Here’s Why the Big Club and People Managing Ron DeSantis Hate Donald Trump


Posted originally on the CTH on January 26, 2023 | Sundance 

President Trump transmitted a message to congress, warning them not to cut Social Security and Medicare {Direct Rumble Link}.  Many politicians and pundits will look at Trump’s position from the perspective of it being good to campaign for older voters, but that’s not the core of his reasoning.

In 2016 CTH was the first place to evaluate the totality of President Trump’s economic policies; specifically, as those policies related to the entitlement programs around Social Security and Medicare.  We outlined the approach Trump was putting forth and the way he was approaching the issue.   In the years that followed, he was right.  He was creating a U.S. economy that could sustain all of the elements the traditional political class were calling “unsustainable.”

Before getting to the details, here’s his video message and policy as delivered yesterday. WATCH:

Fortunately, we do not have to guess if President Trump is correct. We have his actual economic policy results to look at and see how the expansion of the economy was creating the type of growth that would sustain Social Security and Medicare.  This was/is MAGAnomics at work.

♦ On Social Security – Unlike many other 2016 Republican candidates, Donald Trump did NOT call for rapid or wholesale changes to the current Social Security program; and there’s a very good reason why he was the only candidate who did not propose wholesale changes.

With the single caveat of “high income retirees” (over $250k annually), which previously Trump said he was open to negotiating on, President Trump does not consider these programs as “entitlements”. The American people pay into them, and the federal government has an obligation to fulfill the promises made upon collection.

To fully understand how Donald Trump views the solvency of Social Security, you must again understand his economic model and how it outlines growth.

The issue with Social Security, as viewed by Trump, is more of an issue with receipts and expenditures. If the aggregate U.S. economy is growing by a factor larger than the distribution needed to fulfill its entitlement obligations, then no wholesale change on expenditure is needed. The focus needs to be on continued and successful economic growth.

What you will find in all of Donald Trump’s positions, is a paradigm shift he necessarily understood must take place in order to accomplish the long-term goals for the U.S. citizen as it relates to “entitlements” or “structural benefits”.

All other candidates and politicians begin their policy proposals with a fundamentally divergent perception of the U.S. economy.

The customary political economy theory, carried by most politicians, positions them with an outlook of the U.S. economy based on “services”; a service-based economic model.

While this economic path has been created by decades old U.S. policy and is ultimately the only historical economic path now taught in school, President Trump initiated his economy policy with the intention to change the dynamic entirely, and that’s exactly what he did.

Because so many shifts -policy nudges- have taken place in the past several decades, few academics and even fewer MSM observers, were able to understand how to get off this path and chart a better course.

Donald Trump proposed less dependence on foreign companies for cheap goods, (the cornerstone of a service economy) and a return to a more balanced U.S. larger economic model where the manufacturing and production base can be re-established and competitive based on American entrepreneurship and innovation.  This is the essence of MAGAnomics.

The key words in the prior statement are “dependence” and “balanced”. When a nation has an industrial manufacturing balance within the GDP there is far less dependence on the economic activity in global markets. In essence the U.S. can sustain itself, absorb global economic fluctuations and expand itself or contract itself depending on the free market.

When there is no balance, there is no longer a free market. The free market is sacrificed in favor of dependency, whether it’s foreign oil or foreign manufacturing, the dependency outcome is essentially the same. Without balance there is an inherent loss of economic independence, and a consequential increase in economic risk.

No other economy in the world innovates like the U.S.A. President Donald Trump saw/sees this as a key advantage across all industry – including manufacturing and technology.

The benefit of cheap overseas labor, which is considered a global market disadvantage for the U.S., is offset by utilizing innovation and energy independence.  This was the core of the economic program that created so much immediate GDP growth in 2017, 2018 and 2019.

2017: […]  “This policy will be successful in moving the U.S. economy away from low-growth secular stagnation towards significantly more buoyant performance. We would not be taken by surprise by a doubling of the growth rate of real GDP in the U.S. over the next two years, nor by a further significant move up of equity valuations and a material further appreciation of the dollar.”  ~  David Folkerts-Landau, Chief Economist, Deutsche Bank

The third highest variable cost of goods beyond raw materials first, labor second, is energy. If the U.S. energy sector was unleashed -and fully developed- the manufacturing price of any given product would allow for global trade competition even with higher U.S. wage prices.  This is why President Trump traveled to Saudi Arabia as his first foreign trip, followed closely by a trip to Asia.  He was putting the basics of his U.S. economic policy into place.

Additionally, the U.S. has a key strategic advantage with raw manufacturing materials such as: iron ore, coal, steel, precious metals and vast mineral assets which are needed in most new modern era manufacturing. President Trump proposed we stopped selling these valuable national assets to countries we compete against – they belong to the American people; they should be used for the benefit of American citizens. Period.  This was the central point of the Steel and Aluminum tariffs.

EXAMPLE: Prior to President Trump, China was buying and recycling our heavy (steel) and light (aluminum) metal products (for pennies on the original manufacturing dollar) and then using those metals to reproduce manufactured goods for sale back to the U.S.

As President, Donald Trump stopped that practice immediately, triggering a policy expectation that we do the manufacturing ourselves with the utilization of our own resources.  Then he leveraged any sales of these raw materials in our international trade agreements.

When you combine FULL resource development (in a modern era) with the removal of over-burdensome regulatory and compliance systems, necessarily filled with enormous bureaucratic costs, Donald Trump began lowering the cost of production and the U.S. became globally competitive. In essence, Trump changed the economic paradigm, and we no longer were a dependent nation relying on a service driven economic model.

The cornerstone to the success of this economic turnaround was the keen capability of the U.S. worker to innovate on their own platforms. Americans, more than any country in the world, just know how to get things accomplished. Independence and self-sufficiency are part of the DNA of the larger American workforce.

In addition, as we saw in 2018 and 2019, an unquantifiable benefit came from investment, where the smart money play -to get increased return on investment- became putting capital INTO the U.S. economy, instead of purchasing foreign stocks.

With all of the above opportunities in mind, this is how President Trump put us on a pathway to rebuilding our national infrastructure.

The demand for labor increased, and as a consequence so too did the U.S. wage rate which was stagnant (or non-existent) for the past three decades.

As the wage rate increased, and as the economy expanded, the governmental dependency model was reshaped and simultaneously receipts to the U.S. treasury improved.

More money into the U.S Treasury and less dependence on welfare/social service programs have a combined exponential impact. You gain a dollar and have no need to spend a dollar – the saved sum is doubled. That was how the SSI and safety net programs were positioned under President Trump.  Again, this is MAGAnomics.

When you elevate your America First economic thinking you begin to see that all of the “entitlements” or expenditures become more affordable with an economy that is fully functional.

As the GDP of the U.S. expands, so does our ability to meet the growing need of the retiring U.S. worker. We stop thinking about how to best divide a limited economic pie and begin thinking about how many more economic pies we can create.  Simply put, we begin to….

…. Make America Great Again!

We know it works, because we have the results to cite.

It was the Fourth Quarter of 2019…..

Right before the pandemic would hit a few months later…. Despite two years of doomsayer predictions from Wall Street’s professional punditry, all of them saying Trump’s 2017 steel and aluminum tariffs on China, Canada and the EU would create massive inflation, it just wasn’t happening!

Overall year-over-year inflation was hovering around 1.7 percent [Table-A BLS]; yup, that was our inflation rate.  The rate in the latter half of 2019 was firmed up with less month-over-month fluctuation, and the rate basically remained consistent.   [See Below]  The U.S. economy was on a smooth glide path, strong, stable and Main Street was growing with MAGAnomics at work.

A couple of important points.  First, unleashing the energy sector to drive down overall costs to consumers and industry outputs was a key part of President Trump’s America-First MAGAnomic initiative.  Lower energy prices help the worker economy, middle class and average American more than any other sector.

Which brings us to the second important point.  Notice how food prices had very low year-over-year inflation, 0.5 percent.  That is a combination of two key issues: low energy costs, and the fracturing of Big Ag hold on the farm production and the export dynamic:

(BLS) […] The index for food at home declined for the third month in a row, falling 0.2 percent. The index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs decreased 0.7 percent in August as the index for eggs fell 2.6 percent. The index for fruits and vegetables, which rose in July, fell 0.5 percent in August; the index for fresh fruits declined 1.4 percent, but the index for fresh vegetables rose 0.4 percent. The index for cereals and bakery products fell 0.3 percent in August after rising 0.3 percent in July. (link)

For the previous twenty years food prices had been increasingly controlled by Big Ag, and not by normal supply and demand.   The commodity market became a ‘controlled market’. U.S. food outputs (farm production) was controlled and exported to keep the U.S. consumer paying optimal prices.

President Trump’s trade reset was disrupting this process.  As farm products were less exported the cost of the food in our supermarket became reconnected to a ‘more normal’ supply and demand cycle.  Food prices dropped and our pantry costs were lowered.

The Commerce Dept. then announced that retail sales climbed by 0.4 percent in August 2019, twice as high as the 0.2 percent analysts had predicted. The result highlighted retail sales strength of more than 4 percent year-over-year.   These excellent results came on the heels of blowout data in July, when households boosted purchases of cars and clothing.

The better-than-expected number stemmed largely from a 1.8 percent jump in spending vehicles. Online sales, meanwhile, also continued to climb, rising 1.6 percent. That’s similar to July 2019, when Amazon held its two-day, blowout Prime Day sale. (link)

Despite the efforts to remove and impeach President Trump, it did not look like middle-class America was overly concerned about the noise coming from the pundits.   Likely that’s because blue-collar wages were higher, Main Street inflation was lower, and overall consumer confidence was strong.  Yes, MAGAnomics was working.

Additionally, remember all those MSM hours and newspaper column inches where the professional financial pundits were claiming Trump’s tariffs were going to cause massive increases in prices of consumer goods?

Well, exactly the opposite happened [BLS report] Import prices were continuing to drop:

[Table 1 – BLS report link]

This was a really interesting dynamic that no-one in the professional punditry would dare explain.

Donald Trump’s tariffs were targeted to specific sectors of imported products.  [Steel, Aluminum, and a host of smaller sectors etc.]  However, when the EU and China respond by devaluing their currency, that approach hit all products imported, not just the tariff goods.

Because the EU and China were driving up the value of the dollar, everything we were importing became cheaper.   Not just imports from Europe and China, but actually imports from everywhere.   All imports were entering the U.S. at substantially lower prices.

This meant when we imported products, we were also importing deflation.

This price result is exactly the opposite of what the economic experts and Wall Street pundits predicted back in 2017 and 2018 when they were pushing the rapid price increase narrative.

Because all the export dependent economies were reacting with such urgency to retain their access to the U.S. market, aggregate import prices were actually lower than they were when the Trump tariffs began:

[…]  Prices for imports from China edged down 0.1 percent in August following decreases of 0.2 percent in both July and June. Import prices from China have not advanced on a monthly basis since ticking up 0.1 percent in May 2018. The price index for imports from China fell 1.6 percent for the year ended in August.

[…]  Import prices from the European Union fell 0.2 percent in August and 0.3 percent over the past 12 months.

[Page #4 – BLS Report, pdf] – BLS press release.

So yes, we know President Trump can save Social Security and Medicare by expanding the economy with his America First economic policy.  We do not need to guess if it is possible or listen to pundits theorize about his approach being some random ‘catch phrase’ disconnected from reality.  Yes folks, we have the receipts.

This was MAGAnomics at work, and this is entirely what created the middle-class MAGA coalition.  No other Republican candidate has this economic policy in their outlook because all other candidates are purchased by the Wall Street multinationals.

America First MAGAnomics is unique to President Trump because he is the only one independent enough to implement them.

That’s just the reality of the situation.  They hate him for it… 

Author’s note as said in 2016: “If I absolutely did not believe this economic model was doable, I would never expand the concept and place advocacy upon it. I am an absolute believer that we can, as a nation, reignite a solid manufacturing base and generate an expanding middle class.”  Yes, I bet on Trump, and he was right.    

Project Veritas Catches Pfizer R&D Official Stating Company Mutating COVID Viruses to Proactively Create Vaccines


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 25, 2023 | Sundance 

Project Veritas goes undercover and finds another top-level Pfizer Research and Development executive admitting the company is mutating COVID viruses to create vaccines. Instead of calling it “gain of function” research, which is illegal, they are calling it “directed evolution.”  This is very disturbing.

[NEW YORK – Jan. 25, 2023] Project Veritas released a new video today exposing a Pfizer executive, Jordon Trishton Walker, who claims that his company is exploring a way to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution” to preempt the development of future vaccines.

Walker says that Directed Evolution is different than Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that confers new or enhanced activity on a protein.” In other words, it means that a virus such as COVID can become more potent depending on the mutation / scientific experiment performed on it. (read more)

Bizarre – DeSantis Campaign Official Denies Organizing Social Media Influencer Support for Boss, Despite Overwhelming Evidence


Posted originally on the CTH on January 25, 2023 | Sundance

If you have followed the management and branding efforts of the team around Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, the protestations today by campaign official and registered foreign agent Christina Pushaw are quite bizarre.

The Daily Beast wrote an article [SEE HERE] about how Ms. Pushaw organized an astroturf campaign of support for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, which included the recruitment of several conservative influencers.  The substance of the article is generally well known.

In late 2021, early 2022, Ms. Pushaw invited a group of “influencers” to spend time with Governor DeSantis.  It’s not a debatable event. Factually, the collective group took gleeful pictures of their first visit on January 6, 2022, and continued to post frequent pictures on their social media of events throughout last year.  The group went to the reelection celebration and inauguration of DeSantis earlier this month.

However, for some odd reason, likely more concerned about people realizing the ‘organized‘ nature of the creation, in a bizarre turn of events, Ms Christina Pushaw is now denying she ever organized the assembly and stating that without any documentary evidence, saying she organized the group is just a conspiracy theory. [Tweet Link]

If Ms. Pushaw is to be believed, the random group of Florida conservative “influencers” just happened to show up at the Governor’s office on January 6, 2022, without any invitation, organization or coordination on her part.

Even lacking the invitation details, hanging your defense on the absence of a paper trail under these circumstances, seems like a very odd position to take.

Why does the DeSantis team fear sunlight on the origin of how this outreach and subsequent meetings took place?  Very odd.

I sincerely doubt this group just randomly showed up at Ron DeSantis office on January 6, 2022, without an invitation or organizing.

The same group then continued meeting throughout the year….

.

Nothing about their recruitment, continued meet-ups and aggressive promotion of Ron DeSantis for the GOP nomination in 2024 would be that interesting or even noteworthy if Ms. Christina Pushaw didn’t paint them all into a box by denying she ever organized their first assembly.

And there’s the rub…  Why is Christina Pushaw denying that she first organized them on behalf of the political aspirations of her boss, Ron DeSantis?

The only logical reason to make such an outlandish and transparently false claim, is if that original assembly was intended as seed material to use the “influencers” for another purpose, like a 2024 presidential bid.  Yet, Ron DeSantis hasn’t announced a 2024 presidential bid…. so that issue is a nonstarter, unless that announcement is eventually going to come forth.

If Ron DeSantis is going to announce his candidacy for the GOP nomination, then suddenly all these background moves look like proactive steps on behalf of the management team.  The January 6, 2022, meeting would then infer the presidential aspirations as far back as December 2021.

In combination with the $200+ million in Wall Street money assembled by DeSantis, perhaps that 2024 plan is the risk necessitating the absurd denial.

[Daily Beast Article Here]

.

They all just randomly showed up to hang out with DeSantis.  Yep, that’s the story and Pushaw is sticking to it.

For those interested, central planning and organization is the difference between “organic” support and “astroturf.”

Slava Ukraine!

Washington DC was built on Hypocracy


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Jan 25, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Let’s get real. Washington DC was built on hypocrisy. No matter what decade you look at we find that perhaps more than any other setting, the political environment has always been characterized by organized hypocrisy. Now with the blow-up of Biden having classified materials, Hillary’s private server had classified documents. Now you have people trying to twist things around and claim that the classified documents that Trump had were somehow more related to national security than Biden’s. The spin doctors are working overtime.

When Biden was a senator, he helped kill President Jimmy Carter’s CIA director nominee all because he allegedly mishandled classified materials. The hypocrisy in Washington knows absolutely no limitation.

Even the interpretation of the Constitution by the courts, the press, and politicians leave a lot to be desired. When Jefferson wrote “all men are created equal” in the preamble to the Declaration, people argue about what he meant. Was that individual liberty, or was he speaking collectively to diminish personal liberty? Some argue that Jefferson was not talking about individual equality. He was really talking about how the American colonists, as a people, had the same rights of self-government as other peoples. Therefore, they had a right to declare independence, create new governments and assume their “separate and equal station” among other nations.

Today, if a state wishes to separate, the courts claim they have no such right just as England did during the 18th century. Suddenly, the “all men are created equal” was individual liberty including slaves, and not collectively as a body of people. As you can see, even writing down words that may sound magnanimous, can be flipped around depending on the desired outcome. For example, if you want to outlaw carrots, it becomes simple. Do a study that establishes every person who has EVER eaten a carrot had eventually died! OMG – outlaw carrots! They will kill you! I grew up with a gas stove and gas heating. All of sudden, out comes a study to justify new regulations to outlaw gas stoves. Why? Because the bug we are supposed to be eating in the future will taste better if microwaved.

If you cannot twist your words where they can have two meanings depending upon your end goal, then you have no qualification to be a politician.

Multiple Ukraine Officials Removed or Resigned as Widespread Corruption and Embarrassing Financial Graft Discovered


Posted originally on the CYH on January 24, 2023 

While Volodymyr Zelenskyy was on tour banging his tin cup for NATO donations, apparently his top government officials were skimming the books and building an extravagant life on the backs of the U.S. taxpayers.  Slava Ukraini!  However, on a brutally obvious note, I mean the wife of Zelenskyy went Christmas shopping in Paris and spent over €40,000 in a few hours on ritzy Avenue Montaigne.  Where did people think she got that money?

In an effort to stop the embarrassing revelations of internal corruption from weakening support for the inbound flows of cash from corrupt U.S. officials, the government of Zelenskyy has begun getting rid of the officials who were stealing the war money.

But hey, don’t worry, remember, President Zelenskyy decreed rules making it illegal for any political opposition to exist; so, there’s nothing to worry about – just a seating rotation of the same corrupt group.

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Several senior Ukrainian officials, including five front-line governors, lost their jobs Tuesday in a corruption scandal plaguing President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government as it grapples with the nearly 11-month-old Russian invasion.

Ukraine’s biggest government shake-up since the war began came as Poland formally requested permission from Germany to transfer a modest number of its Leopard 2 battle tanks to Ukraine. Germany builds the high-tech armor, and Warsaw needs Berlin’s permission to send them to a non-NATO country.

Zelenskyy was elected in 2019 on an anti-establishment and anti-corruption platform in a country long gripped by graft, and the new allegations come as Western allies are channeling billions of dollars to help Kyiv fight against Moscow.

Officials in several countries, including the United States, have demanded more accountability for the aid, given Ukraine’s rampant corruption. While Zelenskyy and his aides portray the resignations and firings as proof of their efforts to crack down on graft, the wartime scandal could play into Moscow’s political attacks on the leadership in Kyiv.

The shake-up even touched Zelenskyy’s office. Its deputy head, Kyrylo Tymoshenko, prominent for his frequent battlefield updates, quit as the president pledged to address allegations of graft — including some related to military spending — that embarrassed authorities and could slow Ukraine’s efforts to join the European Union and NATO. (read more)

What do Harmeet Dhillon, Ron DeSantis and Volodymyr Zelenskyy have in common?

They are all financial beneficiaries of multinational corporations.

Addressing a Chambers of Commerce meeting in Boca Raton today, Zelensky thanks BlackRock, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and others for their support of Ukraine. Adds that sending Ukraine heavier weapons, like Abrams tanks, represents a “big business” opportunity for US corporations pic.twitter.com/N1h8OVECLt

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 24, 2023

Soros Owns Mainstream Press?


Armstrong Blog/Tyranny Re-Posted Jan 23, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Marty, As you know I worked for _____________ in NYC. We all know you were innocent back then. I have followed you for probably 30 years. Everyone knew that the bankers told the CFTC that you had to be silenced. Your forecast cost them a lot of money when they assumed they could control the market.

It is no longer a mystery why the mainstream press refuses to ever even talk about your Economic Confidence Model and how it has always been right. The press is on the payroll of George Soros who hates your guts for his biggest losses were always against you.

I am passing this article on because I think it sheds light on who is on Soros’ payroll.

Cheers

All the best

WH

REPLY: Thank you. I have heard that from many sources. The CFTC wanted to stop our forecasting at the request of the bankers. They thought they could manipulate markets for “the” perfect trade. They always blew up and blamed me because we had more than $3 trillion under contract back in the ’90s – the equivalent of 50% of the US National debt at the time.

Soros is manipulating the press to press for the destruction of Russia to further his one-world government. Perhaps making that much money causes mental illness whereby you become a demigod to redesign the world. I have ZERO respect for Soros, Gates, or Schwab. They should all be thrown into a padded cell, handed a game of monopoly, and let them try to manipulate each other.

Sunday Talks, Senator Joe Manchin Doing that Purple Thing Again – Admits No Federal Budget in Last 12 Years


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance 

West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin appears with his good friend Chuck Todd for an interview about ongoing political events to include the debt ceiling.

As Manchin and Todd finish each other’s sentences, the discussion hits on the upcoming debt ceiling battle.  Manchin surprisingly pulls out the purple card and states the super-secret thing that no one in DC will admit.  The last federal budget was signed into law September 2008, for fiscal year 2009.  From that moment forward, there has been nothing except continuing resolutions and omnibus spending bills [SIDENOTE: this approach was by design by Obama/Pelosi].

This 12-year timeline includes the entire tenure of House Speaker Paul Ryan, former Budget Committee Chair, who now uses the absence of the budget as a tool to advance his outside impression that DC is fiscally reckless, insert pearl clutching here. I digress.  Manchin is positioning himself as the ‘purple’ option for 2024. WATCH (or read):

[Transcript] – CHUCK TODD: And joining me now is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Senator Manchin, welcome back to Meet the Press.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, it’s always good to be with you.

CHUCK TODD: Look, I want to get into the debt ceiling. I want to get into all this stuff. But I — we got some developments overnight with those classified documents, an FBI search — the White House said it was coordinated with the FBI. But we’ve now had an FBI search of former President Trump. Now we have an FBI search into President Biden’s residence. What’s your assessment of how the president has handled the situation?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, I mean, it’s just hard to believe that in the United States of America, we have a former president and a current president that are basically in the same situation. How does this happen? You know, only thing I can tell you, Chuck, is when I go into the SCIF with the secure documents, they always ask, “Are you clean?” when you walk out. They want to make sure you’re not carrying anything out. You know, and it might be a mistake. You might just put it in your other papers, but you double-check right there. To be held accountable and responsible is what we all are. And to put those in unsecured spaces is irresponsible.

CHUCK TODD: Do you see similarities, or do you see more differences in how President Trump versus how President Biden —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m not going to make —

CHUCK TODD: — has handled this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — that decision, but I think that Merrick Garland did the right thing by putting the special counsel.

CHUCK TODD: You do?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And I think that we should wait until the special counsel, rather than making this a political circus. Let them find out the facts. What — was one more damaging? Are they both about the same, did not cause any problem, or is one more reckless and irresponsible than the other? I can’t answer that question, but I think the special counsel will do a better job than the politicians and the political circus that is going to follow.

CHUCK TODD: President Biden said he had no regrets in how he handled this. Do you have any advice for him on how he should handle this going forward?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, I think he should have a lot of regrets. Yeah. I would —

CHUCK TODD: What are those —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I would think that. I said, “Whoever’s responsible.” I mean, if I hold people accountable, and I use — whether my chief of staff or, you know, my staff, who, that were doing this, that I’m looking at, then I’m going to hold someone accountable. But basically, the buck stops with me.

CHUCK TODD: So you think he should be out there, “Look, I mess — I messed up –”

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: That’s all. Just say —

CHUCK TODD: “Maybe I didn’t do it.” Just say it —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — “I made a mistake.”

CHUCK TODD: Just fall on your sword here?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We’re all human.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We make mistakes. I can tell you I don’t think anyone intended, he sure didn’t intend for it to fall in wrong hands and use it against our country. I know they didn’t intend that to happen. Could it have happened? I don’t know. And yeah, you just might as well say, “Listen, it’s irresponsible. It was something we should’ve had a better check and balance on.”

CHUCK TODD: Now, former President Trump defied a subpoena. So in that sense, the, the way each has handled it is different.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yes.

CHUCK TODD: Do you acknowledge that?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Absolutely. Much different than the other. One’s saying, “Okay, I hope I didn’t make any mistakes.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — I hope no one’s compromised. I hope we didn’t hurt our country.” And the other one says, “Ugh, no. I know it didn’t. Believe me.” Well, you know what? What they said, verify? You have to verify.

CHUCK TODD: Trust but verify?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Trust but verify. Let’s find out. And that’s what the special counsel’s —

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you want here? Both special counsels to sort of resolve this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: First of all, every one of us, in our life, have to be held accountable and responsible for our actions because people want accountability. And they want basically when you’re held accountable, are you responsible or not? If you are, would you — can you fix that? Did you make a mistake? Fine. You’re, you know —

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you think – the president needs to get out there and just get in front of this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Cicero, Cicero said, “To err is human.” You’re a human being. You’re going to make mistakes. Did you intend to make it? Did you intend to harm somebody? Did you intend to basically do an irresponsible thing? I don’t think — hopefully, neither one of them did.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIIN: But it sure turned out to be irresponsible.

CHUCK TODD: Let’s talk about the debt ceiling. You’re — as always, you’re trying to find a compromise, middle ground.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: I know your instinct here. But why should Republicans get the benefit of the doubt on the debt ceiling here, considering that it’s a — that they’re sort of manufacturing a crisis that’s a bit unnecessary right now?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all, if one side thinks that the other one’s more responsible for the debt at $31.4 trillion, that’s, that is totally not accurate and it’s deceptive. We’re all responsible. We’ve got a $31.4 trillion debt. It’s a runaway debt, and no one’s holding themselves accountable. And basically, I think you said it, use the budget process. I’ve been here 12 years. We haven’t had a budget yet.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah. I — that’s what I don’t get here.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We haven’t had a budget yet.

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what I question —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, you should.

CHUCK TODD: — you want to do this special committee here.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m —

CHUCK TODD: And I’m sitting here going, “Why add more “bureaucracy?” We have a budget committee. We have two budget committees. We have a Joint Committee on Taxation. We have all these different committees that have already been created to deal with this process. Why can’t we use the congressional bureaucracy that exists?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We have 12 appropriations committees —

CHUCK TODD: They’re —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They’re supposed to do their job. Why don’t you basically put a time certain on —

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — what you can do and what you can’t and when you do it? I can’t speak for that. I was a former governor of the state of West Virginia.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I was responsible for a balanced budget amendment and basically staying within the realms of my Constitution. So, you know, I met every week. Every week like clockwork they walked in my office on a Tuesday or Wednesday and sit down and go over it. You’re either going to be — have to make some cuts now, make some adjustments now, so we end the year with a balanced budget or a surplus. There’s nothing that holds us accountable. Nothing at all. We can say, “Oh, we’re going to do it.” As I’ve said before, 12 years, haven’t had a budget. That’s ridiculous.

CHUCK TODD: So, let me — you want to do this sort of, that you and Senator Romney, to have committee that deals with the trust fund issues. But right now, neither party wants to touch – I mean, in that sense, Donald Trump came out, and certainly Democrats, nobody wants to touch Social Security or Medicare.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all —

CHUCK TODD: So how do you separate those two out and deal with our fiscal problems?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Why would you scare the bejesus out of people that are basically going to say — in West Virginia, I’ve got 60% of my population that that’s all they have is Medicare and Social Security. You think I’m going to go down that path and put them in jeopardy? No. But there are so much other things, the basically wasteful spending, that can be corralled in without scaring the bejesus, depending on what political side you’re on.

CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you about wasteful spending, because one of the three most hypocritical words I hear are “waste, fraud and abuse.” Right. Everybody says, “Oh, waste, fraud, and abuse.”

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And it’s all there. It’s all there.

CHUCK TODD: Okay, but waste, fraud, and abuse aren’t going to balance the budget, ok? At the end of the day, there are going to have to be choices that have to be made. What is something that ought to be on, on, in the decision of, “You know, maybe we’re spending too much”?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, we know we’re spending too much because we’re not balancing our budget and —

CHUCK TODD: But on what?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — we have more debt. The bottom line is, it’s in the eyes of the beholder. That’s the problem that we have. Five-hundred-and-thirty-five people said, “Well, yeah. What you’re doing is wasteful, Chuck. I think you ought to cut that.” And you’re going to say, “Okay, Joe. How about yours?”

CHUCK TODD: But your, your spending that you think is mandatory, another person thinks is wasteful or abuse.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah. Just think, for every dollar, just get it down, break it down to the dollar. Is there any savings within that dollar you think that is wasteful or abuse that we could at least have a target to set? Is it a penny? Is it five pennies? Is it a nickel? Where is it?

CHUCK TODD: But here’s what gets lost here, is nobody will put anything on the table. Everybody says, “We’ve got to cut spending.” Well, what? And nobody wants to articulate —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the process —

CHUCK TODD:– the what.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, you hit it dead on the head. The process isn’t working. How come we’re not held accountable to have – to have the appropriation bills done at a certain time before the end of the fiscal year?

CHUCK TODD: You tell me.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, that’s what I —

CHUCK TODD: I mean –

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know –

CHUCK TODD: – what does Chuck Schumer say? What does Mitch McConnell

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know what happens? It rolls over into an omnibus bill at the end and everything’s thrown into it. “Okay. Here we got it, guys. That’s it.” It makes no sense.

CHUCK TODD: So what should – it sounds like you actually think the debt ceiling is a moment we should use to focus on —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, if you’re going to use the debt ceiling for anything except for theatrics, okay, which is what probably might happen for a while, we’re going to pass the debt ceiling. You are exactly correct.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: It has to pass. You know, we have the currency of it, you know – the good faith of the United States dollar and the currency of the world. You just can’t let it default and basically hold us in jeopardy from where we stand in the world, world order. With that being said, is how do you get to it? Do you use this moment? Do you come to a reason – responsibility? What are we paying for interest now? For ten years, it was zero. It was funny money. Were not – you know, it doesn’t put any burden. We’re just raising debt, but we’re not basically harming how we have to meet that debt through our interest payments. Now we’re talking real money on an interest basis. We’re almost, up to what our defense budget is, paying in interest.

CHUCK TODD: I guess I come back to, and I don’t think you have the answer either, which is what is the moment to force this conversation?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: This is a moment if, if Kevin McCarthy coming in – coming in new says, “Okay, this is – it’s serious,” and he takes it from the standpoint. And he knows —

CHUCK TODD: What does he need to do that you would take him seriously in this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, you know, Chuck —

CHUCK TODD: Do you know what I mean by that? Like, how do you know when he’s being serious, and how do you when he’s paying politics?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the bottom line is he has a hell of a – heck of a political hand that’s not, not very good right now. He’s not holding a lot, if you will. And he has ten or 12 that’s pretty much out there. He has to make a decision how he wants to govern and how he ought to these next two years in this 118th Congress. You know – I just – it was amazing. I just saw that the Ohio legislature, I don’t know if you paid any attention to that —

CHUCK TODD: I did. Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The Ohio legislature, which is Republican-controlled –

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – basically chose their new speaker, a Republican, with as many, if not more votes, from the Democrats because they wanted someone they can work with. That’s a coalition. Why can’t we put coalitions together here?

CHUCK TODD: Well, that’s —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The moderate, centrist Democrats coming over and working, whoever’s the majority, and saying, “You don’t have to bow and cow-tail to the extremes.”

CHUCK TODD: Yeah. You don’t have to worry about primaries. A lot of your colleagues have to worry about primaries. Isn’t that why this —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Let me tell you —

CHUCK TODD – doesn’t happen?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – one more thing. I’ve got to be honest with you, Chuck. If it’s all about the election, the next election, you know, that’s the worst thing that could happen to us.

CHUCK TODD: You just came from Davos.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: There’s a moment, I don’t know if you realized, that went viral between you and Senator Sinema. I want to show the moment here. I want to ask you about it. You guys are high-fiving. I think we’ll show it again here. It was right after she was talking about the filibuster.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: Is that what you were high-fiving about?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, that was – I think, you know, after that. I saw her hand go up and I said, “Sure” because here, the two of us are committed to protecting the filibuster, which I think protects checks and balances on the executive branch. So if you have a Democrat, Democrat, Democrat – president, House and Senate – and you have a strong president, basically leader of the party, then you don’t have a check and balance because I can guarantee you the House and Senate will roll wherever the president wants. I – and I’ve said this before. I appreciate the Republican senators and the leadership of the minority leader at that time, McConnell, majority leader at that time – with Donald Trump every day beating on him, “Get rid of the filibuster.” You’ve got 53, 54 Republicans, and he would not. And I appreciate that. And I told Harry Reid we should not have done it when we did it in 2013. But to come back now, the checks and balances aren’t there. It makes and forces them to work together. Think what we’ve accomplished in the 117th, the most divided Congress we’ve ever had, and we did more substantial bills, I think that’s going to be transformational.

CHUCK TODD: You think those first two years of Biden and this Democratic Congress is going to be historic?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I think it’s going to be transformational and historical, yes, because here you had a bipartisan infrastructure bill we haven’t done for years.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You had then on top of that the CHIPS Act, which will bring manufacturing back so we don’t have supply chains that we’re depending on that aren’t loyal and trustworthy. And then we have the Inflation Reduction Act, which is going to give us – it’s been misaligned because this administration basically said it’s environmental, environmental, environmental. That bill is designed to be energy security, Chuck. And energy security is exactly what we need.

CHUCK TODD: And you’re frustrated that the White House won’t say the phrase “energy security”?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They will not use the word, and they haven’t. I’m begging you all, please. Energy security. We have to have fossil. We do it better and cleaner than anywhere in the world. And we can be energy secured for ten years, and also be able to invest in technology of the future.

CHUCK TODD: Is this an agenda you can run for reelection on in West Virginia?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, most certainly because we’re seeing right now, I’ve got a battery plant coming in. I’ve got basically hydrogen coming in that direction. We’ve got expansion. And we’re raising our coal with carbon capture sequestration. We’ve got basically methane capturing using gas. We have people that are fighting continuously. And you have to have the pipeline to move this product. And it’s going to be needed. If not, you’re going to end up like Europe. And that’s where I didn’t want to rub it into them, but Europe took an approach that they’re going to say, “We’re going to have cap-and-trade.” And we’re going to be basically charging you a carbon tax.” I’ve said, “I’m not going to support that and vote for it because I think it doesn’t work.” So I took the approach, and basically we wrote this bill with incentives. And it was working. And that’s why they were all upset. That’s why the chancellor and that’s why presidents of other countries were very upset on this bill and concerned about it.

CHUCK TODD: If you run for office in 2024, are you going to run as a Democrat?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, I haven’t made a decision what I’m going to do in 2024. I’ve got two years ahead of me now to do the best I can for the state and for my country.

CHUCK TODD: What are – what’s on the table? Is reelection on the table?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Everything’s on the table.

[End Transcript]

Sunday Talks, HPSCI Chair Mike Turner Discusses Latest in Biden Classified Document Issue


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance 

The likely Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Mike Turner (R-OH), appears on CBS Face the Nation with DC stenographer for the regime, Margaret Brennan.

You know the left wing of the DC political operation is riddled with angst, when Margaret Brennan goes tilt, stomps her heels and throws the proverbial coffee pot across the table.  The only thing missing was Margaret pounding the table and yelling ‘curse you villain.‘  The unbiased pretenses are chucked right out the window here.  The interview is a little funny.  WATCH: 

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We go now to Ohio Congressman Mike Turner, he is expected to head up the House Intelligence Committee. Good morning to you.

REP. MIKE TURNER: Good morning Margaret, thank you for having me.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So we have this development in regard to the further materials that were found at President Biden’s Delaware home. What is your reaction? And what does it signify to you that no one realized that this classified material was missing, some of it dating back to his Senate years?

REP. TURNER: This is really incredible. And as you know, congratulations to you, we would not know anything about this if it hadn’t been that CBS had broken this story. The White House nor the Department of Justice had shared any of the information with the public. And this really is one matter, we wouldn’t have this issue if it hadn’t been for Biden’s Attorney General did- making the decision to raid former President Trump’s house looking for- for classified documents that were being held there. What’s amazing about all this is it takes us to the question of why were these documents here? Well, now that we learned that some of these go back to his Senate time, you know, clearly he’s- he’s become a serial classified document hoarder. Why did he have these? Who did he show them to? I mean, the only reason you can think of as to why anyone would take classified documents out of a classified space at home is to- is to show them to somebody. Who did he show them to? This is going to be crucial, I think, to the special counsel’s investigation, is why did the president have these documents? Who did he show them to him? And is it connected to the Biden family businesses?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, you know, the differences of course, too. I want to talk about the Biden situation. But just to clarify, when you reference President Trump, there were 300 classified documents, there was a warrant, there was refusal to comply in terms of handing things over and the White House and the president’s lawyer are pointing out that in the case of Biden, he granted permission, and this was consensual for the DOJ to come in and search. Does the fact that the Justice Department conducted the search signify anything more to you and do you have any insight into the sensitivity of the documents?

REP. TURNER: Sure, absolutely. I think this looks more like a cover up than an investigation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you have any facts to back up your- your allegations that he was hoarding things in terms of intention to take classified material versus it’s been characterized that it was somehow accidental? Do you have any insight into what these materials were?

REP. TURNER: Well, they didn’t fly to his home without him. They went on a train with him from the- his Senate offices and then in boxes that he was in charge of. The chain of custody here is going to be important, because we know that these were in Joe Biden’s hands and Joe Biden’s control, then ended up behind his Corvette in his garage and in his office, that he did not control and also throughout his house, so the special counsel is gonna have to deal with the issue of what was the chain of custody? Who had these? Why did he take them to begin with? When did he get them? When was he handed these documents? And what did he do with them? And this is a real critical question to all this, why did he have these documents to begin with? And that is why the special counsel’s work is going to be really important, because I can think of no reason why the president should have taken home, as a senator or as vice president, any classified documents that clearly have no protection. They’re available and open to anybody.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You have also before this development asked for a briefing from the Director of National Intelligence. You set a deadline of Thursday, do you have any further reason to believe they will meet that deadline, that you will get any insight into these materials?

REP. TURNER: Well we’ll have to see, but what’s critical here–

MARGARET BRENNAN: They haven’t responded?

REP. TURNER: –And this is very important, this is what’s very important to all of this, Margaret, and that is the FBI and the national archivists were working completely independent of the intelligence community, or the Department of Defense. They claim this was all an issue of national security, but they did not speak to anyone who’s involved in national security.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So no response yet from the intelligence community?

REP. TURNER: I have not received a response, no.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay. I also want to ask you what leadership looks like with Republicans in charge. You are also on House Oversight.

REP. TURNER: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Of the 26 Republican members on the committee, 19 of them denied the results of the 2020 election. Your colleagues now include Marjorie Taylor Greene, Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, Lauren Boebert, Scott Perry. They all played critical roles in – in the former president’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. Do you have any concerns about working with these lawmakers? I mean, you’re very much a centrist.

REP. TURNER: Well, you know, even on the Democrat side, there’s been a number of people who objected to President Bush’s reelection and voted against certifying his election.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I am asking about you, your party, and your colleagues.

(CROSSTALK)

REP. TURNER: There’s a long history of both sides, having raised issues, including, you recall, the- Al Gore taking President Bush’s election all the way to the Supreme Court.

(CROSSTALK)

MARGARET BRENNAN: You are not an election denier by CBS standards just to be clear.

REP. TURNER: I am not, and I work with both sides of the aisle, and there are election deniers on both sides of the aisle.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You are comfortable with all those individuals I just rattled off and the fact that the majority of the Republicans on this committee denied the election results. Is that what you are saying?

REP TURNER: What I’m comfortable with is -the electorate are very smart. And these people have been sent to Congress to represent their districts and to be part of the congressional debate-

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.

REP TURNER: -to lead us to what’s going to be bipartisan, bicameral resolutions. We have a split government right now, Republicans control the House, the Senate is controlled by the Democrats, you have a Democrat president. We’re going to have a lot of debate and discussions. And I think this is going to be a very fruitful period for- for Congress and for our country, because it’s going to have to be bipartisan, bicameral, and I believe that the president in opening negotiations with Republicans is beginning to start that process.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What is actually possible in this bipartisan, bicameral situation? What can you actually get legislation through on?

(CROSSTALK)

REP. TURNER: Depending on what the pending- what the president’s willing to do, I think it’s unlimited. Right? We have really tough issues right now. We have out of control inflation. We have an open border and record people crossing our border.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What about gun control?

REP. TURNER: We have -we have the issue of Russia, and certainly in Ukraine, and certainly China, I think we’re going to have a number of issues that we’re going to have to deal with.

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right, Congressman Turner, we have to leave it there today.

REP. TURNER: Thank you, Margaret.

[End Transcript]

Recipe for Perfect Pancakes


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance

Making good pancakes is one of the easiest processes; however, you need just the right ingredients.  Consider this recipe next time:

2 large eggs

1 1/4 cups whole milk

4 tablespoons melted butter

1/4 teaspoon salt

1 3/4 cups flour

2 teaspoons baking powder

1 tablespoon sugar

.

UPDATE: Here’s what I know:

♦ I know the key principals have read the outline, reached out, connected, seem to concur with the scale of the problem, and are discussing options.

♦ I know this is uncomfortbly outside the box for almost all involved.

♦ I know I have assembled an external small group ready, willing and capable to engage.

♦ I know the alliance group -outside govt- comprehend the larger outline (as below), and despite initial reservations now agree on goals and objectives.  The human resources are there, and their ability to get things going seems solid.

♦ I know everyone inside and outside wants to do the right thing, the best thing.

The basic elements are in place, and in my opinion the goal timeline would be to have all the preliminary structural and logistical work done by Easter; then blitz with intense speed on “Operation Sunlight” for the following six months.

Beyond that, all other aspects are now contingent upon what happens inside the discussion silo of the principals.

CTH password protected posts are under the password: wolverines

Communication, discussion and step-by-step outlining is a very time consuming enterprise.  If you are wondering about the light CTH posting recently, refer to the prior sentence.  I cannot say much, except to say no one is more cynical than I, and yet… We live our best life and remain pragmatically hopeful.  If they do this, we will all benefit.

As previously noted, the 118th Congress is expected to authorize a “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”   The subcommittee will fall under the jurisdiction of the House Judiciary Committee led by Chairman Jim Jordan.  Additionally, Thomas Massie (R-KY) is being reported as a representative under consideration for the chairmanship of the House Subcommittee.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and potential House Subcommittee Chair Thomas Massie should have a grasp of the scale and scope of the opposition they are about to face.  Assuming they have a fully prepared staff to support them – willing to take on a very consequential investigation; then we begin by first anticipating who will oppose their effort to investigate the “weaponization of government“.   Which is to say, everyone!

The defensive apparatus of the DC political system will likely do everything in their power, individually and with collective assistance, to ensure this committee fails.  The stakes are quite high.  As readers here can well attest, DC politics is an institutional system of purposefully created compartmentalized silos.

The compartmented information silos permit plausible deniability, and this collection of weaponized institutions contains career bureaucrats who view their opposition as the American people.

Example – The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and every Republican member therein, including SSCI Vice-Chairman Marco Rubio, will make it their willfully blind priority to obstruct any investigation that touches on how the intelligence apparatus of the United States Government is weaponized against the people.

The SSCI is the institution that facilitated the creation of the National Security State.  Any effort to investigate the outcome of that system will make the House investigators adversarial to their colleagues in the Senate.

Additionally, every executive branch intelligence institution, including the DOJ-NSD, FBI, DHS, ODNI, CIA, DoD, DIA, NSC and every sub-agency within their authorities, will do anything and everything to block a subcommittee looking into their domestic activity.

A lot of bad decisions have led to really bad things.  DC does not want those bad things discussed.

Every national security justification that exists, and some that have yet to be created by the DOJ National Security Division solely for the expressed interest of blocking this subcommittee, will be deployed.

Every member of the subcommittee and their staff will be under constant surveillance.  Phones will be tapped and tracked, electronic devices monitored, cars and offices bugged, physical surveillance deployed, and top tier officials at every subsidiary agency of the U.S. government will assign investigative groups and contract agents to monitor the activity of the subcommittee and provide weekly updates on their findings.

The White House together with the National Security Council will also backchannel to and from these agencies doing the surveillance.

The intelligence apparatus media will be deployed, and daily leaks from the various agencies to their contact lists in the New York Times, Politico, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC will be in constant two-way communication for narrative assembly and counterpropaganda efforts.

This is the context of opposition to begin thinking about before anything moves forward.

Additionally, the national security state will demand the House investigation take place on their terms.  They will demand secrecy, national security classification and require House subcommittee members to adhere to the Intelligence Community terms for review and discussion of anything.

Each agency will not voluntarily assist or participate in the investigation of any of their conduct.  Every official within every agency will do the same; and they will require legal representation that will be provided to them by Lawfare, political operatives skilled in the use of “National Security” and “classified information”, as a justification for non-compliance and non-assistance.  A protracted legal battle should be predicted.

Lastly, anticipate Special Counsel Jack Smith using his position to block the House Subcommittee from receiving evidence.  The House should anticipate that congressional representatives are already under investigation as a result of the authorities granted to Jack Smith by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco {Go Deep}.  The White House and all of the executive branch agencies will use the existing Special Counsel to block House investigation. Heck, that looks to be the primary purpose of the appointment.

As a result, expect the House Subcommittee members to be under constant threat from the DOJ, via the Special Counsel, specifically from DAG Lisa Monaco, with statements that House Subcommittee investigative efforts are “obstructing” a special counsel investigation.  The aforementioned agencies and the Senate Intel Committee will work with the DOJ to use the Jack Smith special counsel as a shield to block participation with the House Subcommittee.

With all of that in mind, what is the successful path forward?

♦ First, everything has to be done in sunlight and maximum transparency, even the planning and organization of the committee construct, purpose and goals.

The committee can have no shadow operations, unknown guiding hands or secrets that can be discovered and then weaponized against the intent.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I know DC has little concept of working like this, but you can train yourself to do it.  You have nothing to hide; however, those who are being investigated have everything to hide.  Do not provide them ammunition by retaining secrets that can be weaponized against you.

As Andrew Breitbart said, be open with your secrets.

Your second cousin Alice will be a source for the New York Times to write about the Thanksgiving dinner three years ago when she heard the “N” word or a tasteless joke about something outrageous.  Every member of the committee and staff need to prepare for a dossier completed by the FBI about them and distributed to the government allies in mainstream media.

Security clearances will be leveraged and threatened as a tool of the national security state to stop the secrecy envelope from being opened publicly.  This will happen; so just anticipate it.  When the security clearance of [insert_name_here] is threatened, go to the microphones and tell the public who is doing the threatening, and why.

♦GOALS – The goal needs to be crystal clear to anyone and everyone who would contemplate assisting.  Yes, there needs to be a legislative intent in order to legally formulate the committee; that’s a no-brainer.  However, the ultimate goal should NOT BE accountability on those who may have perpetrated or supported weaponized activity against American Citizens.  The ultimate goal SHOULD BE for maximum public information, transparency and sunlight about the weaponization as it is discovered.

Let us assume the goal is accepted.  Before moving forward, the subcommittee needs a professional communication strategy in place before the rules, terms and member outlines are structured or made public.

A thoughtful communication strategy so that information can come from the committee to the public without the filtration of a corrupt system that will bend and skew the findings as a weapon against the committee itself.

♦COMMUNICATION PORTAL – Hire a communication staff, and set up a website for the sharing of information directly from the committee to the public.  The daily activity of the committee should be shared publicly in granular detail.  The witness names as scheduled, documents requested, everything that involves the committee activity should be known to the general public. This system should be updated at least DAILY, or as information is compiled.

This communication network should also contain a separate staff assigned to solicit, accept and distribute information provided by the public to the subcommittee.  Yes, you read that correctly, the subcommittee website should be able to accept information provided by the public as it relates to the ongoing committee work.

Crowdsource We The People as research leverage against the much more effective Lawfare operations you will face in opposition.  This means a portal where the ‘open source’ information can be delivered by researchers, many of those on the spectrum, who hold deep knowledge of the information and system processes in the silos.

In the past several years, thousands of documents have been retrieved by FOIA and public records investigations.  Hundreds of experts in the granular details of the DHS, FBI, DoD and DOJ-NSD systems have knowledge that can benefit the committee; you just need a way for them to transmit the evidence/information to you.

That ‘open source’ evidence should flow into the committee portal with address sourcing that allows the committee staff to review and locate it independently.  This avoids the predictable counterargument, from the national security state, that Russia (or foreign actors) is feeding disinformation into the committee.

The documentary evidence will mostly be “open source,” extracted and then cross-referenced from within the multiple silo system the national security state uses as a shield. And the origination of the documents will be traceable and easy to duplicate, thereby providing secure provenance.   The internal staff manager for this inbound portal is critical (think former HPSCI Nunes staff).

Documents found by the committee should then be uploaded to the same communication system (website), permitting the public -especially the autists- to review and then cross reference the committee material; ultimately channeling information back into the committee if important dots connect or puzzle pieces clarify.   Think of this as a massive counter Lawfare operation with hundreds of Deep State subject matter experts assisting the committee.

Witness transcripts should be uploaded within 36 hours of testimony.  Then let the public do the research, background review and dot connecting from the testimony.  If you build it, they will come.

♦ Next, GO PUBLIC with everything.  Do not use the terms and conditions of the secretive administrative state.  Tell the public what you are finding as you are finding it.  You can share information without violating “sources and methods.”   Schedule a media appearance at the 8pm hour twice weekly with a high visibility broadcast media network to provide updates and answer questions.

These scheduled appearances should be in addition to random media press releases and press comments as pertinent information to the subcommittee arrives.   What this means is that you do not wait to produce a 2,000-page final report before releasing the information.  The final report should be an update and summary of all previous findings that have been released to the public along the way.

♦ At the outset, put no rules on media contacts with any subcommittee staff or member.  Counter the darkness that fuels the intelligence community agenda with maximum sunlight and transparency.  Use truth as a weapon against disinformation.  That means no nondisclosure agreements at any part of the process.

Yes, this is radical change in approach, but this is also a radical enemy you are facing.  Playing the secrecy game works in their favor, not yours.  Transparency is your tool, not theirs – use it.

Use truth as a weapon.

Every member of the committee can say anything they want about any of the material or witness testimony they hear during the course of the investigation.  Public hearing or closed-door sessions, it matters not.  The same rule applies.  Committee members are completely free to discuss any findings as the information is reviewed.

The goal should NOT BE accountability on those who may have perpetrated or supported weaponized activity against American Citizens.  The goal SHOULD BE for maximum public information, transparency and sunlight about the weaponization as it is discovered.  This approach makes We The People the accountability portion of the process.  As a result, the next section is again rather groundbreaking….

♦ Every witness to the committee should be granted full legal immunity provided by the House and House Speaker for anything said during the testimony or admitted as being done as part of the evidence fact-finding.  Again, the goal is transparency and openness, not prosecution and accountability.  Use sunlight as a weapon to draw out the truth, then let the American people be the judges of what that truth means when contrasted against the constitution of our nation.

Let me repeat this… There should be ZERO legal liability for any conduct that happened as a part of any witness effort to weaponize the United States government against the American people.  The immunity should cover everything *except* perjury from the witness to the committee itself (ex. Oliver North).   If the witness lies, the immunity evaporates.

Why this approach?  Because (a) it circumvents any issues that might impede testimony, removes hurdles; (b) immunity compels confession, honest sunlight and the urgency of the situation; (c) immunity makes the truth more likely; and finally, (d) you are not going to get legal convictions anyway.   The truth has no agenda.

Another reason for the immunity is because the operation of the subcommittee should be heavily focused on witness testimony, not documents.  The documents can come as part of the follow-up to the witness testimony, but it is the witness testimony needed; the publication of the transcripts then provides the public sunlight.  This is key.

90% of the committee work should be focused on witnesses and questions therein.  Only 10% of the committee work should be seeking documents.   Avoiding the documents shortens the time needed for investigative disclosures and avoids protracted legal battles therein.  If the people on the committee, those who are asking the questions, do not already know the details behind the questions and the locations of the supportive documents, then you have the wrong people on the committee.

Every response to a questioned witness should come with the following question: “How do you know this?”   That is how you will discover the nature of the documents, communications, emails etc that support the fact-finding mission.  “How do you know this” also leads to more witnesses.  Work the issue from the bottom up.   How do you know this; who told you this; why did you do this; what authority guided you; who authorized this approach? etc. etc. etc.

Use fully immunized witnesses to tell the story, then go look for the documents to corroborate the witness statements using the ‘under oath’ transcript as part of the impenetrable subpoena itself; but don’t wait, keep questioning witnesses.

DOCUMENTS – Once you identify the location of documents that would assist the sunlight objective, don’t only rely on the government side of the conversation as the targeted source for retrieval.  If the document contains communication to external parties, ie public-private partnership, then move to gain the documents from the private side, thereby avoiding the roadblocks inside government.

Regardless of the status of the document search, and regardless of whether legal battles will be needed to retrieve those documents, keep moving forward with the witness testimony.  Do not stop committee work just because internal silo opposition is being fought.  Keep working the plan and bringing immunized witnesses, both inside government and outside government, forward for questioning.  Leaders within organizations and agencies are important, but clerks, staff, and administrative aides in/around those same leaders could also provide important information.

This subcommittee approach, along with the people needed, will obviously take more time to assemble.  However, once put together everything thereafter moves at a very rapid pace, which is also part of the strategy.  Flood the information zone with maximum sunlight and keep the opposition off balance.

The goal is sunlight. Rip the Band-Aid off, call the baby ugly and start the process to fix this crap by exposing it. Restore the First and Fourth Amendments, and heal the injury.

From the Church Commission we got the secret FISA court and more tools for violations of our Fourth Amendment rights.  From the 911 Commission we got The Patriot Act, DHS, TSA, DNI and many more violations of our rights and Fourth Amendment protections.   We do not need any legislation as an outcome of the House “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”

We do not need your legislative help.  All prior legislative help only ended up making things worse.

What we need is a full, uncensored, brutally honest expose’ of how bad things have become and how that system can be dismantled.  The existing constitution is the protection, just remove the stuff that is violating it.

I know this approach is rather different from the norm.  However, if this roadmap seems reasonable, I am certain you will find support from within the silo system that is currently operating, and from people outside the government who will volunteer time and effort to assist.

Summarized: (1) Know the scale of opposition.  (2) Formulate a communication strategy around it and build a website. (3)  Communicate findings by telling the story to the American people as it is discovered. (4) Grant immunity to all witnesses. (5) Don’t wait until the end to generate another useless report that few will read. (6) Make sunlight the motive of the committee. (7) Consider success when the American people can see the problem.  (8) Dissolve any weaponized systems.  (9) Don’t create new ones.

If you tell us the truth, We The People will fix it ourselves.