McConnell in 2018.  With a prior SSCI confirmation being successful, the path to confirming John Ratcliffe as CIA Director is essentially a foregone conclusion.

As CIA Director, John Ratcliffe will control the world’s second-most powerful intelligence agency. Ratcliffe has almost no attack vectors for the internal IC apparatus to use against him, that’s why I previously thought a role in the Trump-2 intel system would be good.

Ratcliffe was/is the lead transition team member on all things related to Intelligence.  Prior rumor put him in the NatSec Advisor role, but CIA Director is a good fit.  John Ratcliffe is very stable, vanilla, no drama and can be expected to deliver on the priorities of the Trump administration.  He will work very well with the White House.

The concern would be Ratcliffe’s ability to remove the corrupt players within the darkest part of the darkest IC system.

The CIA operates a totally opaque budget and is the only institution in government with an allowable mandate to lie to every other element of the executive branch and every other branch.  The CIA is legislative authorized to be an entirely dark operation with almost no oversight (SSCI).

All lying is legislatively lawful from the CIA, that is the structure of their authority.  However, we can quickly see what that authority can lead to when corruption is running amok.

With this in mind, a guy like Ratcliffe in charge of a silo that is permitted to manipulate/lie is worth quite a bit.  It will be very interesting to see how truth telling Director Ratcliffe deals with the dark aspects to the omnipotent silo he now controls.

One last word of caution.  In the prior administration Ratcliffe never fought for declassification of records, which led to President Trump exiting his second term without vital issues ever seeing sunlight.  As DNI John Ratcliffe never declassified the critical information that President Trump was urgently requesting in the final months of his presidency.  Ratcliffe maintained the silo structure without conflict.

John Ratcliffe’s best friend is Trey Gowdy.

.

Sean Hannity will likely quickly follow with ‘glowing’ reviews.

Watch for a response from those who have a table in the kitchen.

♦ The U.S State Dept and CIA operation is like a restaurant.

The Dept of State is the front of the restaurant, with the Secretary as the Maitre D’. The CIA is the back of the restaurant, the kitchen. The Director is the Chef.

The consulates are the wait staff. USAID are the food runners. The Dept of Defense are the bus boys.

The tables and chairs are assigned by the Maitre D’ according to their value.  Countries viewed as more important get the best tables.

The menus offered to each nation are completely different.

Israel has a table in the kitchen.

To get the best experience, tips (bribes) are required for everyone, from the parking valets outside, to the sommelier, to the server.   Currently, Ukraine is the biggest tipper.

On the oversight aspect the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the control mechanism to approve/install the Secretary of State. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is the control mechanism to approve/install the CIA Director.  Everything therein and thereafter is a system of pretending it is something else.

Nov 13 2024

President Trump Confirms Selection of Representative Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor


Posted originally on the CTH on November 12, 2024 | Sundance 

President Trump has confirmed his intention to use Florida Rep (Daytona) Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor.

[Source]

Mike Waltz serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).

In the role of Nat Sec Advisor, Waltz would presumably represent the power of the president toward every element of the National Security apparatus and Intelligence Community.

The Nat Sec Advisor is a very powerful position, if used correctly.  The absolute power of the President toward the intelligence community in the executive branch is carried by the Nat Sec Advisor (NSA).  The NSA has the ability to reach into every silo and control every element of every decision therein.

The NSA organizes the finding memos which authorize all covert intelligence operations globally and domestically.  The NSA can shut down bad things in the IC, cancel black-op operations, and essentially hold omnipotent power within the executive branch over every aspect of the 17 intelligence agencies who operate therein.  The NSA can also determine what is, and what is not, a national security matter.

Mike Waltz comes from inside the IC machinery and there is a lot more to be concerned about than there is to be optimistic about.

Waltz has publicly said, engaged with, and acted upon, National Security Information (NSI) products, intelligence information, that is demonstrably false and fraudulent.

Perhaps Waltz has changed his disposition, but I see no immediate indications.

Like many others, heck, almost all others, Mike Waltz believes the IC system is inherently good, just under the control of bad actors. There are volumes of direct and specific evidence that this is not the correct perspective.  The IC system is corrupt by design, the mandates and interpreted policies that formulate the mission statements of the bureaucrats within it are the problem, not just the corrupt officials carrying out the mission.

It is almost impossible to understand the scale of the corruption within the IC from a position inside the silos under the control of the IC, the “six ways to Sunday” group.  It is only when you exit those silos and engage with the world that is not under the control of the IC that you fully grasp just how fraudulent the constructs are.

The IC use the system to manipulate the Office of the President, the House and Senate intelligence committees, and the aggregate direction of all agency silos under their control.  Big Tech is a downstream beneficiary, both in finance and operational business model, from the Intelligence Community, that’s how and why the IC can control social media.

Those entities who operate within the current system of technocracy are dependent on the allowances of their benefactors.  This presents a very challenging problem to overcome.

None of what you have just read is fathomable to anyone inside the silos created by the IC, including Mike Waltz.

Those who exit the silo structure, and then contemplate the reality of new information from outside the world of the IC, suddenly realize just how their thinking was manipulated by the people who operate the control systems in the silos.  It’s akin to an abusive relationship, where the abused only realize the scope of how much they were manipulated long after they finally break free.  I have watched it happen.

Here’s the announcement:

Sean Hannity will be thrilled and will deploy ‘glowing’ reviews.

We REALLY need to watch the White House Counsel selection closely now.

FUBAR!

Nov 12 2024

Strong Rumors: Rubio at State – Waltz as NatSec – Kash at CIA


Posted originally on the CTH on November 11, 2024 | Sundance

If the basic story unfolding in Mar-a-Lago is to be believed, RFK JR, Elon Musk and a small group of technocrats and billionaires have become the ‘kitchen cabinet’ advisors putting the Trump administration together.  Rumors swirl that Melania Trump, Devin Nunes and Dan Scavino have checked out of the ridiculous “non-clown-car” hot mess until the dust settles.

Adding evidence to this possibility, the media are starting to report on some rather, well, shall we say, curious picks from the Mar-a-Lago transition group.

Everyone else, except you guys, will miss what each of the New York Post “leaked” names have in common.  They are all in direct alignment with the retention of the Intelligence Community as it exists.  For the IC, this is the team that lets them hunker down until ’28.

♦ Rubio at State:

Rubio would be the IC pick because, well, he is Vice-Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and a direct installment due to his efforts to support the prior Trump targeting; which included the big assist to then Vice-Chair Mark Warner.   The IC has super thick black files on Rubio, they’d love to have him at State.  This rumor seems ridiculous.

Actually, this rumor seems like a leak trap.

♦ Waltz as National Security Advisor.

Putting aside all of his wife’s very direct and sketchy associations with the World Economic Forum, Representative Mike Waltz is currently a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI.

Waltz supports U.S. troops in Ukraine, wants to continue the anti-Russia narrative, and has openly pushed every narrative the IC has presented to him in briefings.  Mike Waltz believes everything that comes from the Intelligence Community as gospel.

As National Security Advisor, Waltz would be awesome for the intents of the IC stakeholders.  You cannot see the IC corruption around you from a position inside the IC corruption.

♦ Kash at CIA.

This is the one part of the outline of leaks that gives me hope all of these rumors are nonsense.

Kash at CIA would be as valuable as Andrew Weissmann as White House counsel.  Patel has never managed anything, let alone an aggressive and massive global spy agency.  However, he does like the spotlight and would be able to invest in a lifestyle more befitting his opinion of himself.

Remember,…

♦ The U.S State Dept and CIA operation is like a restaurant. The Dept of State is the front of the restaurant, with the Secretary as the Maitre D’. The CIA is the back of the restaurant, the kitchen. The Director is the Chef.  The consulates are the wait staff. USAID are the food runners. The Dept of Defense are the bus boys.

The tables and chairs are assigned by the Maitre D’ according to their value.  Countries viewed as more important get the best tables.  The menus offered to each nation are completely different.  Israel has a table in the kitchen.  To get the best experience, tips (bribes) are required for everyone, from the parking valets outside, to the sommelier, to the server.   Currently, Ukraine is the biggest tipper.

On the oversight aspect the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the control mechanism to approve/install the Secretary of State. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is the control mechanism to approve/install the CIA Director.  Everything therein and thereafter is a system of pretending it is something else.

If you think I didn’t previously say the IC would love to have Rubio, here’s a datapoint from July:

.

Remember also, everyone has a self-interest, including the billionaire Technocrats currently housed in Mar-a-Lago for the assembly of the cabinet.

The modern technocrats exist because the IC is their main benefactor.  Confronting the IC would be against the interests of the Technocrats.

These names and selections would be fatal flaws in a Trump administration from the position of confronting the IC apparatus.   Quite simply, with this assembly the IC cancer just goes dormant; the cancer appears to be in remission -everyone smiles- and then the cancer reemerges again in 2028 to kill the host.

Let’s wait and see if these names and positions actually happen.

Nov 12 2024

President Trump Will Nominate Lee Zeldin to Lead the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA


Posted originally on the CTH on November 11, 2024 | Sundance 

Announcing via Truth Social, President Trump has outlined his selection for Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in term-2.

President Trump announced his intent to nominate former New York Congressman, Lee Zeldin, to the position.

[Source]

Lee Zeldin is an attorney, and his announced nomination caught the DC proletariat off-guard.  The announcement is an unusually prominent location in the line-up presentation given the generally obscure nature of the agency.   Deregulation appears to be a significant agenda item in the T-2 administration.

Washington DC – […] The selection of Zeldin, a vocal Trump ally in Congress during his first term, was a surprise after Andrew Wheeler, who served as the second EPA chief during Trump’s first term, was widely thought to be the frontrunner for the post.

At EPA, Zeldin will carry out Trump’s energy and environmental agenda, which includes pulling back Biden-era rules on climate and air pollution and potentially rescinding millions of dollars in funding for clean energy under the Inflation Reduction Act. And the administration is expected to take a more aggressive stance in challenging California’s autonomy in enforcing environmental standards that are more stringent than those set by the federal government — many of which picked up as models for more than a dozen other blue states.

Trump and his adviser Elon Musk have also included the agency as a target in their calls to radically shrink the government bureaucracy — and potentially move many of the federal jobs out of Washington.

“Lee, with a very strong legal background, has been a true fighter for America First policies,” Trump said in a statement. “He will ensure fair and swift deregulatory decisions that will be enacted in a way to unleash the power of American businesses, while at the same time maintaining the highest environmental standards, including the cleanest air and water on the planet. He will set new standards on environmental review and maintenance, that will allow the United States to grow in a healthy and well-structured way.”

On X, Zeldin wrote that his selection to run EPA is an “honor.”  (read more)

Nov 12 2024

National Security Pathology Report – America Faces a Cancer of Unknown Primary Origin


Posted originally on the CTH on November 11, 2024 | Sundance

Yes, folks in the transition, I get it.

I totally understand why you approach the weaponization of government as a cancer treatment, and the Dept of Justice is the silo of focus for you to target with the harshest Stage-4 metastatic chemo.

I completely understand why, during this phase, all of your efforts have to be on aggressive treatment.  Main Justice carries the badges, and it is only Main Justice that can prosecute corruption.  I get it. I understand.  However, the cancerous lesion, that first moment when the compromised cells began to die and replicate, will not lead to an origination in the DOJ.

So far, every pathologist who has reviewed the diagnostic biopsy has called this a ‘cancer of unknown primary origin’ or abbreviated a CUP. Having backlight this cell structure for many years, I call tell you with confidence the accurate origin is the United States Intelligence Community.

Please, begin all Term-2 treatment options with this diagnosis in mind.

Please pay attention to the silo structure.

Notice in this first short video how Mary McCord positions the power structure of the DOJ-NSD silo in deference to the Intelligence Community (IC).

This is a critical path within the next step to American’s “great awakening.” In the past we have outlined how the DOJ-NSD weaponizes their Lawfare by using “National Security Information,” or what the insiders call “NSI.”

As an outcome of the way our checks and balances have been modified against our interests, the judicial branch has repeatedly deferred to the DOJ around the issue of “national security.” In fact, if the DOJ labels any Lawfare approach as a national security matter the subsequent evidence therein, the NSI (even when not seen) is accepted by the judicial branch without question. The judicial branch defers to the executive on all matters defined by the executive as “national security.”

This is the area of exploit being discussed by Mary McCord in this segment below. However, PLEASE NOTICE there is an apparatus that can supersede the DOJ-NSD’s ability to weaponize Nat Sec Information, that’s the power of the intelligence apparatus. WATCH:

https://twitter.com/listen_2learn/status/1842038443880116610

Do not brush off this important reveal by the foremost voice in exploiting the targeting systems granted by the Intelligence Community.

Mary McCord is telling us the IC is in charge of “the information” that is then weaponized in the lawfare approach.

McCord notes how she and Andrew Weissmann navigate through the process of using National Security Information (NSI) as they move toward their target; the most common reference is their political opposition, Donald J Trump.

The DOJ has to ask the IC for permission to engage.

The IC gives the DOJ-NSD the targeting system; without it, nothing happens.

If you remove Main Justice as a weapon, you are treating a symptom – not the disease itself.  You still have not removed the origin of the cancer, the Intelligence Community.

McCord background:

If there is one Lawfare operative who has escaped scrutiny for her corrupt endeavors, it would be Mary McCord. More than any other Lawfare operative within Main Justice, Mary McCord sits at the center of every table in the manufacturing of cases against Donald Trump. {GO DEEP} Mary McCord’s husband is Sheldon Snook; he was the right hand to the legal counsel of Chief Justice John Roberts when the Dobbs decision was leaked.

When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous ‘Woods File’).  That’s why the Steele Dossier ultimately became important.  It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump.

When the application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin.  Carlin quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016 just before the final application was submitted (October 21,2016).  John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.

♦ When the FISA application was finally submitted (approved by Sally Yates and James Comey), it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant.

A few months later, February 2017, with Donald Trump now in office as President, it was Mary McCord who went with Deputy AG Sally Yates to the White House to confront White House legal counsel Don McGahn over the Michael Flynn interview with FBI agents.  The surveillance of Flynn’s calls was presumably done under the auspices and legal authority of the FISA application Mary McCord previously was in charge of submitting.

♦ At the time the Carter Page application was filed (October 21, 2016), Mary McCord’s chief legal counsel inside the office was a DOJ-NSD lawyer named Michael Atkinson.  In his role as the legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, it was Atkinson’s job to review and audit all FISA applications submitted from inside the DOJ.  Essentially, Atkinson was the DOJ internal compliance officer in charge of making sure all FISA applications were correctly assembled and documented.

♦ When the anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint was filed against President Trump for the issues of the Ukraine call with President Zelensky, the Intelligence Community Inspector General had to change the rules for the complaint to allow an anonymous submission.  Prior to this change, all intelligence whistleblowers had to put their name on the complaint.  It was this 2019 IGIC who changed the rules.  Who was the Intelligence Community Inspector General?  Michael Atkinson.

When ICIG Michael Atkinson turned over the newly authorized anonymous whistleblower complaint to the joint House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee (Schiff and Nadler chairs), who did Michael Atkinson give the complaint to?  Mary McCord.

Yes, after she left main justice, Mary McCord took the job of working for Chairman Jerry Nadler and Chairman Adam Schiff as the chief legal advisor inside the investigation that led to the construction of articles of impeachment.   As a consequence, Mary McCord received the newly permitted anonymous whistleblower complaint from her old office colleague Michael Atkinson.

♦ During his investigation of the Carter Page application, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered an intentional lie inside the Carter Page FISA application (directly related to the ‘Woods File’), which his team eventually tracked to FBI counterintelligence division lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith.  Eventually Clinesmith was criminally charged with fabricating evidence (changed wording on an email) in order to intentionally falsify the underlying evidence in the FISA submission.

When John Durham took the Clinesmith indictment to court, the judge in the case was James Boasberg.

♦ In addition to being a DC criminal judge, James Boasberg is also a FISA court judge who signed-off on one of the renewals for the FISA application that was submitted using fraudulent evidence fabricated by Kevin Clinesmith.  In essence, now the presiding judge over the FISA court, Boasberg was the FISC judge who was tricked by Clinesmith, and now the criminal court judge in charge of determining Clinesmith’s legal outcome.  Judge Boasberg eventually sentenced Clinesmith to 6 months probation.

As an outcome of continued FISA application fraud and wrongdoing by the FBI, in their exploitation of searches of the NSA database, Presiding FISC Judge James Boasberg appointed an amici curiae advisor to the court who would monitor the DOJ-NSD submissions and ongoing FBI activities.

Who did James Boasberg select as a FISA court amicus?  Mary McCord.

♦ SUMMARY:  Mary McCord submitted the original false FISA application to the court using the demonstrably false Dossier.  Mary McCord participated in the framing of Michael Flynn.  Mary McCord worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to create a fraudulent whistleblower complaint against President Trump; and Mary McCord used that manipulated complaint to assemble articles of impeachment on behalf of the joint House Intel and Judiciary Committee.  Mary McCord then took up a defensive position inside the FISA court to protect the DOJ and FBI from sunlight upon all the aforementioned corrupt activity.

You can clearly see how Mary McCord would be a person of interest if anyone was going to start digging into corruption internally within the FBI, DOJ or DOJ-NSD.

What happened next….

November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)

That’s the context; now I want to go back a little.

First, when did Mary McCord become “amicus” to the FISA court?  ANSWER: When the court (Boasberg) discovered IG Michael Horowitz was investigating the fraudulent FISA application.  In essence, the FISA Court appointed the person who submitted the fraudulent filing, to advise on any ramifications from the fraudulent filing.  See how that works?

Now, let’s go deeper….

When Mary McCord went to the White House with Sally Yates to talk to white house counsel Don McGhan about the Flynn call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, and the subsequent CBS interview with VP Pence, where Pence’s denial of any wrongdoing took place, the background narrative in the attack against Flynn was the Logan Act.

The construct of the Logan Act narrative was pure Lawfare, and DAG Sally Yates with Acting NSD AAG Mary McCord were the architects.

Why was the DOJ National Security Division concerned with a conflict between what Pence said on CBS and what Flynn said about his conversations with Kislyak?

This is where a big mental reset is needed.  Flynn did nothing wrong. The incoming National Security Advisor can say anything he wants with the Russian ambassador, short of giving away classified details of any national security issue.  In December of 2016, if Michael Flynn wanted to say Obama was an a**hole, and the Trump administration disagreed with everything he ever did, the incoming NSA was free to do so.  There was simply nothing wrong with that conversation – regardless of content.

So, why were McCord and Yates so determined to make an issue in media and in confrontation with the White House?  Why did the DOJ-NSD even care?  This is the part that people overlooked when the media narrative was driving the news cycle.  People got too stuck in the weeds and didn’t ask the right questions.

Some entity, we discover later was the FBI counterintelligence division, was monitoring Flynn’s calls.  They transcribed a copy of the call between Flynn and Kislyak, and that became known as the “Flynn Cuts” as described within internal documents, and later statements.

After the Flynn/Kislyak conversation was leaked to the media, Obama asked ODNI Clapper how that call got leaked.  Clapper went to the FBI on 1/4/17 and asked FBI Director James Comey.  Comey gave Clapper a copy of the Flynn Cuts which Clapper then took back to the White House to explain to Obama.

Obama’s White House counsel went bananas, because Clapper had just walked directly into the Oval Office with proof the Obama administration was monitoring the incoming National Security Advisor.

Obama’s plausible deniability of the Trump surveillance was lost as soon as Clapper walked in with the written transcript.

That was the motive for the 1/5/17 Susan Rice memo, and the reason for Obama to emphasize “buy the book” three times.

It wasn’t that Obama didn’t know already; the problem was that a document trail now existed (likely a CYA from Comey) that took away Obama’s plausible deniability of knowledge.

The January 5th meeting documented by Susan Rice was quickly organized to mitigate this issue.

Knowing the Flynn Cuts were created simultaneously with the phone call, and knowing how it was quickly decided to use the Logan Act as a narrative against Flynn and Trump, we can be very sure both McCord and Yates had read that transcript before they went to the White House.  [Again, this is the entire purpose of them going to the White House to confront McGhan with their manufactured concerns.]

So, when it comes to ‘who leaked’ the reality of the Flynn/Kislyak call to the media, the entire predicate for the Logan Act violation – in hindsight – I would bet a donut it was Mary McCord.

But wait, there’s more…. 

Now we go back to McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook.

Sheldon was working for the counsel to John Roberts.  The counsel to the Chief Justice has one job, to review the legal implications of issues before the court and advise Justice John Roberts.  The counsel to the Chief Justice knows everything happening in the court and is the sounding board for any legal issues impacting the Supreme Court.

In his position as the right hand of the counsel to the chief justice, Sheldon Snook would know everything happening inside the court.

At the time, there was nothing bigger inside the court than the Alito opinion known as the Dobb’s Decision – the returning of abortion law to the states.  Without any doubt, the counsel to Chief Justice Roberts would have that decision at the forefront of his advice and counsel.  By extension, this puts the actual written Alito opinion in the orbit of Sheldon Snook.

After the Supreme Court launched a heavily publicized internal investigation into the leaking of the Dobbs decision (Alito opinion), something interesting happened.  Sheldon Snook left his position.   If you look at the timing of the leak, the investigation and the Sheldon Snook exit, the circumstantial evidence looms large.

Of course, given the extremely high stakes, the institutional crisis with the public discovering the office of the legal counsel to the Chief Justice likely leaked the decision, such an outcome would be catastrophic for the institutional credibility.  In essence, it would be Robert’s office who leaked the opinion to the media.

If you were Chief Justice John Roberts and desperately needed to protect the integrity of the court, making sure such a thermonuclear discovery was never identified would be paramount.  Under the auspices of motive, Sheldon Snook would exit quietly.  Which is exactly what happened.

The timeline holds the key.

Remember the stories of the J6 investigative staff all going to work for Jack Smith on the investigation of Donald Trump?   Well, Mary McCord was a member of that team [citation]; all indications are that her background efforts continue today as a quiet member of the Special Counsel team that is still attacking Donald Trump.

To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key functionary, consider what we can document.

♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.

♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House.

♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

♦ McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create.

♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review.

♦ McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed.

♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia.

♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.

In short, Mary McCord is the lawfare string that winds through every legal ‘stop Trump’ effort, and her primary partner in this endeavor is Andrew Weissmann.  In this next video segment, notice what the “how to use that” quote is referencing.

https://twitter.com/listen_2learn/status/1842020205817381287

.

Mary McCord is telling us who orchestrates their efforts.

It’s not Jack Smith, any more than it was Robert Mueller.

Mary McCord, Jack Smith, Andrew Weissman, Robert Mueller, etc. are/were simply the front men.

♦ Who assembled the 2016 “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report”? […] “The US intelligence community has concluded that a hack-and-release of Democratic Party and Clinton staff emails was designed to put Trump — a political neophyte who has praised Putin — into the Oval Office.”

♦ Who were the heads of the 17 intelligence agencies who backed Hillary Clinton in 2016?

♦ Who were the 51 names from the IC who said the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation in 2020?

♦ Who are the 60 IC professionals who recently said Kamala Harris was stronger for National Security?

There’s the backlight picture provided by an accurate pathological diagnosis.

I hope President Donald Trump uses the absolute power of his office to appoint key people who will carry his constitutional, plenary and absolute authority.

The National Security Advisor doesn’t need confirmation for a reason.  Use the NatSec Advisor to target the origin of the cancer.

You did not make Tom Homan DHS Secretary because you knew in that role, he would have been weaker on securing the border and carrying out deportations. Great call.  Now apply that same level of thinking to the National Security Advisor.

Have the NatSec Advisor secure the Intelligence Community with the same level of ferocity you expect Homan to carry out on the border.  Have the NatSec Advisor carry the same deportation expectation inwardly, into every silo that makes up the 17 intelligence agencies, and purge them just like the criminal aliens.  The “Six Ways from Sunday” cartel are far more dangerous.

Destroy the lies.  Get rid of the liars.

Get rid of the system control agents who isolate the Office of the President.

Make the Office of the President Great Again.