Posted originally on the CTH on August 17, 2023 | Sundance
Shadow Banning is the term given to social media backroom activity that uses computer algorithms to shrink user account engagement without informing the user. The process involves putting friction upon the account to block amplification and control engagement. The user doesn’t see the process, they just notice a severe drop in the engagement by other users on the platform.
Last year, Elon Musk promised to start letting the account holders see what level of friction they were assigned to by letting the users see their shadow ban status. However, that promise was never fulfilled. Musk was questioned about why the X platform, formerly known as Twitter, has not followed through on the transparency pledge.
Continuing the process of pretending not to know things, Musk says transparency is hard.
(Washington) – The long-hated process of shadow-banning on X, formerly Twitter, soon will change, according to owner Elon Musk.
At the Viva Tech conference this week, the billionaire said he plans to address the issue soon. He said the company is working on a plan that will let people see if their account was affected by the Twitter system.
“Sorry it’s taking so long,” Mr. Musk posted. “There are so many layers of ‘trust & safety’ software that it often takes us hours to figure out who, how and why an account was suspended or shadow-banned. A ground up rewrite is underway that simplifies the X codebase dramatically.”
Shadow-banning is a practice where users have their accounts partially silenced without their knowledge. If users are shadow-banned, they can still post but they will notice engagement drops significantly. Since there is no way to officially know that a user is shadow-banned, the issue has been politicized. Conservative accounts consistently claimed they were shadow-banned for speaking out against vaccines or the 2020 election. (read more)
This statement from Musk follows on the heels of X-Corp CEO Linda Yaccarino saying, “If you are going to post something that is illegal or against the law, you’re gone. Zero tolerance. But more importantly, if you are going to post something that is lawful, but it’s awful, you get labeled. You get labeled, you get deamplified, which means it cannot be shared, and it is certainly demonetized. … So, they [advertisers] are protected from the risk of being next to that content.”…
It doesn’t take a deep thinker to understand why X-Corp (Twitter) would not want users to know the reason for their shadow banning or deamplification. Once people become aware of the content they generate that assigns them a label, the control units within X-corp then need to justify their labeling. Transparency runs counter to the intentions of those who control information; that’s why Musk has never followed through.
In the bigger picture, there are legal ramifications when this shadow banning, labeling and definition system is rolled out for the entire North American internet. This is the conversation taking place now in the closed-door meetings of DHS and the various organizations conscripted to develop the process.
Elon Musk is not John Galt. Remember that!
Elon Musk has one prism that is at the forefront of his decision making, money. From my calculations, there are less than eight weeks remaining before Musk and Yaccarino need to go back into the capital markets looking for additional funding. Watch what happens over the next two months.
Despite the cheering from the Washington Post, CNN, NY Times, and the rest of the anti-Democracy press that supports their stringent demands upon the nation, my phone has been in meltdown ever since Trump was arrested. These leftist zealots are cheering the end times for EVERY phone call I have had from Asia to Europe, they are all expressing complete shock that the United States is collapsing and they are now all seeing that our forecast that the 2024 Presidential Election would be the most corrupt in history and market the END of democracy in the United States.
These people just do not get it, They crossed the line and now the view of the United States from the outside looking in, they no longer believe that America is the beacon of liberty to the world. It is becoming so obvious that our computer will be right again. I warned it even was showing that the 2024 election might not even take place. That was a small 18% probability, but that NEVER came up EVER in this history of running our political models – NEVER!
This year, 2023, was a MAJOR Directional Change that was showing up in both the LEFT & the RIGHT databases. The year 2025 is when a president would take office in January. This has been the #1 target on our political models for decades. The NEOCONS are in full control of the government. There is no way to stop the collapse of the United States at this point. Nobody will listen and there is nothing I can do. People often ask what if people protested? We will never realize the opportunity to reestablish a new form of government post-2032 without the pain and destruction first.
During the Reign of Valentinian I and his brother, Valens, who came to power in 364AD where Valentinian I died in 375 and Valens ruled into 378, there are serious correlations from both and economic and monetary perspective. They too saw their power weakening so they allowed the Goths to cross the Danube and settle within Roman territory provided they would also then serve in the Roman military. This is what is really behind Biden allowing all these people to flood in through the border. What they do not realize, is that history repeats as Biden grants citizenship in return for military service. The Neocons want to build an army to defeat China and Russia simultaneously. Additionally, they assume that all these illegal aliens will vote Democrat so they can decimate the economy of natural-born citizens.
Besides the barbarians storming across the border as we see today under the Biden Administration, here is a tax collector’s ingot. There was so much debased coinage in circulation, they no longer would accept their own coins in payment for taxes. Instead, the taxes were to be imposed by weight and in-kind. The coins had to be melted down. Below the bar, is a weight you would put on one side of the scale. Here we are on the dawn of digital currencies and the elimination of all paper money and even cryptocurrencies whereby they will only accept digital to end what they see as the black market.
Here is a medieval coin scale serving the same purpose – accept coins only by weight.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 11, 2023 | Sundance
I have been reviewing interviews, looking at discussion, and some of them I will share in the next few articles. However, for a solid representation of the state of our current dynamic, as it relates to the targeting of President Donald J. Trump, this interview below is a solid outlook from the detractors.
CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman and CBS News investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge join “Face the Nation” to discuss what’s in the indictment — and what it means for Trump. [Transcript Here]
Before getting to the video, it’s valuable to see Rikki Klieman representing the interpretation of the media outlook toward the indictment handed down by Special Counsel Jack Smith. It is also valuable to see CBS’s Catherine Herridge represent the defenders of the institutions, from the outside vulgarian personage of Trump.
Klieman buys the Lawfare narrative completely, including the framework of classified documents as opposed to documents containing classified markings. She sells the Lawfare outline as gospel and makes all assertions from that position. Herridge looks at how the bureaucracy responds to Trump, including how the institutions hold power of determination higher than a President of the United States.
As Bill Barr said emphatically earlier today, “The documents do not belong to Trump,” continuing with “The documents belong to the government who created them, not the man for whom they were created.” So sayeth the defender of the omnipotent Dept of Justice. This is where a sharp intellectual knife to cut through the chaff and countermeasures is needed, and notice no one brings up the visible and practical deconstruction point.
If the documents did not belong to President Donald J. Trump, then why did the government dump them in the parking lot of the White House and tell him to deal with them?
If the documents belonged to the government, and not to the man for whom they were created, then why did that same government give them to him and force him to take them to a location of his choosing? Can you see the obtuse argument fall apart when simple pragmatic questions are raised?
The institutions are presented, by the sellers of the Lawfare narrative, as higher than the authority of the President of the United States. This is how ridiculous our government has become.
Institutions are not omnipotent entities; they are buildings and networks full of people who facilitate processes that are an outcome of policy. Those buildings and offices are not the government. The elected politicians who we send to Washington DC are not subservient to the processes, norms and morays they determine within the bureaucracy that the politicians are in charge of.
The argument(s) against Donald Trump are akin to a business saying that all work product created during the tenure of employment belongs to the enterprise of the business and not to the employee. If you want to hold that line of thought, fine. However, you then need to reconcile that the business enterprise intentionally gave all the work product to the employee, dumped it in their lap, told them to take it and leave, and then comes back at a later date and says – we now need to review the stuff we forced you to take because some of it might not actually belong to you.
Does this happen anywhere else? Of course not.
The fact that the National Archives and Record Administration refused to take custody of the documents upon the end of the White House tenure, combined with the fact the NARA dumped those documents in the parking lot of the White House for Trump to deal with, is a direct statement the bureaucracy was telling President Trump these are your records. His records – not their records on loan to him.
The Presidential Records Act is the overriding legislative guidance for the flow of work product post term in office. These are essentially document arguments. The fact that NARA together with the Biden administration would weaponize the disposition of documents, they intentionally forced Trump to take ownership of, speaks to an intent within the bureaucracy that is transparently obvious.
Bill Barr’s entire mindset is based on a belief the institutions are of a higher power than the individuals we elect to control them. In essence, the President of the United States is subservient to the bureaucracy. This is nonsense. This is also why former AG Bill Barr was more concerned about preserving the institutions than stopping the weaponizing activity that flows from them.
President Trump could store his “presidential records” anywhere he wants to; they are his records.
Now, watch Klieman obscure the difference between classified documents and documents containing classified markings. Despite her pontifications to the contrary, the indictment is not based around any classified documents. The classification of the documents is technically and factually moot to the ridiculous point the special counsel is making.
[Transcript] -JOHN DICKERSON: For more on the legal implications, we’re joined by senior investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge and CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman.
Rikki, I want to start with you.
You have been a prosecutor and a defense lawyer. So what stands out to you, now that you have read this indictment?
RIKKI KLIEMAN: I think what stands out, obviously, is the magnitude of detail in this indictment.
It’s not only that you’re dealing with 31 counts under the Espionage Act, which simply means the unlawful, willing retention of classified information, or even unclassified information that would hurt the defense of the United States and aid our enemies. It’s the detail of a speaking indictment.
We have to remember that much of this indictment, John, is to educate not only ultimately a court and jury, but it’s really to educate the public. Much of this indictment, in terms of the detail, may not even come into evidence, in terms of what’s admissible or not in the course of a trial.
What also strikes me, John, is, the overwhelming detail leaves the Trump legal team with real need to have powerful motions to dismiss, because, if this goes to trial, the way it reads, it’s rather overwhelming for anyone to be able to fight it on the facts themselves.
JOHN DICKERSON: And I want to get to that motion-to-dismiss question in a moment.
But, Catherine, you have been doing reporting about the risk assessment about just what was in these documents. Educate us on that.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Well, what jumps out to me, John, is when you go to the section the willful retention of national defense information, by my count, there are 21 top secret documents, and the disclosure of top secret information has the expectation of exceptionally grave damage to national security.
But what out — stands out to me is some of the classified codings, like TK, or Talent Keyhole. You don’t see that very often. That’s about intelligence from overhead imagery. For example, if we’re looking at a terrorist target, do we have such good visibility that we can count the hairs on their head? Can we see what they’re eating for breakfast on their terrorist patio?
Those are capabilities that we don’t want our adversaries to know that we have. And then also Special Access Programs, or SAP, these are highly restricted programs because of the sensitivity of the intelligence and the technology, such as stealth technology, for example.
Think of classified information like the Pentagon. Special Access Programs are these handful of rooms where there are just a limited number of keys to control and restrict access to that information.
JOHN DICKERSON: So it’s not just secret; it’s the top of the — top of the top?
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Some of these are way beyond top secret, like, I said, Talent Keyhole, when you’re talking about Special Access Programs or SCI, sensitive, compartmentalized information.
These really are the crown jewels of the U.S. intelligence community.
JOHN DICKERSON: Rikki, let me ask you about a part of this indictment which seems to come — which comes from one of the former president’s lawyers.
Educate us on the crime-fraud exception, how it’s possible for a prosecutor to have this information. And is that a weakness? Because we know, from our reporting, that this is something that the Trump defense team is going to talk about, is the behavior of the prosecutors.
RIKKI KLIEMAN: We all believe that, when you go to a doctor, that there’s a privilege, that what you say and what your ailments are will remain confidential.
Same thing if you go to a clergyperson. And it’s exactly the same thing. When you go to a lawyer. You believe that, if you are a client, that what you say will never be disclosed to anyone, let alone in the grand jury or court of law. It’s called the attorney-client privilege. It protects all conversations relating to legal advice.
So, how did it get broken? That is, how did a court in Washington, D.C., a judge, and then an appellate court affirm the idea that you could hear, listen, read the notes and the voice memos of a lawyer to testify against his own client?
It’s called the crime-fraud exception. So what the court believed was, the conversations between Evan Corcoran, the lawyer, and Donald Trump were really in furtherance of a crime or a fraud, and he was ordered and forced to testify.
Now, one could say, well, that’s one and done. So now Mr. Corcoran is going to be a witness in this case, should it go to trial. But we have to remember that that took place, that decision, in the District of Columbia. Now we are in Florida. So can it come up to a new judge? Might a new judge decide that it is not admissible at trial? Yes.
Will that hurt the case? Not necessarily. There’s plenty of other evidence.
JOHN DICKERSON: Catherine, I have got two questions for you.
The first is, what happens if you’re just a regular old Joe and you have this kind of information? Legally, what happens to you? What’s happened?
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Well, as one example, I have contacts who work in the nuclear weapons capability arena.
Let’s say you have a nuclear document, it’s on top of the photocopier, and you walk away, you leave it there. Your clearance is gone. You are out the door. There are immediate consequences.
JOHN DICKERSON: Let me ask you about a number of the president’s defenders.
Well, first of all, we should note, the current president is under investigation by a special counsel.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Correct.
JOHN DICKERSON: We don’t know much about that. But Republicans have brought that up in defending the president. They have also brought the case of Hillary Clinton.
You have been looking at that. Give us a sense of the apples and oranges or apples and apples in comparison with what’s on the table here.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Well, what strikes me, John, in this indictment is I think the special counsel, Jack Smith, specifically charged willful retention of national defense information in an effort to sort of blunt criticism that these cases may be the same.
If you go back to the summer of 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey said that they found multiple e-mail chains on Hillary Clinton’s private server that she used for government business that contained highly classified information, including these Special Access Programs that we just discussed, but, in his view, it should not be charged because he didn’t feel there was sufficient evidence of intent or willfulness.
Critics would say that even just purchasing the server was an example of intent. And then, finally, you have to look at just the scope of the information and also the timeline. But I think this charging of willful retention really is by design.
JOHN DICKERSON: Right, the facts of the case quite different. But thank you so much for that and for all your other answers.
And, Rikki Klieman, thank you.
And Face the Nation will be back in one minute. Stay with us. (link)
Posted originally on the CTH on June 9, 2023 | Sundance
Good news, bad news and granular news..
First, the good news.The judge assigned to the Trump documents case is U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon. She is the same judge who handled the lawsuit last year after the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. Judge Cannon was the judge who appointed the “special master” to review the documents the DOJ was claiming were classified, but Team Trump was contending that definition.
Now the bad news. The DOJ is no longer legally arguing that Donald Trump held any classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. The DOJ is arguing that President Trump held documents vital to U.S. defense security. It’s a farce but that’s their position. The classification status of documents is moot, nonexistent, except to create the predicate for the proverbial FBI nose under the tent.
The DOJ-NSD (that’s Lisa Monaco) got a warrant to look for classified documents, but never intended to use classified documents as a case cornerstone because President Trump had full declassification authority. The DOJ got a search warrant by convincing a judge they were looking for something that wasn’t even a violation of law. That’s why the DOJ would not reveal the probable cause affidavit. The search was built upon a fraudulent pretense. “Classified” is a snipe hunt.
You will notice Jack Smith never discussed “classified documents” in his remarks, and the issue of classified documents appears nowhere except in the indictment as a purposeful lawfare description of documents. The DOJ is not legally charging anything relating to the classification status of the documents. That’s the Lawfare and media banter to create a talking point. The term “classified” is all over the indictment, but as a lawfare adjective only; it’s like using the word “stash”.
The special counsel legal framework is centered around documents the DOJ define as vital to “the defense security” of the United States. EVERYTHING is predicated on 31 counts of an 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) violation. The DOJ defines what is considered a defense document, and that intentionally has nothing to do with classification.
The granular news. You might have heard that two of Trump’s lawyers, Jim Trusty and John Rowley, quit today. The media wants to use their exit as a point to indicate Trump is in legal jeopardy; however, that’s not the case.
As soon as Trusty and Rowley saw their forced testimony was used in the indictment, they had no option except to exit the case. Despite the lawyers providing no damaging information against Trump, the DOJ used language in the indictment to turn Trump’s lawyers into material witnesses. Weissmann’s Lawfare tactic create a conflict, forcing the two Trump lawyers to depart.
WASHINGTON DC – Two of Donald Trump’s top lawyers abruptly resigned from his defense team on Friday, just hours after news broke that he and a close aide were indicted on charges related to their handling of classified documents.
Jim Trusty and John Rowley, who helmed Trump’s Washington, D.C.-based legal team for months and were seen frequently at the federal courthouse, indicated they would no longer represent Trump in matters being investigated and prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith, who is probing both the documents matter and efforts by Trump to subvert the 2020 election.
The resignations were shortly followed by an announcement from Trump himself confirming that a close aide, Walt Nauta, had also been indicted by federal prosecutors. Nauta, a Navy veteran, had served as the former president’s personal aide and was a ubiquitous presence during his post White House days.
In their place, Trump indicated that Todd Blanche — an attorney he recently retained to help fight unrelated felony charges brought by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg in April — would lead his legal team, along with a firm to be named later. Trump and his team have liked Blanche, who is expected to play a more elevated, central role. (more)
Weissmann, Eisen and Smith are using lawfare in the indictment to put the interests of Trump and his aide Walt Nauta against each other. Obviously, Nauta would not turn on Trump, so the prosecution made Nauta a target for a federal 1001 charge of lying to investigators and will pressure him throughout the case to take a plea in exchange for testimony against Trump. Nauta is the baseline of the “Conspiracy Elements” which require two or more people. Again, pure Lawfare.
Obviously, Jim Trusty was unaware last night that his forced testimony would be used in the indictment. WATCH:
Posted originally on the CTH on May 26, 2023 | Sundance
Everything I have ever written about Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop is true, even if it takes a little longer for the more complex details about the data processing, govt subsidies and the DHS financial side of the operation to surface. The DHS, ODNI and FBI control elements were proven in the Twitter Files before the lawyers shut down the pertinent line of inquiry. That horse left the barn as everyone stood jaw-agape. The second aspect, the financial side of the operation, remains more elusive – but slowly even the biggest tech detractors are coming around to the realization.
Into this foray came the question of whether or not Musk knew about it. A debate on these pages took place. In the background, unbeknownst to the general public, the tech insiders within the rebel alliance had formulated a thesis about the takeover. The key part of their overlaid thesis was a timeline of sorts, showing the rise of Truth Social – and the partnerships therein (Rumble) – contrast against the entry of Musk into the coffee shop and the official DHS position about TikTok, – another competitor.
Was the Musk intervention timed to coincide with a rise in strategic competition against the interests of DHS? Go back and look at the timeline and decide for yourself. It is certainly suspicious when contrast against the ‘new features‘ being advanced within the coffee shop business model.
Regardless, if you overlay the recent Musk decisions, and then overlay the deployed alignment of the Musk enterprise and DeSantis presidential launch, you can make a solid argument the Trillions at Stake group, the collaboration between govt, billionaire multinationals and Big Tech, have a multi-faceted approach to control public information in advance of the 2024 election. Subtle like a brick through a window:
You are going to hear me continue repeating this, and you might get sick of it, but always ‘Trust Your Instincts’. If you are grounded in the truthful world, the pretending doesn’t work against you.
May 25, 2023 – Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill Thursday providing additional liability protections for public and private space companies like Elon Musk’s SpaceX and Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin. Presidential hopeful DeSantis signed the bill one day after announcing his candidacy on a Twitter Spaces session hosted by Musk.
DeSantis approved CS/SB 1318 — Spaceflight Entity Liability and 27 other bills Thursday. The law provides liability immunity to a spaceflight entity “for an injury or death of spaceflight participant or crew resulting from a spaceflight activity,” under certain circumstances. The bill requires space companies provide a warning statement for crew members to sign. (more)
We are about to see exactly how the billionaire corporate funders control the Red State operations and manufacture the ‘illusion of choice‘. The difference between now and the Romney era of 2012 – through the Bush era of 2016, is that the American electorate are eyes-wide-open. We are watching the assembly in real time, and once again at CTH we have no financial affiliation to influence our sunlight. The gang might be getting back together, but The Truth Has No Agenda.
Remember, GOPe politics is all about money, not ideology. The ideological framework of Republican politics is a false front. ‘Social issues’ are used as the illusion inside the theater keeping the audience entertained and distracted, while the directors who create the performances take loot out the back door.
Once you understand the real baseline of corporation run party politics inside the USA, all of the moves – past and present – make sense, and the ‘ah-ha’ moments just keep flooding in. {GO DEEP}
The boardroom of the Democrat private corporation (DNC) wants power. The boardroom of the Republican private corporation (RNC) wants money. The Democrats use money to get power, ultimately control over people; the Republicans use power to get money, whatever happens to the people is irrelevant.
The DNC wants fundamental change; the RNC wants to be paid and control wealth while it happens.
The core issue to understand Republican politics is to look at how the people in control, the billionaires and multinational corporations, position for wealth. This is why/how the DNC can weaponize voting systems (outcomes), while the RNC accept it and position to be paid off while voting fraud takes place.
The person with the greatest opportunity to defeat the schemes of the corrupt political elite, is the person you see in the mirror every day when you brush your teeth. There are more of us, than them – united we cannot be defeated.
There is a great MAGA insurgency taking place at the state level, and that is also visible in the endorsements. However, the systems – not people, systems – which operate the business end of Republican politics at a state and federal level, are still under the control of the RNC as a private corporation. Don’t look for MAGA support from the institutions until we have MAGA people in charge of them.
Once you see the strings on the marionettes, you can never go back to that moment in the performance when you did not see them. While we have awakened many people to the ‘illusion of choice’ system by predicting the moves in advance, the enemy is cunning, and they know how to weaponize the feeling of desperation.
We are in an abusive relationship with our government, and that cycle of abuse is truly created by the background financial institutions who control our government.
Posted originally on the CTH on May 17, 2023 | Sundance
Paul Sperry at RealClearPolitics has an article today citing one part of the Durham report that deserves a little CTH attention.
I hope you will forgive my indulgent snickers, as the graphic you see below was created by me in early 2018, a full five years before the release of this Durham report. I even referred to the Steele Dossier as the Nellie Ohr Dossier. lol
As noted by Sperry, “According to the 306-page report, former Justice Department prosecutor Bruce Ohr’s wife Nellie Ohr first plowed the ground for the dossier with a series of research reports she wrote for Fusion GPS, the D.C.-based opposition research firm the Clinton campaign commissioned to dig up dirt on Trump and Russia.”
[…] Durham suggests Nellie Ohr planted the seeds of sourcing for the most explosive allegations leveled by the dossier against Trump, including the oft-cited notion that he and his campaign were engaged in a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” with the Kremlin. The dossier attributed this, falsely, to Millian. Durham found that the Belarusian-American realtor was never a source for the dossier and was simply invented as one, along with the allegations attributed to him.
In fact, Durham says that Millian initially wasn’t even on the radar of Steele and his dossier “collector” Igor Danchenko, a former Brookings Institution analyst who’s admitted much of the information he provided Steele was alcohol-lubricated gossip. Millian was called to their attention by Nellie Ohr, who the prosecutor said “implicated” Millian through her own reports. Durham suggests Steele and Danchenko merely followed her leads.
[…] Bruce Ohr, an anti-Trump Democrat, pushed his wife’s reports that cited Millian — 12 in all — onto the Crossfire Hurricane team at FBI headquarters that was investigating Trump and his campaign for possible espionage. Agents used her reports as a source of corroboration for the Steele reports they received in the summer and fall of 2016, even though it was circular reporting. “The reports prepared by Ohr and others at Fusion GPS were ultimately provided to Crossfire Hurricane investigators by Ohr’s husband, Bruce Ohr,” according to the Durham Report. Durham notes that Danchenko was tracking leads on Millian from Nellie Ohr within “approximately one week” of Fusion GPS retaining Steele to compile the dossier. He concludes that this “strongly supports the inference that Fusion GPS directed Steele to pursue Millian.” In other words, Steele was not the catalyst behind the dossier’s central claims. Rather, it was Clinton’s contractor Fusion GPS — but more specifically, the wife of a senior DOJ official who worked for Fusion. So the FBI wasn’t really investigating “Crown reporting,” as officials referred to Steele’s dossier, implying it was British intelligence. More accurately, it was investigating information from inside its own department that was laundered through Steele and his dossier. (read more)
Smart fella that John Durham.
Nellie Ohr – a former CIA open-source expert on all things Russia; a woman who used HAM radios for communication; a woman who approached Fusion GPS owner Glenn Simpson for a job in December 2015; she was the impetus for the information that ended up in the Chris Steele Dossier.
Posted originally on the CTH on May 17, 2023 | Sundance
“I’m not being arbitrary; I’m just not going to pretend. These people know exactly what is going on. Their action is not an outcome of some esoteric thought process. They are corrupt & acting to retain the corruption with specific intent & full understanding of the consequence.” ~Sundance
Now, let us get down to the business of understanding; let us uncomplicate the complex; and, more importantly, let me propose the outline of a solution.
♦ SILO #1 – Inspector General Michael Horowitz was given instructions by outgoing President Barack Obama, to review the internal decision-making inside the FBI, Main Justice and DOJ-NSD as it pertained to the Hillary Clinton classified document scandal.
In early January 2017, IG Horowitz was tasked to review the FBI decisions during the Clinton exoneration and deliver a report on his findings.
First, it is important to remember the DOJ inspector general can only review internal government conduct. The IG does not review or investigate outside involvement and has no authority to compel investigative compliance from outside parties. The Office of Inspector General is an internal review agency.
Second, it is important to remember the DOJ inspector general was not authorized to conduct any oversight of the Dept of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. During the Obama era, when the DOJ-NSD was created by Attorney General Eric Holder, through the entirety of the Obama era, there was no inspector general oversight into any operations conducted by the DOJ-NSD; that included the FISA process. It was not until later in 2017 when the Trump administration granted the OIG authority to conduct oversight into the DOJ National Security Division.
Think of IG Michael Horowitz as an investigative silo. You will see why this matters.
♦ SILO #2 – Robert Mueller (truthfully Andrew Weissmann) was appointed in May of 2017 by Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, as Special Counsel to investigate Trump-Russia and the reports of prior Russian influence in the 2016 election. Robert Muller was a figurehead, a person in name only to give credibility to the purpose and intent of the group who assembled under his shingle. Andrew Weissmann was the actual manager of the investigation, events and details of the Mueller probe.
On the outward face, in the aftermath of FBI Director James Comey being fired, the Mueller investigation was created to look at Russian interference in the 2016 election – against the background that Comey’s firing by President Trump was related to an intent to impede the ongoing Crossfire Hurricane investigation. However, on the internal dynamic, inside the mechanics of how DC silos are created, the Mueller probe existed to hide the DOJ and FBI weaponization of government that was deployed under the justification of the FBI Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
Sometime around June of 2017, while conducting his review of the FBI conduct in the Clinton investigation, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered troubling internal communications between FBI agent Peter Strzok and DOJ-NSD assigned lawyer to the FBI, Lisa Page. Silo #1 now intersects Silo #2.
Lisa Page was the DOJ lawyer advising FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Peter Strzok was the lead FBI counterintelligence agent working on the Clinton email investigation. Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe were the core of the Clinton investigation and intrinsically linked to the Clinton exoneration as announced by FBI Director James Comey.
IG Horowitz knew of the Clinton investigation and was investigating the details therein. Horowitz did not initially know about the Crossfire Hurricane investigation which, by June of 2017, had subsequently morphed into the Special Counsel Mueller investigation.
Horowitz’s 2017 task only pertained to the Clinton classified documents and decision-making. However, it was the exact same FBI and DOJ people who investigated then exonerated Hillary Clinton, who then opened an investigation of Trump, who then transferred into an expanded Robert Mueller probe.
Horowitz (Silo 1) was bound by requirements of his office to inform Robert Mueller that individuals inside his investigation (Silo 2) were under investigation.
This presented a problem for Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann who were conducting a coverup and targeting operation.
Essentially, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were a threat, as they were bringing an IG review into the security of the Mueller Silo. Almost immediately, Strzok and Page were removed by Mueller/Weissmann to purge the problematic window they represented.
Mueller and Weismann then continued their operation, absorbing any Main Justice information that had anything to do with Trump-Russia. Simultaneous to their unilateral empowerment, Weissmann and Mueller continued to fabricate a false premise of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This ‘Russia narrative’ was supported as the justification for their continued operation throughout 2017, 2018 and into 2019.
It is important to remember that Mueller/Weissmann had full control over everything that had anything to do with the Russian interference narrative or the Trump-Russia narrative. Any ancillary investigation from any government office that touched on these issues was subsequently absorbed by Weissmann and team.
As an example, this Weissmann/Mueller absorption and control included the FBI case against SSCI Security Director James Wolfe, the man who leaked the Title-1 surveillance warrant (FISA application) deployed by the Crossfire Hurricane team against Carter Page. The Wolfe investigation (April ’17 through January ’18) was conducted by FBI Washington Field Office agent Brian Dugan. James Wolfe was indicted by USAO Jessie Liu for leaking the FISA application to journalist Ali Watkins. However, the evidence file was reviewed by the special counsel, and after threats by the defense team to subpoena Senate Intelligence Committee members, the specific charge of leaking the FISA was dropped from the criminal case.
Because Weissmann/Mueller controlled everything that touched the Trump-Russia issues, in June of 2018 when the Carter Page FISA application was made public, it came from the Weissmann/Mueller team release. This was one of the lesser discussed revelations from the Rod Rosenstein June 2020 testimony about the Mueller probe.
♦ SILO #3 – After taking office in February of 2019, Attorney General Bill Barr received the Mueller report in March and a debate with Mueller/Weissmann about the content and report release began. In May 2019, AG Barr appointed Special Counsel John Durham to review the FBI operations that initiated the Trump-Russia probe.
It is important to note that John Durham was appointed *after* Bill Barr received the Mueller report from Andrew Weissmann. It is also important to note that despite the originating mandate of Weissmann/Mueller being predicated on their obligation to look into the accusations of Trump-Russia, the Clinton campaign organization of the Trump-Russia narrative does not appear in the Mueller report.
There is nothing about Clinton’s work with the Perkins Coie law firm and lawyer Michael Sussmann to work as a cut-out for the Clinton campaign contacts with Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele, Glenn Simpson, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr or any other substantively manufactured system that was used to create the illusion of the Trump-Russia connections. The absence of that information inside the Mueller report begged the obvious question:
How could Mueller investigate Trump-Russia for two years and never find the origin of Trump-Russia?
After realizing the Mueller report contained none of this information, in May of 2019 Bill Barr appointed John Durham and Silo #3 was created.
Each of the silos, purposefully created by those who operate within the DC systems of political power, were created to have specific usefulness and function. This is how the system operates.
We hear things like “ongoing investigation” as sunlight blocks, or “potential interfering with an investigation” as another technique. Each time a silo is created, the purpose of the silo is to control information and isolate the larger system from scrutiny.
When Robert Mueller (silo 2) appeared before a congressional committee in June 2019 to answer questions about his report, he was asked about the origination of Trump-Russia. Mueller’s jaw-dropping response was, “That was not in my purview.”
Wait, how can your existence be predicated on investigating Trump-Russia, and yet the origin of Trump-Russia is not in your “purview”? See the problem.
Unfortunately, and not accidentally, Robert Mueller was able to avoid scrutiny of never having investigated the origin of Trump-Russia because there was another silo, John Durham (silo 3), to take the heat off him. Each silo is sequentially created to deflect and distract from questioning that surrounds the originating corruption. Attorney General Bill Barr created Silo #3 (Durham), for exactly this reason. Bill Barr was the Bondo, John Durham the spray paint.
John Durham finishes up Silo-3 operations, delivers a report, and now we have a Silo #4 in operation via the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith.
As you can see, each silo creates an internal defense system which also allows media to deflect, ignore and distract. However, in the Trump-Russia story you will note there is a flow to how the silos are sequenced. The silos are designed to absorb information, deflect sunlight and keep accountability away. The silos are constructs, preservation systems, for the DC administrative state.
Ultimately, each silo is created to stop seeing the larger picture – the unlawful targeting of a presidential candidate, and then a subsequent coup against that candidate after the election. The evidence of the weaponized government is in the full story that resides, compartmented, inside purposefully constructed containment silos; each intended to block sunlight upon specific components of the evidence.
♦ SOLUTION – There is a way to bring the sunlight and destroy the silo system. The method is to use the inertia of the construct against itself.
Obviously, I hope you can understand why it would be imprudent to go too deep into this right now. However, suffice to say – here are the broad strokes.
In front of you sits a panel of SEVEN people:
Barr, Rosenstein, Horowitz, Mueller, Weissmann, Durham and Wray.
You do not deconstruct the silos by questioning them separately. Each silo will avoid sunlight by deflecting inquiry to the mechanism of the other.
Instead, you rain sunlight down upon the silos by questioning each of the participants individually while located together.
You use very granular and specific questions that pertain to the flow-through details that each silo was created to hide.
The usefulness of the silo process is dependent on its ability to stand alone.
When you put direct questions to the assembly of silos, there is nowhere to deflect.
Two days. Eight hours each day. Five rounds of questions. No one reading statements – only questions.
Very, very specific questions.
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. 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.
Posted originally on the CTH on April 8, 2023 | Sundance
I’m not sure what is going on at the Twitter with Elon Musk, but apparently either his team is misleading their CEO, or Musk is just shooting from the hip.
In a reply to Matt Taibbi’s report about Substack content being blocked by Twitter and Taibbi’s decision to exit the Musk platform, the Twitter CEO fired back, calling Taibbi a liar.
Twitter’s own internal checkers put a community note, citing the claims by Taibbi were essentially correct. Then, Substack CEO Chris Best weighed in on the issue, claiming the assertions by Elon Musk were false and the weird claim about Taibbi being an employee of Substack is completely without merit.
Mediaite – […] Forbes reported Saturday that Best and other figures at Substack are being individually punished on Twitter now, too.
“To top it all off, it appears the Substack crew is being punished on Twitter in other ways. If you try to search co-founder Chris Best on Twitter, his profile doesn’t show up,” writes Matt Novak.
Musk’s claim that Taibbi is a paid employee was an obvious implication that he was shilling for his bosses rather than reporting honestly. An ironic line of attack, considering it’s the same charge leveled at Taibbi and the other Twitter Files journalists by Democrats during a House hearing. (read more)
It’s all weird…. which, I might add, is not unusual for events that take place in/around the intelligence apparatus of the U.S. government.
Posted originally on the CTH on April 7, 2023 | Sundance |
When CTH outlined the connection between DHS and Twitter in Jack’s Magic Coffee shop, many people thought it was nuts.
In the year since, DHS and FBI have been evidenced to have direct access to Twitter content controls, up to and including access code in the Twitter algorithm itself. Not so crazy anymore.
When Elon Musk bought Twitter, CTH warned to refrain from forming opinion of the takeover because of the DHS network with it. Either Musk did due diligence in the purchase and was aware of DHS attachment, or Musk didn’t know of the scale of DHS involvement. Both possibilities painted a rather odd perspective of the Musk motive.
The latest development upon the new Twitter platform, includes Twitter no longer permitting Substack authors to promote their articles. “Twitter is now blocking likes, retweets, and comments on tweets that include a link to a Substack newsletter. In addition, Twitter users cannot pin a tweet that includes a Substack link to their profile.” Apparently, Twitter views the growth of Substack as a business threat.
Unfortunately, that leaves a Substack author like Matt Taibbi in a tough position; especially because he is one of the lead independent journalists highlighting the findings within a review of Twitter’s prior corporate correspondence and networking with DHS officials, also known as “the Twitter files.” As a result, Taibbi was forced to choose between Twitter and Substack. His decision, below:
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
), the guy that went to Prague on business.
Centinel2012 