Category Elon Musk

May 14 2023

Strange “Democracy” – Govt of Turkey Demands Twitter Remove Political Opposition, Elon Musk Agrees


Posted originally on the CTH on May 13, 2023 | Sundance 

The authoritarian government of Turkish President Recep Erdogan, a man of notoriously manipulative and unstable disposition intent on recreating the Ottoman empire, demanded that in advance of their elections Twitter remove the voice of the opposition party.  Elon Musk complied:

This decision is interesting because it shows that despite his questions about the need to defend democracy and free speech, Twitter owner Elon Musk is willing to support the removal of opposition political parties during elections.

Musk justifies this decision by saying the choice was between shutting down a political viewpoint or shutting down all of Turkish Twitter access.  Musk chose to simply eliminate one set of voices in opposition to the existing government in Turkey.

When Rumble was faced with a similar threat from France, Rumble stood with the principle of freedom and refused to block content the administration of Emmanuel Macron did not like.  Rumble left France rather than comply with authoritarian censorship demands.  Twitter remains operational in Turkey, willing to support the authoritarian censorship demands.  An interesting contrast.

I have fielded many calls in the past few days about this seemingly 180° reversal from Elon Musk in his ‘speech’ positions.  The hiring of Linda Yaccarino was one massive datapoint that seemed to indicate the priorities of Musk had changed.  The acquiescent to Turkish government requests less than 24 hours later is another datapoint.

The general questions all fall in the spectrum of ‘what has changed’?

I will answer here, what I have answered privately.

When I published my thesis on the background of Twitter called Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, the essential outline contained two basic cornerstones.

First, the United States government was operating to control the information on the Twitter platform with direct access to the content.  Second, the USG was subsidizing it.

Two years ago, people thought I was nuts about government control over content.  However, in the last several months the information from within Twitter, specifically the Twitter Files outlining the DHS influence and control, has verified exactly the issue CTH noted in the very first outline of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop.

However, it is the second aspect behind the platform that people have yet to recognize.  When the fulsome story is told in hindsight, you will see that I am correct.

The second aspect is that Twitter cannot financially exist as a viable communication platform without government subsidy.

As it is currently structured, including the AWS cloud-based services for data processing, the costs associated with handling 30 million active simultaneous users (24/7) exceeds the business model for self-sufficiency.  It simply costs too much without ownership of the metal.

Amazon Web Services (AWS), and other cloud-based services (Microsoft etc), are efficient for platforms who do not then need to employ as many engineers to keep the data processing operational; but they are very costly.

Data processing for 30 million simultaneously active users engaging with the platform is extremely expensive.  Every engagement feature makes this issue worse. It is simply an issue of scale.  Unfortunately, unlike traditional business models, the per user costs do not decrease as the number of simultaneous users increase.

There is no viable business model for a ‘free’ or low-cost user-based platform that requires data processing for this scale of simultaneous users without a massive amount of money to create the actual servers (metal-based operations).  A cloud service (AWS) is expensive, and Musk is on the hook for every penny in data processing cost.

There have also been many reports that AWS is technically an endpoint U.S. government operation. Meaning the actual data processing is done by systems attached to U.S. government operations.  While staying away from the granular tech on this issue, it remains most likely that government subsidy underpins the ability of Twitter to exist and function as a platform.

The motive behind the public-private partnership is symbiotic and long precedes Musk purchasing the platform.

The evolution of Twitter from a private to a quasi-public institution under the control of DHS took place over a decade.  Essentially from 2012 (Arab Spring), and the first requests of the U.S. government for assistance, to the present day.  As the public-private partnership relationship grew, Twitter was viewed as beneficial to the interests of the U.S. government as a controlled communication platform, and the financial subsidy to retain the viability of the platform was predictable as an outcome.

As with all things connected to the deep state IC, over time controlling content on the platform became increasingly obvious.  The Twitter files reveal the scale of this issue as it was available to understand via internal communication correspondence. However, as admitted by the journalists requesting the searches of the Twitter database, they really don’t know the full scale and scope of the government involvement in Twitter.  My personal suspicions of govt scale greatly exceed those journalistic reviews, driven in part by my experience as a target of the background actors.

Which brings me back to the question that everyone asks me about the motive for Musk’s ideological reversal.   Surprise, it’s the money!

There is only one force more powerful than the firmly committed and espoused ideology of an altruistic mind, ECONOMICS.

The economics of the thing always supersedes and overpowers the other issues related to the thing.   If the U.S. government wanted to shift the full scale of cost to operate Twitter onto the shoulders of Musk, the platform would not survive.

Tap Musk on the shoulder, or allow Musk to discover this financial dependency organically, and suddenly the reality of the thing changes. Nothing changes espoused opinion faster than money, just ask Steve Cortes.

It is a simple truth in everything: if you see a person change opinion quickly and radically, look at the money behind them.

There are two vectors for economics to change things.  First, the gain of money as an enticement. Ex. you do this, you get paid. The second vector is more powerful, the removal of money as an enticement. Ex. you do this, or the existing payment stops.

If you look at the financial background of an abrupt change, almost every time you will find the answer to the motive that puzzles you.

May 14 2023

Big Picture – Elon Musk Confirms Hiring DEI Advocate Linda Yaccarino as Twitter CEO


Posted originally of the CTH on May 13, 2023 | Sundance 

Twitter platform owner Elon Musk has confirmed the hiring of Linda Yaccarino as CEO of Twitter. Many reactions are happening, but CTH analysis generally likes to stay ahead of the reactions and more into the future of what each datapoint means.  That said, here’s some context.

The general or more common logic, completely understandable, is to look at the hiring of Yaccarino as binary.  Either Musk was previously lying about everything he believed in, or the revenue situation is at a critical mass. Otherwise, it really doesn’t make sense to bring in Linda Yaccarino.

Before going deeper, it is critical to know just how ideological Linda Yaccarino is.  The former head of NBCUniversal is the apex voice in the system of promoting Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) from an advertising perspective.   I’m not talking about a little bit ideological, I mean the full dna-level, metastatic, this is the core essence of what makes Yaccarino believe she has purpose in life.

Changing social culture by leveraging commercial enterprise is Yaccarino’s life work.

Literally Linda Yaccarino believes that advertisers should determine the product being sold. This is not a spoof, exaggeration, hyperbole or a spin on her outlook. Yaccarino believes marketing and advertising executives should be able to control the physical content, the actual stuff, created by the publisher they pay to advertise their product.

A traditional example might be Ford Motor Company telling Motor Trend magazine what positions to place ads for competitors in the auto industry as a contingency for their ad spend.  A modern example might be Disney telling Fox News what content may be discussed by Tucker Carlson.  This is the origin of DEI ideology controlling platform content.

To understand how this mindset applies to Twitter and Elon Musk, watch a few minutes of this previous interview between Yaccarino and Musk at a convention of advertisers. This is an example of how the NBCUniversal executive thinks.  WATCH (prompted):

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ypZNWjPpOuI%3Fstart%3D1386%26feature%3Doembed

You can see in the back and forth, how Musk tries to stick to his core principles about “free speech” while Yaccarino uses terms like “partnership”, “collaboration”, and “mutual benefits” to leverage her advertising team’s agenda.

It is important to understand the views expressed by Musk and Yaccarino are mutually exclusive.  There is no free speech when the advertisers are permitted to determine the content of that speech.  Musk tries to negotiate a nuance, but the core of the dynamic is in conflict.

Any good, stable and even-tempered corporate executive will tell you the marketing team is consistently the least valuable mindset at the corporate table.

Factually, most of the people who fail out of business schools fail down into the humanities dept.  However, sometimes those emotionally driven ideologues simply move into the marketing and advertising fields within the business majors.  The outcome of this truism is Alissa Heinersheid and her destruction of the Bud Light brand through marketing.

Linda Yaccarino is the apex voice in the system that has allowed advertisers to determine content.  She would be the ideal candidate within an organization like Google, but she is oil in the water of Twitter.  So, what gives?

Why would Elon Musk hire Linda Yaccarino as the CEO of Twitter?  We return to the binary issue…. Either Musk really doesn’t believe in what he previously advocated, or Musk has hit a wall of acceptance and generating revenue is now more important than the platform itself?   For the latter, essentially the economics of the thing is determining the outcome of the thing.

There is a third alternative; a less familiar dynamic that has surfaced in the past and does provide a reference.  This is what I call the “ino” hiring process within large institutions and organizations; “ino” stands for In Name Only.

An executive is hired to represent the division/organization, in name only.  They have no actual control, influence or power.  They are simply figureheads installed to create the optics needed for the institution to continue operations.

The ino practice is also visible with ‘diversity hires’.  A person is hired not to drive the mission of the organization, but to deflect opposition away from the achievement of the organizational mission.  However, all ‘in name only’ (ino) hires always end up in the exact same conversation within the organization.

When the ino realizes they are essentially irrelevant to the function of the organization, that means their opinions and recommendations are never part of the organizational outcome, there is always a conversation with the following words: “then why did you hire me?”  This conversation always happens, it is the one constant in an ever-changing business world.

So, there’s three basic dynamics:

Elon Musk was not as committed to ‘Free Speech’ as he originally defined it.

Priorities have changed and now Revenue is more vital than Free Speech.

Musk is still committed but needs to create the illusion of DEI acceptance.

In considering the last element, Mrs. Yaccarino does not present herself as an ino-person who will accept a position and then not deliver on the intent of her mission.

So, what does this tell us about the future of Twitter content?

I think we all know the answer….

~ This just happened today ~

WHY?

Because the now-restricted Twitter Account created THIS:

The CNN Town Hall Massacre

Posted in 1st Amendment, Big Tech, Cultural Marxism, Culture, Deep State, Joe Biden, Uncategorized

Share

May 10 2023

Tucker Carlson Announces Venture with Elon Musk’s Twitter Broadcasting


Posted originally on the CTH on May 9, 2023 | Sundance 

Only if you really understand the background of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, an argument can be made that the deal between Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson is trying to get the unsubsidized financial viability of Twitter under the control of an independent platform.  At least, that’s my slant on the positive perspective here.

As a free communication platform, Twitter has never been, and is not now, financially viable.  However, if Musk can continue finding ways to monetize the platform, subscriptions, exclusive content, advertising, and now broadcasting etc., he might finally be able to break free from the data processing subsidy running behind it.  We should be cautiously optimistic, yet pragmatic to the reality of the challenge.

Toward that end, Tucker Carlson announced today an intent to use the social media platform as a free speech and journalistic broadcasting system.  If Elon Musk chooses to make Carlson the anchor of this ¹Twitter enterprise it would be akin to ²Fox streaming services making Carlson the anchor of Fox News digital, via Fox Nation.  {Direct Rumble Link} WATCH:

Tucker Carlson teams up with Twitter

.

¹On an investment/return approach, it would make a lot of sense for Elon Musk to give Tucker Carlson a percentage stake in the enterprise (25% backend wealth) in combination with a front-end lump sum and generous expense deferred contract [all write-offs for Musk].  Carlson retains full proprietary control of his created content; Musk gets platform profitable; a genuine win-win.

²Tucker Carlson and the show Tucker Carlson Today was the prior anchor of Fox Nation digital. Murdoch shot themselves in the streaming foot when they fired him.  However, you will notice Murdoch waited until Carlson had produced a year’s worth of yet to be broadcast long-format programming which Fox Nation still owns.

(Via Axios) Tucker Carlson, two weeks after being ousted by Fox News, accused the network Tuesday of fraud and breach of contract — and made a host of document demands that could precede legal action.

Why it matters: The aggressive letter from his lawyers to Fox positions Carlson to argue that the noncompete provision in his contract is no longer valid — freeing him to launch his own competing show or media enterprise.

On Tuesday, Carlson announced he would be bringing his show to Twitter.

“Starting soon we’ll be bringing a new version of the show we’ve been doing for the last six and a half years to Twitter,” he said in the video. “We bring some other things too, which we’ll tell you about. But for now we’re just grateful to be here. Free speech is the main right that you have. Without it, you have no others.”

The intrigue: The Twitter move would seem to technically violate Carlson’s contract with Fox, but his lawyers’ letter effectively holds that Fox breached the contract first.

Sources told Axios that Carlson’s lawyers sent their letter before he took to Twitter to announce his new show.

Catch up quick: Axios reported Sunday that Carlson, frustrated by being held to his contract, is preparing to unleash allies to pressure the network into letting him work for — or start — a right-wing rival.

Carlson’s contract runs until January 2025 and Fox wants to keep paying him, which would prevent him from starting a competing show.

Carlson already has gotten eye-popping offers from several right-wing outlets, and has talked to Elon Musk about working together.

The details: The letter — from Carlson lawyer Bryan Freedman to Fox officials Viet Dinh and Irena Briganti — said Fox employees, including “Rupert Murdoch himself,” broke promises to Carlson “intentionally and with reckless disregard for the truth.”

The lawyers accuse Fox executives — which two sources say are Dinh and Murdoch — of making “material representations,” or promises, to Carlson that were intentionally broken, constituting fraud.

Notably, the letter alleges Fox broke an agreement with Carlson not to leak his private communications to the media and not to use Carlson’s private messages “to take any adverse employment action against him.”

Multiple outlets have reported on Carlson’s redacted communications from pre-trial discovery documents and have suggested that they led to his ousting.

The letter also alleges Fox broke promises not to settle with Dominion Voting Systems “in a way which would indicate wrongdoing” on the part of Carlson and not to take any actions in a settlement that would harm Carlson’s reputation.

Carlson was told by a member of the Fox board that he was taken off the air as part of the Dominion settlement, two sources briefed on a conversation told Axios. (read more)

*Headline updated 10:52pm EST as Musk denies any current joint partnership – which makes sense, giving the pending litigation on the contract at Fox News.

May 1 2023

Elon Musk Interviewed by Ann Coulter’s Old Boyfriend


Posted originally on the CTH on April 30, 2023 | Sundance 

Over the weekend Ann Coulter’s ex-boyfriend interviewed Elon Musk on his legacy enterprise HBO television show.  The interview is interesting from the dynamic of a few short soundbites that come from a brief discussion.  It’s 20 minutes for those who are interested.  WATCH:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=oO8w6XcXJUs%3Ffeature%3Doembed

.

Apr 19 2023

Tucker Carlson Interviews Elon Musk – Part 2 Full Video


Posted originally on the CTH on April 19, 2023 | Sundance 

The second half of Tucker Carlson’s interview with Elon Musk is below. The second part is most esoteric discussion about the current state of U.S. and geopolitical affairs with further discussion of AI, the banking industry and the future of human life as quantified by the viability of civilization. {Direct Rumble link} WATCH:

Apr 19 2023

Is Elon Musk Doing Damage Control Using Tucker Carlson Interview?


Posted originally on the CTH on April 18, 2023 | Sundance

I write the headline in the form of a question but in reality, all of the data points in one direction, yes.

If I am going to be brutally honest, this Elon Musk scenario is like the August 2022 review when it became obvious all of the DeSantis 2024 data only reconciled in one direction.  In many ways, Musk is to social media interests as DeSantis is to DC UniParty interests.

More than half the readers here have picked up on the clues and cues showing Musk has a very real motive to position himself in the best light possible given the situation that surrounds him.  Unfortunately, that position creates conflicts between ideals (what’s possible) and reality (what limits surround one’s ability).  Musk is riding a tiger, and the intelligence community ring masters control the beast.

The damage control motive is a few layers deep.  However, one of the recent events that would lead to Musk’s public need for brand image protection comes from the situation with Matt Taibbi:

…”When we got into the Files, we were caught off guard. The content-policing system was more elaborate and organized than any of us imagined. A communications highway had been built linking the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence with Twitter, Facebook, Google, and a slew of other platforms. Among other things this looked more like a cartel than a competitive media landscape, and I had an uneasy feeling early on that publicizing this arrangement might create a host of unanticipated problems for everyone involved. Still, there was no question this was in the public interest. So we kept going.”  (more)  ~ Matt Taibbi

On the issue of Twitter File access and personal motivation, Taibbi’s best financial and short-term professional interests would be served most by retaining a positive relationship with Musk/Twitter.  The fact that Taibbi would turn away from the lucrative interests, says something positive about his compass heading.

Accepting the COVID-19 files were never released, what some have called the Fauci files, and accepting the revelations within the filtered internal documents stopped abruptly, we can consider that ‘stakeholder’ interests became more consequential as the outside peering gained depth.  Likely the core of the platform, which we now know is based on a U.S Government intelligence relationship, needed a protective boundary.

When you overlay the reality that all of Elon Musk’s ventures are dependent on the same USG for viability, the vulnerability & motive to shape outcomes (via messaging) is stark.  Tesla, SpaceX, Star Link and all of Musk’s endeavors are intertwined with government approvals, authorizations and operations.  Control of the Twitter platform as a tool for public opinion is in alignment with those same Big Gov interests.

Another core issue that should be the focus of attention, a string that can unravel the gordian knot, is the financial mechanisms of Twitter.

As a business model, Twitter never made any sense.  That’s the obvious answer why no other Tech business ever made an effort to absorb or merge it.

When you overlay the government activity, then overlay the financial value to the government for the access and control that everyone now admits was in place, the Occam’s Razor of financial operations would indicate some form of government subsidy (direct or indirect) along with some form of financial funding (again, direct or indirect) was in the background of the platform.

As CTH has said for several years, a financial agreement in the background of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop just made sense.  The platform held/holds a value to the U.S. govt, so a subsidy in operations for sustainability of the influence seemed obviously motivated.

While there are some important datapoints showing Musk trying to take steps to make Twitter a viable business without govt support (80% staffing reductions, monthly fees for premium content, etc.) the prior financial relationship is almost certainly still in place.  The internal operations, the preestablished public-private partnership, at the core of the platform also appears to retain the same general executive operators as before the takeover.

Again, I go back to Twitter File Release #8 – […] “The United States intelligence apparatus was/is actively using and working with the Twitter platform to align with U.S. government interests.  The govt was coordinating, instructing, assisting and benefitting from the relationship.  Pro govt positions were amplified, and information adverse to the interests of the Pentagon and State Dept was removed, hidden, throttled.

Unfortunately, as admitted by Twitter File #8 Author Lee Fang, a writer for The intercept, “The searches were carried out by a Twitter attorney, so what I saw could be limited.” There is no ‘could be‘ in that statement.  The searches were limited, specifically time limited putting all of the scrutiny on the timeline when Donald Trump was in office.

CTH has no vested interest in this pretending nonsense.  We all know, hell, its public record, the use of Twitter and Facebook as a tool to advance U.S. foreign policy began during the Obama administration.  There are dozens of mainstream press accounts of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton reaching out to Twitter and Facebook for support during the ’11/’12 Arab Spring.   This is not controversial, it happened.

However, the current release uses a carefully applied time filter only showing DoD and DoS use of the platform (to assist foreign policy) starting in 2017, when President Trump took office.  This is intentional.  The origin of the practice starts with Barack Obama. (more)

Twitter file release #8 was curated, fullstop!

That curation reality is empirical within the data itself.  That acceptance stands as a solid foundation to recognize that all of the releases are filtered and curated to protect certain levels of interest.  And within that larger truth we discover the reason why the government sponsored COVID-19 operations were never fully revealed.

Just as AG Bill Barr was shown to be mitigating damage that could come from the American public discovering that Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government all collaborated in the Trump-Russia fabrication, presumably Barr motivated to save the country from the reality within the scale of corruption, so too does the network around Elon Musk hold a similar motive.

You put all this together and the sheer weight of it indicates Elon Musk appeared on the Tucker Carlson broadcast to shape public opinion favorably away from the reality of what the real Twitter story reveals.  Government control is even bigger than general public understanding.  Elon Musk was/is doing damage control.

Outhouse Counsel – “He voted for the cabal behind Obama, Clinton, and Biden. Not Biden. He placated the low-info left audience with his Democrat “credentials”, impressed the hopeful with the sincerity of his little nonsequitorious “admissions”, and then sought to appease the appalled on the right with another “admission” that he’s not happy with Biden and why can’t we have a common-sense moderate middle. He then frosted this cake with humble sweetener that was designed to reinforce his naivety in certain areas; the posturing that when he bought Twitter he really didn’t understand the EXTENT of the government infiltration.

And he did this over and over again, gently saying rather alarming things quietly and in a way that could be taken multiple ways because they were tempered by seemingly guileless admissions, hopeful commentary, and witty self-deprecation (he was fooled by erstwhile competitor google/Ai founder , he sheepishly shrugs at his losing money by buying during bad timing, he fired employees from “Twitter” but he’s also implicitly a victim of those who voluntarily left but no mention of who now works for X Corp…)

He is a genius at more than computer coding. Please don’t fall for it.”

There are trillions at stake… 

Apr 18 2023

Tucker Carlson Interview With Elon Musk – Full Interview as Broadcast


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

A very interesting interview conducted by Fox News host Tucker Carlson with billionaire entrepreneur, CEO and owner/operator of Twitter, Elon Musk.   The interview is interesting on a variety of subjects, specifically artificial intelligence, public speech, government control of the public information networks and the broad picture of freedom in a digital era.

The interview is extensive and provided below in multiple parts.  The first part discusses the big picture issue of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the potential of AI to disrupt society through the control of public opinions and perceptions of reality.  WATCH:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=a2ZBEC16yH4%3Ffeature%3Doembed

.

The second segment continues discussing AI, more philosophical aspects of what defines humanity, and then the conversation transitions to the issue of government control within the Twitter social media platform that Musk now owns.

.

Part Three:

.

Part Four:

.

Apr 18 2023

Tucker Carlson Interview With Elon Musk – Tonight 8:00pm ET


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

Consider this an open thread on this interview which will broadcast tonight at 8:00pm ET, along with a good preview by Tucker Carlson below.

The topic of Musk is interesting from multiple perspectives, particularly in an era of universal deceit, pretending and openly exposed manipulation of information by government and govt stakeholders.   I have my own keen reasons to watch the Musk dynamic closely, one of them pertains to the Twitter situation and what it means in the bigger sphere of communication.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=dxDQCWygkBU%3Ffeature%3Doembed

Readers here will long remember my outline of the Twitter/Govt dynamic.  However, lesser focused is my empirical belief that a collaborative financial relationship, a subsidy of sorts, had to exist given the nature of both public and private enterprises.  The lesser discussed aspect to social media is the scale and cost of operations in proportion to the revenue the platforms can create.

Musk has essentially confirmed the basic premise I always believed about this public-private partnership; however, what has never been discussed is the financial subsidy for the data processing -and hardware- at scale.  People shrug off this part of the equation, but if you look at the financial moves Mr. Musk is making through the prism of trying to break free of a background financial dependency/subsidy, while simultaneously maintaining viable platform operations, then suddenly some of his moves make sense.

If you are watching the interview tonight, use this thread to share opinion, and I will update with video after broadcast.

PS. We have already peered into the future of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and a decade ago presented the image of what it looks like.

If you think about it to context, everything comes together in this very predictable dynamic.

As we shared more than a decade ago, pictures are worth a multitude of words.

Apr 18 2023

The Truth of the Thing


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

Two quick juxtapositions to contemplate:

Just accepting things as they are presented to be, without laying opinion on the table.

♦ Mr. Elon Musk is saying he spent $44 billion to purchase a platform without any prior knowledge the U.S. Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was operating on the backbone of the communication platform he was purchasing.

Additionally, all due diligence that may have been conducted before the biggest expenditure in the history of social media networks, did not reveal this intelligence community operation, to him, until after the sale was complete.

Everything thereafter is based on this predicate.

♦ Mr. Ron DeSantis is saying he had no idea the apparatus of political constructs was creating a presidential campaign process over a period of two years that would require his ultimate approval and participation, during the period when he genuinely claimed to be running for reelection to be the 2022 Florida Governor.

Everything thereafter is based on this predicate.

Whether you believe these assertions to be true or not is entirely up to you.

However, with these two points in mind, what does that say about the current state of our national pretense?

Expand the discussion. I am very interested in how intellectually honest people view these assertions.

Apr 17 2023

Elon Musk States “Government Agencies Had Full Access to Everything That Was Going on in Twitter”, Including DM’s


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

Tucker Carlson has interviewed Twitter CEO Elon Musk and will broadcast the interview on Monday at 8:00pm ET.

If Carlson had the accurate and full context of the background situation, he would be able to ask the right questions. It appears Mr. Carlson does have the key issues well understood.  This should be a good interview.

In this preview segment {Direct Rumble Link Here}, Musk admits his mind was blown when he discovered the extent of the full government access to everything that was happening on Twitter.  He essentially confirms two key elements.  First, our long-held framework of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, is accurate.  Second, Musk had no idea when he bought it.

There has been an ongoing debate about whether Elon Musk was aware of the U.S. government and intelligence community control over Twitter prior to the purchase; with many people saying there is no way that Musk could not know given the scale of the money involved, $42 billion and the due diligence that generally follows such transactions.

However, in this interview Musk states he had no idea how much operational control and influence the government and intelligence apparatus held over the platform prior to the purchase.

Readers here are so far ahead of the curve on this story, it’s kind of cool, funny, and yet frustrating at the same time.  Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop is all a wild conspiracy theory born from the oddly wired brain of some dude in the corner of the internet; until suddenly it’s not.

Factually, it has been visible since the U.S. Government operation began in 2011/2012, yet no one was willing to believe it.  For several years, CTH has been outlining the relationship between DHS and social media, specifically Twitter.  However, as I said from the outset of this new awakening moment, I promise you things are not what they seem.

As noted earlier, and it is worth repeating, let me put some context to the dynamic that will hopefully clarify the issue and perhaps the context will help explain what we are seeing and not seeing as this unfolds.  There are going to be a lot of citations to fill in the details, and understanding the modern Fourth Branch of Government is critical.

♦ Elevator Speech: Twitter was/is to the U.S. government as TikTok is to China. The overarching dynamic is the need to control public perceptions and opinions. DHS has been in ever increasing control of Twitter since the public-private partnership was formed in 2011/2012.  Jack Dorsey lost control and became owner emeritus. As he now admits, Elon Musk had no idea.

To explain the background activity of Twitter in a way that readers could understand, I used the metaphor of Twitter as Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop.

…”The metaphorical Jack had a great idea, open a coffee shop where the beverages were free and use internal advertising as the income subsidy to operate the business.  Crowds came for the free coffee, comfy couches, fellowship, conversation and enjoyment.

It didn’t matter where Jack got the coffee, how he paid for it, or didn’t, or what product advertising the customers would be exposed to while there.  Few people thought about such things.  Curiously, it didn’t matter what size the crowd was; in the backroom of Jack’s Coffee Shop they were able to generate massive amounts of never-ending free coffee at extreme scales.

Over time, using the justification of parking lot capacity and township regulations, not everyone would be able to park and enter.  Guards were placed at the entrance to pre-screen customers.  Some were denied.  A debate began.”…

Here’s what happened….

In/around 2011 and 2012 the U.S. Government, Obama administration and the U.S. State Dept., came into Jack’s Coffee Shop and asked him for help.

The govt officials needed to deliver massive amounts of coffee to their allies in Egypt, Libya and the middle east to support the Arab Spring party.  Jack told the officials he was willing to help but didn’t have the capacity to deliver on that scale.  The officials told Jack not to worry, they would handle that aspect – he just needed to agree to the partnership and let them utilize his business.  Jack agreed.

[Note, the timing here is not accidental.  The operational agreement happened at the same time DHS was fine tuning the domestic surveillance systems to monitor social media platforms and target political opposition. See The Fourth Branch.]

Over the next several weeks, months and eventually years, Jack watched as hundreds of new employees flooded into the business to facilitate the rapid expansion.  Along with a myriad of new faces, new equipment was delivered, and soon Jack found himself looking at heavy industrial equipment erecting large buildings in the back lots of the property.  Coffee urns were replaced with massive industrial coffee delivery systems that far exceeded anything Jack ever imagined.

Business was booming, but slowly Jack realized he had lost control.  Jack was riding a dragon.

As the years progressed, thousands of new employees moved into the offices of the new buildings and massive pipelines were producing incredible scales of coffee.  Jack noted offices of the United Nations Human Rights Commission were now creating unique blends of coffee for international distribution, and the European Commission had an entire suite of specially trained coffee production engineers creating alternate combinations and flavors.

By 2018, Jack had essentially become an “owner emeritus”; his name was on the shingle, but the day-to-day operation of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop had turned into an industrial park complex.

Jack saw his personal wealth attached to the success of the business, but operationally, his only responsibility was traveling to symposiums and venues where he would stand on stage and wax philosophically about the future of a coffee delivery organization he no longer controlled.  Day-to-day operations were now controlled by experts in the scale of massive industrial coffee.  Those experts came from the Dept of Homeland Security.

[The Intercept] – […] Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

In a March meeting, Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government. Dehmlow, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.” (read more)

To streamline the operational efficiencies as the industrial coffee system grew, direct portals between the Washington DC government offices and Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop were created.  Officials no longer needed to travel to the location of Jack’s Coffee Shop in order to operate the valves, mixers, grinders and systems to generate the scale of blends being produced.

Experts could now use direct portals to the facility to operate the coffee production systems remotely, with a limited number of specially trained (FBI) coffee engineers doing the laborious tasks and maintenance at the facility.

The badges were intimidating to Jack who went to sleep every night under the realization he no longer had any clue about how the coffee shop communication business was operating.

[…]  The extent to which the DHS initiatives affect Americans’ daily social feeds is unclear. During the 2020 election, the government flagged numerous posts as suspicious, many of which were then taken down, documents cited in the Missouri attorney general’s lawsuit disclosed. And a 2021 report by the Election Integrity Partnership at Stanford University found that of nearly 4,800 flagged items, technology platforms took action on 35 percent — either removing, labeling, or soft-blocking speech, meaning the users were only able to view content after bypassing a warning screen. The research was done “in consultation with CISA,” the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Prior to the 2020 election, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives. According to NBC News, the meetings were part of an initiative, still ongoing, between the private sector and government to discuss how firms would handle misinformation during the election. (keep reading)

After several years of increasing distance from the Coffee Shop operation he initially started, eventually Jack decided it was silly to own an industrial coffee delivery system that he didn’t control.  So, Jack decided to sell his shingle to someone else.

Enter, Elon Musk.

Billionaire Elon Musk, a man intimately familiar with large industrial systems and government, had been watching the disgruntled visitors to Jack’s Coffee Shop who were no longer permitted to enter.  Musk saw an inequity between the amount of coffee that was available, and the scarcity of the coffee amid a community blacklisted by the operational executives and managers of the shop.

With expressions of both interest and fellowship, Mr. Elon Musk told Mr. Jack Dorsey he would take ownership of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop and remove any discriminatory guards that were now controlling permitted entry.  Jack had no aversion to Elon and eventually a deal was brokered.

After the transfer of sale was complete, Mr. Musk fired many of the guards and then set about checking the payroll to identify which group of shop employees were actually involved in the generation of coffee, and which employees were involved in promotion of the industrial coffee delivery system that were no longer needed.

Within this process, Elon Musk begins to discover the complex nature of what, at least at the surface, appeared to be an uncomplicated coffee shop.  Why is there a 500-room glass walled office building on the backside of the coffee shop?  What is going on in that GEC building that has anything to do with selling domestic coffee?

The sunlight revelations began surfacing several months ago, when someone of reasonably intelligent curiosity finally asked Elon Musk the right question about this direct portal from DHS into the coffee shop.  Twitter owner Elon Musk had no idea a DHS portal into the coffee shop existed and what it would be for.

To put it in brutally honest terms, the State Dept initially created the partnership between the U.S. government and Twitter (Arab Spring).  However, when the operations needed to become domestically centered (post Trump election), another agency stepped in.  The United States Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) is the operating system running in the background of Twitter.

The State Dept started it with GEC, but ultimately DHS, via CISA, controlled Twitter.  The justification for control was ‘national security.’  Mr. Elon Musk is now the face of a quasi govt controlled enterprise.   This is why what we see being released by Elon Musk in the Twitter Files is actually a filtered outcome as a result of this new ownership dynamic.

Put simply, DHS stakeholders, to include the DOJ, FBI and Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), are mitigating any consequential public exposure of their domestic surveillance activity by controlling and feeding Mr. Musk selected information about their prior Twitter operations.  DHS is still the ghost in the machine.

The larger objective of U.S. involvement in social media has always been monitoring and surveillance of the public conversation, and then ultimately controlling and influencing public opinion.

I will continue peeling these types of issues apart, applying sunlight as heavily as possible, because the mechanisms and the institutions themselves need to be destroyed.  They cannot be reformed because they have assembled too much power.  They need to be completely defunded and removed.

~ Support CTH Here ~

Resources:

Large Numbers of FBI Agents Work Inside Twitter 

Govt Structured Cloud Computing is Social Media operating System

Tech Platforms Connected to DHS Portals

Examples of Govt Influence of Social Media Content

[…] “Intelligence agencies backed new startups designed to monitor the vast flow of information across social networks to better understand emerging narratives and risks.” [HERE]

Understanding Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop

Leaked DHS Documents Showing Connections

Why Govt Fears Discovery of Relationship