Category RINO -vs- MAGA

Dec 5 2022

Sunday Talks, Incoming Republican House Intelligence Chairman – Orange Man Bad, Joe Biden Should Be Commended, Zelenskyy is Awesome, More Money for Ukraine, Working Great with Adam Schiff and Mark Warner


Posted originally on the CTH on December 4, 2022 | Sundance

Sooner or later someone, if not Donald Trump, is going to have to start a second party.

Appearing on CBS with Margaret Brennan, incoming House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner walks through the priorities of the new HPSCI committee, to include that President Trump is horrible, Ukraine President Zelenskyy is awesome, Joe Biden is doing an awesome job and Ukraine needs more U.S. money and weapons.

If you listen closely, you might even catch the part where Mike Turner says he is working swimmingly with current HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff and current Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner.  Yes, folks, you just cannot make this stuff up.  Ms. Brennan is absolutely smitten with Mr. Turner, he’s an acceptable republican.  WATCH:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=EihK08NUBwQ%3Ffeature%3Doembed

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: And we turn now to Ohio Congressman Mike Turner, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman Turner, good to have you here in person.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE TURNER: Thank you. Yes. It’s great to be here.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So just yesterday, the Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said that Russia was perhaps struggling to keep up with the amount of munitions that it’s using in this war in Ukraine, the cold weather is slowing combat. The Secretary of State, though, didn’t really give hope for diplomacy at this moment. Given what you know, when will this war end?

REP. TURNER: Well, the one thing that we know is that the- the gains that Ukraine is making are real, they’re real in the battlefield. They’re real in the support that they have around the world, they have with democracies on the floor of the United Nations, in condemning this aggression by Russia. But Ukraine really has to be the one that decides that if, when, and how negotiations are entered into, and at this point, you know, they’re battling for their country. They’re losing lives for democracy. President Zelenskyy says, I was just in Ukraine, just before the elections, he says openly, he understands that he’s the frontlines for democracy, and he’s fighting an authoritarian regime. And I think, you know, obviously, Russia has to reevaluate how they look at this conflict and how Putin looks at what he has started–

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you agree with the administration on this?

REP. TURNER: I agree absolutely. That this is, this is something where, that this is a war of aggression, that Russia needs to reevaluate and to withdraw from Ukraine.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’ve said, because you are poised to run the intelligence committees since you are at the top Republican when Republicans take control in January. Is this going to be an area where as you promised, you can take politics out of it and actually work across the aisle? What does that mean?

REP. TURNER: Right. So, you know, we’ve, when I went we went on a bipartisan trip to deliver to President Zelenskyy a message that there’s bipartisan support for Ukraine. I think there’s a number of issues that we’re going to be working on a bipartisan basis. What should the United States policy be? How do we make certain that the I serve on the Armed Service Committee and the Intelligence Committee? How do we make certain that they get the weapon systems that they need? How do we hold together this world alliance that-that we have where the world is condemning what Russia is doing? And of course, the expansion of NATO, we’re looking forward to Sweden and Finland, joining NATO, which is the opposite of what Putin believed he was going to achieve and attacking Ukraine. He’s now sees the expansion by two valuable partners with great military capabilities joining NATO.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to show our viewers some pretty extraordinary video that the Pentagon unveiled this week, a B-21 Raider. It’s the first US nuclear stealth bomber aircraft in more than 30 years. And it’s being packaged as this deterrent to Chin- to China. How concerned are you about the pace of Beijing’s nuclear development?

REP. TURNER: Extremely, and I want to co-co-commend the-the administration because they’ve been very forward leaning in releasing and declassifying information about what China is doing. They are expanding their nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons capabilities, their ICBMs that are targeting the United States. This plane is incredibly important. I served as chair of the air and land subcommittee as we, on a classified basis, began the process of working on this plane. And it gives us an additional balance, because it’s an additional delivery vehicle, additional way to combat what China’s doing–

MARGARET BRENNAN: to drop nuclear weapons?

REP. TURNER: to cause people not to drop nuclear weapons. I mean, that’s what’s so–

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s- it’s really the deterrent.

REP. TURNER: Right. It is to make certain that the balance of power is there so that people understand that the-that the cost is just too great. When China is expanding the nuclear weapons, they’re looking at United States if we blink if we don’t, if we don’t respond, and they assume that they can get first strike capabilities that not only holds us at bay, but really holds us at risk, because then you have the leader of a nuclear power that might make that miscalculation and of course, cost unfathomable lives.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You talked about being open about intelligence. I’m wondering, in your new role, will you be asking the Director of National Intelligence for a briefing and a damage assessment related to Mar-a-Lago and the documents the former president took to his private home?

REP. TURNER: That’s already in process. I mean, we’ve already talked–

MARGARET BRENNAN: It hasn’t happened. In the new Congress will you ask for it?

[CROSS TALK]

REP. TURNER:  Yes. I’ve just talked to the director of national intelligence about this particular issue. One issue that we have discussed with the director, which is very, very interesting is is that, you know, prior to the Mar-a-Lago and raid, no one in the intelligence community or in the national security community was engaged at all by the FBI to request an assessment as to what the risk of the documents that had been surrendered from Mar-a-Lago,or that might have been at Mar-a-Lago, or that were even perceived as being missing–

MARGARET BRENNAN: And you the Justice Department–

[CROSS TALK]

REP. TURNER: This was just the FBI and the and the archivist, which is basically a glorified librarian, coming together and deciding to raid Mar-a-Lago. Now-

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you’re not downplaying that taking classified material to your private home is a problem particularly for the commander in chief.

REP. TURNER: Absolutely not. There were just- there were other options that the FBI had versus the escalation that- that they did. That’s certainly going to be one of the questions we have. The Director of National Intelligence indicated they have conducted their risk assessment, and they are prepared to give both of our committees on the Senate and the House presentations as to what those are–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you have a sense of when or what the scale of the damage is?

REP. TURNER: At this point it’s just a scheduling issue. We just had a meeting with the director, but both Sen. Warner, myself and Adam Schiff. And as they look to how do we get everybody scheduled together, and those who’ve done the assessment, because again, it’s not just a director that will be coming–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. TURNER: They’ll have to come forward to give us, what did they see, what did they have, and how do they perceive the threat that may or may not have existed from some of these documents.

MARGARET BRENNAN: This may seem a basic question, but all elected leaders swear to uphold the Constitution. Does calling for its suspension, is that disqualifying for a presidential candidate?

REP. TURNER: It’s certainly not consistent–

MARGARET BRENNAN: You know why I’m asking this question?

REP. TURNER: I do. It’s certainly not consistent with the oath that we all take.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So yesterday, the front runner for the Republican nomination, the standard bearer for your party, posted on Truth Social, and we know he lost the 2020 election, but continues to claim he did not. “A massive fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution.” Should the standard bearer for the Republican Party, the front runner for the nomination for the presidency for your party in 2024, say this?

REP. TURNER: Well, I you know, I, first of all, I vehemently disagree with- with the statement that Trump has made. Trump has made, you know, 1,000 statements in which I disagree. There is a political process that has to go forward before anybody–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Constitutional conservatives are pretty clear about where they value the constitution–

REP. TURNER: Exactly. There has to be–

[CROSSTALK]

REP. TURNER: You do get picked questions, but I do get to pick my answer.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I know. I’m trying to get you to answer the question I’m asking.

REP. TURNER: There is a political process that has to go for before anybody’s a front runner or anybody is a- even the candidate for the party–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you condemn him saying something like this?

REP. TURNER:  Absolutely. And I believe answering your question that people certainly are going to take into consideration a statement like this as they evaluate a candidate.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I also have to ask you about the other statement and the people that he has been spending time with, a neo-Nazi, pro-Putin misogynist, named Nick Fuentes came to have dinner with the former president at his home alongside Kanye West who just this past week, praised Hitler.

REP. TURNER: This is atrocious. This is- everybody I think- everyone both condemns and is shocked and is as disgusted and nauseated by the fact that we’re even in this year, in 2022, having anyone that would make statements like that, nevertheless, have anybody who would engage in a conversation with someone who’s having- making statements like that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So having classified documents at the same place where they’re having the dinner–

REP. TURNER: Well that’s- that’s not–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –which we’re not necessarily securely held, and they’re government records that should be in government property, all those things together, it’s a problem.

REP. TURNER: Well, as you know, the FBI raided his home, and I suppose there are not classified documents there. But all of these are issues of judgment.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The president is saying he doesn’t know who he’s having dinner with at that home.

REP. TURNER: These are all issues of judgment, and a political process has to go forward. And I believe voters are smart, and they’ll take those things into consideration in a political process.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Congressman, thank you for coming on and answering questions. We’ll be back in just one minute so stay with us. {End Transcript}

Dec 5 2022

Sunday Talks, Former AG Says Biden Administration Positioned Resources to “Absorb” the Violence Created by Corrupt Political Indictment of President Trump – Trade Arrest of Hunter Biden for Arrest of President Trump and Play Blind Justice Game


Posted originally on the CTH on December 4, 2022 | Sundance

Appearing on CBS with Margaret Brennan, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama’s fellow traveler and wingman in the fundamental change process, stated his belief the progressive movement and Biden administration has adequately prepared the nation to “absorb” the political violence that may surface as the result of an arrest of former President Donald Trump.

The rather remarkable admission and statement comes at approximately 06:30 of the video interview below where Margaret Brennan reads her prepared script and questions Eric Holder about such a divisive decision by a comprehensively corrupt U.S. justice system.   The statement also comes on the heels of an 11th circuit appeals court ruling that removed the court ordered ‘Special Master’ in the Trump Mar-a-Lago documents case.

In the Mar-a-Lago case the 11th circuit court stated if the search warrant was legally predicated, and if the search warrant was legally executed, then all of the proceeds from the search warrant were legally valid as investigative outcomes – and no special master is needed.  However, President Trump is not allowed to see the search warrant, nor are his lawyers allowed to see the predicate affidavit that underpins the search warrant, and they are not permitted to see what documents were seized by the FBI.

In essence, if the secret and general warrant was legal, then all seizure is legal, but you are not allowed to see the secret and general warrant.  Former AG Eric Holder rejoices in this judicial ruling as he evaluates the ability of the nation to “absorb” an arrest of Donald Trump based on that justice system position. WATCH:

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

If you read between the lines, and know how Holder (Obama Inc) operate, you can see what Obama structured Deputy AG Lisa Monaco has to do. Monaco will coordinate the timing of the arrest and indictment of Hunter Biden to coincide with the arrest and indictment of President Trump. This will provide the narrative of blind justice the DOJ will attempt to leverage to stop national reaction.

There’s actually a lot in this interview.  Eric Holder doesn’t surface accidentally; he is preparing the Lawfare landscape.

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to former Attorney General Eric Holder. He now heads up the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. And he has a book, “Our Unfinished March,” which examines the current state of America’s democracy. Welcome back to the program.

ERIC HOLDER: Good to see you, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I have a number of things I want to get to with you. But I want to start on something I know is immediate this week. An organization that you run that we mentioned here that focuses on redistricting is involved in a Supreme Court case, Moore v. Harper. It’s going to be heard on the seventh of this week. And it boils down as I understand it to the question of what the Constitution means when it assigns state legislatures the task of regulating elections. That sounds really wonky, but you phrased it as the future of democracy being at stake. What are you worried is actually going to happen here?

HOLDER: Yeah, this case is all about something called the independent state legislature doctrine. It’s a fringe theory that North Carolina Republicans are trying to use to make sure that the North Carolina Republican legislature has the sole responsibility of doing redistricting in the state and excluding from that determination the state court system. It is something that if the Supreme Court goes along with it, would really upend our system of checks and balances. And it’s for that reason that I am extremely concerned. It is a fringe theory, this is something that if the Court I think does the right thing, you should have a nine to zero opinion by the court that rejects this notion of this independent state legislature doctrine that has been rejected by conservative scholars, by practicing Republican lawyers, by former Republican judges, and by this conference of state supreme court justices, as well. This is a very, very dangerous theory. It would put our system of checks and balances at risk.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So there were a number of Democratic senators who actually filed a brief urging the Supreme Court not even to hear the case. So there are some heavy hitters here saying don’t even talk about it. What does that tell you about the potential harm here? I mean, is there value in the Supreme Court hearing this and striking it down? Or does them hearing it at all indicate something more to you?

HOLDER: Yeah, it’s hard for me to see how this case was ever taken by the Court. I think the better thing would have been for the court to simply have rejected it. But now having taken the case, I would hope that the Court would drive a stake through this notion of this independent state legislature doctrine and get it off the- off the books and out of our consideration, once and for all. It truly is, I cannot emphasize this enough. It truly is a fringe theory that should result in a nine to zero rejection of the- of the theory.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So we mentioned you’re working on redistricting. Democrats are suing to overturn congressional maps in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Ohio and Texas. I read a quote from you in the Washington Post that said the work you’ve been doing on redistricting has paid off in the most recent midterms. Do you think that your legal battles will help Democrats make gains in 2024? What are you trying to say there?

HOLDER: Yeah, I think that what we have seen, there been studies that said that we have had the most fair redistricting process in the last 40 years as a result of the work that we’ve done. 75% of the redistricting is considered to be fair, which also means that 25% of it is unfair, and that is still problematic. I think, for instance, the House of Representatives is going to be in play for the entirety of this decade, very contrary to where it was in the past decade where after the successful Republican gerrymandering that occurred in 2011 and in 2012, it was really difficult for Democrats to take the House back. I think Democrats will be able to take the House back as early as 2024. But it doesn’t ensure what we have done doesn’t ensure the Democrats are going to hold on to the House for the entirety of the decade. It will be for the American people to decide. Fairness will reign in that determination.

MARGARET BRENNAN: When you were last on this program in May you shared at the time that you had changed your mind recently that you did believe that the Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland should hold former President Trump accountable for his actions. You previously thought it would be too divisive for the country. Now, where we are with this special counsel, what is your assessment? And how should Merrick Garland, who has to ultimately decide, weigh the question of a risk to political violence in this country from any decision he makes regarding the former president?

HOLDER: Well, I think the Attorney General has said it quite well, that he’ll make the determination without fear or favor. There is- Everybody has to be held accountable for the same system. The determination that he’s going to have to make will have to be based on the facts and the law. And we’ll just have to deal with the consequences. The reality is that if he makes a determination one way or the other, it is going to be divisive. And so the best thing simply is to make sure that everybody who is under consideration for possible criminal treatment, including the former president, is treated just like every other American. And that’s what that opinion out of the Circuit Court this week essentially said that you can’t craft things. As a district court judge you can’t craft things for a former president that don’t exist for regular American citizens. Treat everybody in the same way, make the determination based on the facts and the law. And the United States, I think, has the capacity to absorb a possible indictment and to deal with it fairly and to get on with the business of the country.

MARGARET BRENNAN: As someone who’s been an attorney general, I wonder as well, how you think about the case before the U.S. District Attorney in Delaware regarding President Biden’s son Hunter. CBS has reported the FBI has sufficient evidence to charge him with tax and gun related crimes. How would you handle this? A plea deal? Is the Attorney General boxed in to take a hard-line position because of working for the President?

HOLDER: No, I mean, you have- they left in place, the Republican, the Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney in Delaware to consider the case. You’ve got career lawyers working on it, career FBI agents. You want to listen to their recommendations and then again, make a determination based on the facts and the law. The defendant should not be treated any more harshly because of who he is, who he is related to, should not be given breaks because of who he is or who he is related to. He should be treated as former President Trump should be treated, just like any other American citizen. If there is culpability, that person should be held liable for his or her acts. And if there is not a basis for a case, a case should not be brought.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But it will ultimately come to the Attorney General’s desk.

HOLDER: That’s certainly the way I would have run the Justice Department. And my guess is also that that would be something that Merrick Garland will be doing as well. That determination will be made I suspect in Washington, D.C.

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right. General Holder, thank you very much for your time today.  [End Transcript]

On the election stuff….  Holder is moving to phase 2

REFERENCE and CONTEXT is critical to understanding.

PHASE 1 – After Eric Holder left the Obama administration as Attorney General, he was hired by the State of California to defend against the Trump administration in early January 2017 (LINK).

Why?

When Eric Holder left the Obama administration, his firm was contracted by California during a process of linking the motor vehicle registration files to the Secretary of State voter registration system.  Holder was advising on part of a technology system being constructed to bridge the DMV and SoS offices.  You might know this as a “Motor/Voter” process.  However, former AG Eric Holder had a very specific function in the construction of this technology bridge.

The process of adding voters to the registration rolls when they receive or update their driver’s license was seen as an opportunity to expand the voter rolls.  Making the voter rolls as big as possible is the key to the utilization of mass mail-out balloting.  I will skip the part where California started giving illegal aliens drivers licenses for a moment – you can obviously see how that would play with motor/voter rolls – instead I am choosing just to focus on the specifics of the Holder aspect.

The DMV needed to connect to the SoS office.  This was simply a part of a tech system that needed to be built.  CTH has previously spoken with the lead engineer, a member of a very small technology group, who worked in the California information technology (IT) unit that was tasked with building the system that connected the DMV to the SOS. [NOTE: I invite the state of California to sue me as they will likely claim what you are about to read is not true.]

In the process of connecting the two state networks together, there needed to be a “flag”, essentially a check box, where the applicant to the DMV would attest to being legally authorized to vote.  It is a positive affirmation, a check box, that says the Driver’s License holder affirms they are legally eligible to vote. That affirmation (the technical flag in the process), when affirmed, then transmits the information to the SoS office with the DL operator identity, and the California driver is automatically added to the SoS rolls and registered to vote.

During the time when Eric Holder was the legal counsel for the California Secretary of State, the technology team was constructing the internal data processing systems.

The lead engineer in the unit was instructed to code the data transfer in such a way that even if the “check box” was left unchecked, the registration data would transmit from the DMV to the SoS office.

Essentially, instead of only those who affirmed their legal eligibility by checking the box, everyone -including those who did not check the box- would get a DL and would automatically have their information transmitted to the SoS office.  Everyone who received a driver’s license or state issued id was automatically going to be registered to vote, regardless of their legally authorized status.   That request led the engineer to contact me.

I wrote about it, published the details, then the engineer freaked out as he/she realized there was only a very limited number of people who could expose the issue.  He/She was worried about his/her safety and family and asked me to remove the article.  This background is how I know the details of who, what, when and why the California mass mailing ballot process was being constructed.

In the 2018 midterm elections we all watched the outcome of that process surface in the weeks following election day.  As each day passed more and more California mail-in ballots were being counted and day-by-day Republicans who won on election day 2018 watched their lead evaporate.

What happened in the California 2018 midterm election surrounding state-wide ballot distribution, collection (harvesting) and eventual presentation to the counting and tabulation facilities, was the BETA test for the 2020 covid-inspired national ballot mailing process.

The outcome we are seeing from the 2022 midterm ballot collection program was not just similar to the 2020 general election ballot collection program, it is a direct outcome of the refined BETA test from 2018.  Now we have multiple states following the California mass distribution of ballots approach.  Washington state, California, Arizona, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, there’s a long list.

In many states mass mailing of ballots is now codified in election law.  Activist election lawyer Marc Elias now coming in behind the construction team of Eric Holder with the legal arguments to support the ballot collection programs.

The Importance of Election Rolls – As you can see from the California initiation point (Motor/Voter), in order to most effectively use the mass distribution of ballots as an electioneering process you first need a massive state secretary voter file in order to generate, then mail, the physical ballots.

Remember, votes require people – ballots require systems.

Any institutional system that can link people into the SoS system to generate a larger registration file for ballot distribution is a net positive.  The key point is not to generate voters, the key is to generate ballots – the more the better.  Mass printing of ballots is the origin of the electioneering process.

Any state or federal system that links a physical identity to the secretary of state voter rolls is good.  Any system, like the USPS postal change of address system, that would remove physical identities from the state voter rolls is not useful.  The goal is to maximize the number of systems that generate registration, that eventually generates ballots.

Beyond the Driver’s License issue, it’s everything.  Sign up for public assistance, get registered to vote.  Sign up for state benefits, get registered to vote. Sign up for a state id, get registered to vote. Sign up for state college, get registered to vote. Sign up for a grant, get registered to vote. Sign up for unemployment, get registered to vote. Sign up for any state system and get registered to vote.  Get married, change names, change addresses, etc, that’s how the voter rolls expand and that’s how the massive distribution of ballots is created.

The states then fight against anything, any effort, any process, that would purge voter rolls or fix incorrect voting rolls.  To use the new electioneering system, the system operators need ballots created, they no longer need votes.  They need ballots.

Downstream from this process that’s where you find the “ballot submission assistance” programs.  This is where the local community networks, regional activist groups and widespread community organizers come into play.  Instead of advertising or the previous electioneering systems around candidate promotion and Get Out The Vote (GOTV) efforts, the majority of donations to the DNC are now used in the ballot assistance programs.  This was phase 1.

PHASE 2 – What Eric Holder is describing as his “victories so far”, is the codification of phase 1 together with controlling the geographic process for ballot collection.

Forget votes.  Congressional districts (CD’s) need to be looked at as ballot gateways.

Zip codes are where the importance exists for phase 2.

On a congressional district level, the problem for ballot use is the lack of ballots in certain areas. Moving forward, ballots that DNC activists can gather and control need to come from geographic regions where they can impact congressional representation.  CD’s now need to be looked at as district mail regions to modify so that zip codes can determine election outcomes.

With ballot collection and assembly as the new process, congressional districting maps are no longer important from a representation standpoint, now the priority needs to be zip code representation.

Mass distribution ballots need to go to addresses in zip codes in order for them to be harvested to change the congressional district representation.

Now that elections are based on ballots and not votes, zip code control is where the action is.

Keep watching.

Dec 2 2022

If You Wonder What’s Wrong With Georgia – The Republican Lt Governor Appears on CNN to Tell Georgia Republicans Not to Vote for Hershel Walker


Posted originally on the CTH on December 1, 2022 | Sundance

People around the country are looking at the Georgia Senate runoff between Democrat Raphael Warnock and Republican Hershel Walker.  Lots of people wondering what is going on.  Well, last night the Republican Party of Georgia gave an excellent example of what it means to be Republican in Georgia.

Republican Lieutenant Governor Geoff Duncan appeared on CNN to share his opinion of Republican candidate Hershel Walker.  As Republican Duncan outlined during the interview, he stood in line for an hour, took a ballot at the polling location, and then decided he could just not vote for a Republican in Georgia, so he turned around and walked back out without voting.

Republican Geoff Duncan had no issue pushing this on CNN much to the smiles of the CNN producers, Democrats and the Warnock campaign.  This is what it means to be a Republican in Georgia.  WATCH (01:08 prompted 30 seconds)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=7l3kZ2izy9c%3Fstart%3D68%26feature%3Doembed

.

The 2022 goal of the Republican Party of Georgia is in alignment with the 2022 Republican National Committee.   The goal of Mr. Duncan and others is to remove the populist movement within the RNC by destroying the Make America Great Again grassroots movement.

Was Duncan censured? No.  Was Duncan criticized by fellow Republicans? Again, no.   Was Duncan ostracized for promoting an election position against the interests of the Republican Party? Yet again, no.  Did RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel rebuke the effort to undermine Walker as carried out by Republican Geoff Duncan?  Rhetorical at this point, I know.

In the bigger or big pictures, Republican Lt Governor Geoff Duncan is doing what professional Republicans do.  He also knows there’s nothing to fear from it because he is operating on behalf of the majority Club interests who support his agenda.  However, somehow this will be President Trump’s fault.

Dec 2 2022

President Trump Special Master Appointment Overturned by Appeals Court – If Secret Search Warrant is Valid, All Seizure Valid – But You are Not Allowed to See Search Warrant, Because National Security


Posted originally on CTH on December 1, 2022 | Sundance 

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals having previously ruled the special master cannot review classified documents, also ruled today against the special master having any involvement in the filtering of seized documents from Mar-a-Lago.  [Ruling Here]

Previously, the lower court appointed a special master to review the seized documents and ensure no privileged material was exploited by the DOJ.  However, the appellate court determined the DOJ can independently define a national security interest and classify documents with no legal basis for challenge, therefore the special master cannot filter classified documents.

Today the appeals court essentially said if the search warrant was legally predicated and legally valid, and if the search warrant was used legally, then all the seized documents are valid for the investigative purposes of the DOJ – regardless of their content.  The only way to fight the authority of the DOJ seizure is to challenge the legality of the search warrant.  However, here’s where things get weird.

President Trump’s lawyers have been: (1) blocked from receiving a non-redacted search warrant; (2) denied access to the underlying probable cause affidavit used to predicate the search warrant, and (3) denied the full contents of the documents that were seized as part of the warrant (they are not allowed to see).  Yet somewhere in this convoluted mess, we are supposed to believe a 4th amendment violation doesn’t exist.

Florida – […]  The ruling by the three-judge panel, including two Trump appointees, goes into effect in seven days, absent intervention by the full circuit court or the Supreme Court.

“The law is clear,” the judges found. “We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so.”

The order effectively eliminates what federal authorities had described as a major obstacle in their ongoing criminal investigation into whether Trump illegally retained highly classified records after leaving the presidency and obstructed efforts by the government to recover them. He denies wrongdoing.

The appellate judges had signaled in a hearing last week that they were likely to order an end to the special master’s review. They repeatedly expressed concern that the appointment of third-party judge Raymond Dearie by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida lacked any clear precedent. (read more)

As it stands right now, President Trump has not been permitted to see the documents that support the search warrant, nor the scope of the search warrant as issued (the DOJ is claiming national security interests).  The appeals court today is saying as long as the hidden search warrant is valid, all seized documents are valid.

How is President Trump supposed to challenge the legality of the seizure if the DOJ isn’t required to produce the legal basis for the warrant?

The legal challenge against the underlying warrant is the key issue.

In a recent court filing [Document Here], President Trump through his legal counsel has requested Judge Cannon to unredact and unseal the search warrant affidavit used as the predicate for the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.  Apparently, the DOJ have yet to provide President Trump with the constitutionally required predicate documents to support their search.

While asking the court to provide the affidavit to the defense team, the lawyers for President Trump are noting the fourth amendment protects everyone against warrantless searches and seizures, and that same protection also guarantees the target the right to receive and review the claimed justification for the warrant.

The unredacted affidavit is obligated to be supplied so that it can be determined if the search warrant was legally valid and predicated.  General search warrants are not legally permitted.  The warrant must specify what is being searched and why.  The DOJ is fighting against this affidavit release.  The Trump lawyers are asking the judge to make a decision.

Dec 1 2022

Rupert Murdoch Pays Ron DeSantis Undisclosed Sum with Book Deal Ahead of 2024 Announcement…


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 30, 2022 | Sundance

Previously billionaire Rupert Murdoch paid Megyn Kelly, through advances on her book deal, $10 million for her political efforts in 2015 and 2016.  Rupert Murdoch owns Harper Collins book publishing.

Book publishing, as done by politicians in both parties, is the way money is laundered to candidates and various campaign finance rules are subverted.  Nikki Haley, Kristi Noem, Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo and Tim Scott have all released books in the past two months in advance of their 2024 presidential bids.

As noted recently by The Guardian, “Lachlan Murdoch, the heir apparent and eldest son, who co-chairs News Corp and runs the parent company of Fox News, has reportedly told DeSantis that the group would back him if he ran in the next election. “Lachlan has been keen on Ron for some time. He’s viewed within the organization as a sanitized version of Donald.”

Candidates are personally financed by the book publication laundry system through advances, typically several million, and then again indirectly by supporting organizations through mass purchasing.  It is not uncommon to find hundreds-of-thousands of books in various warehouses purchased by groups as indirect contributions to boost the candidate of their choice.   The purchases determine the “best seller” rankings.

It is unknown how much billionaire Rupert Murdoch has paid Ron DeSantis for the 2024 campaign but considering the stakes for this election cycle it’s likely in the $20 million range.

(Via Fox News) – Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida will chronicle his life in public service in a new book that will publish in late February in what will be seen by political pundits as another step by the conservative champion toward a possible 2024 presidential run.

The autobiography by DeSantis, who was overwhelmingly re-elected three weeks ago to a second four-year term steering the increasingly red Sunshine State, is titled “The Courage to Be Free: Florida’s Blueprint for America’s Revival.”

Word of the book, scheduled to be published Feb. 28 by Broadside, the conservative arm of HarperCollins Publishing, was shared first with Fox News Wednesday. (more)

As we have chronicled since July, the decision for Ron DeSantis to enter the 2024 contest was made before the spring of 2022, everything thereafter has been a grand game of position and pretense.  The seeds for the effort were laid even earlier in February when the DeSantis team reached out to “conservative influencers” to form the alignment for the August ’22 shift and branding campaign.

According to the most visible and predictable roadmap, DeSantis will likely be held back from an official announcement until later in 2023.

The problem for DeSantis handlers is that when the announcement is made all pretenses will be dropped and many people will review the landscape in hindsight and see the roadmap.

A combination of pretending, deflection and obfuscation is the management team’s #1 priority right now to avoid the Florida voter anger about being duped on DeSantis intention.  However, they do have to follow the timeline of the script if they want to try and maintain the campaign momentum.

By design, Governor Ron DeSantis will almost certainly be the last candidate to enter the 2024 race, sometime late summer.  The entry will depend on their success in keeping him in the spotlight and headlines without ‘officially’ looking like they are trying to keep him in the spotlight and headlines.  Fox News will play a key role in keeping DeSantis spotlighted.

Everything is being carefully managed; however, when you know the script, and know where the tripwires are located, it’s very easy to see it playing out.

Dec 1 2022

A Common Misconception in Elections, The RNC and DNC Do Not Represent “Voters”, They Represent the Interests of Their Private Corporations


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 30, 2022 | Sundance

When it comes to the private corporations in American politics known as the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Democrat National Committee (DNC), there is a common misconception that the corporations represent the voters, they do not.

The RNC and DNC corporations represent their interests, which are not necessarily in alignment with the interests of the unpaid voluntary participants, the voters.  As a consequence, when a lawyer is hired by the RNC they are not representing the candidate or voter, they are representing the interests of the corporation. A big difference.

[SOURCE]

The RNC is the client, the candidate is a secondary consideration, the voter is ancillary to the primary interest.  In the example above, the RNC lawyer has been paid $892,550 through the end of September 2022, to represent the interests of the corporation.

It is entirely possible for the RNC contracted lawyer to succeed in fulfillment of the client goal, yet the candidate and voters lose.  Remember, the corporation is paying to have their interests represented.  If the interests of the corporation are not in alignment with the interests of the candidate/voter, the client interest supersedes.

Legal success is found in representing the interest of the RNC, not the candidate.  Once, that success is achieved, the legal team move to the next objective as instructed by the corporation.

There are two private corporations representing Republicans and Democrats; they are most commonly referred to as political parties. There is no basis for the existence of private political parties in the United States constitution.  Both parties’ function from a position as private interests outside the framework of government.

What we commonly refer to as ‘politicians’ are selected representatives to the government from each of the corporations.  What we commonly refer to as ‘primary elections’ are suggestions to each of the corporations from citizens expressing their preference for the representative.   The corporation can individually choose to accept or decline the suggestion from the voters, and the only thing that binds the corporation to follow the suggestion are the corporate rules.

The corporation of the RNC and DNC exist to serve their own interests.

Politics is the RNC and DNC business; however, the income stream -the financial aspects to the business- is what holds influence over the corporate priority.  Ideology is part of the equation, but control of the business and generating revenue is the main function of the corporation. Unfortunately, in the reality of the business model, election outcomes are downstream from those two priorities.

It is with this corporate baseline in mind that all ‘election’ political analysis should take place.

The economics of the thing is what Republican officers in the RNC emphasize.

Without money, the corporate mission doesn’t operate.  Without money the RNC members -essentially board members- do not function, hold meetings, assemble, or participate in the organization.  Therefore, from the standpoint of the corporation, the business of politics (corporate donor inputs) drives the activity, not election results (outputs).

This facet to U.S. politics is rarely discussed because the corporations and the people who run them do not want this process emphasized.  However, if voters do not comprehend this dynamic, they can fall victim to the fallacy of false representative choice.

The corporation is made up of members.  The members make the rules.  The members have preferences and ideological outlooks about the objective of the corporation as part of their position within it.  Inside this dynamic is where you see the changing of rules to benefit the preferences of the members; ultimately influencing outcomes.

Unlike most political sites, CTH watches this inside club dynamic closely, because ultimately it explains a lot of ‘consequences’ that we see later discussed.  It is easier to just sit back and discuss the consequences than it is to watch the officials inside the club make rule changes proactively.  However, it is by watching the rule changes that we can see the roadmaps of influence within game as played by both RNC and DNC corporations.

Any political commentary that does not take this private club dynamic into consideration, and/or explain the consequences from decisions within the club, is not serving the interests of the American electorate.

Some RNC members support MAGA, some do not.  Some RNC members support the Wall Street alignment, some do not.  Some members support the populist movement, others do not.  Some RNC members support a big tent approach to a working-class coalition, other RNC members regard the working-class as beneath their representative interests. The key point is that it’s a private club making these decisions.

The majority decision from within the club membership vote will determine each outcome(s).  Donald Trump may have earned 100 million voters and supporters, but only 168 unelected members and party officials will determine what that means to their corporate agenda.

There is no guarantee the America First agenda of Donald Trump is in alignment with the 2022, 2023 priorities of the club.

Factually, all recent suggestions from the club control officers, the billionaire Wall Street donors like Ken Griffin, all suggest the removal of Trump and the MAGA agenda from association with the RNC Club should be the priority of the assembly.  The dynamic of financial influence, income to the corporation, changes the entire mechanism of the outcome.

An ideological alignment of individual people, institutions and organizations working in concert toward a common goal is not a conspiracy.

...”He wants to improve the diversity of the GOP and blunt the vein of populism that has complicated the party’s relationship with the corporate world — two things he’s consulted with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy about.”… (link)

I am going to continue outlining the 2023 and 2024 political club landscape. Much of the continued exposing will be on a granular, cited and difficult to accept level. Yet it becomes necessary because we need to see the strings on these GOPe marionettes if we are going to avoid the “illusion of choice” that each component element, RNC, GOP, RGA, RCCC, is constructing for us.

Normally, I would avoid such a “tripwire” outline before the 2023 RNC Winter Meeting this upcoming Jan.  However, I have also vowed to deconstruct the pretending with brutal -and yes, difficult to accept- honesty; so, firstly the timing is not of my choosing.  Secondly, CTH will once again be assembling the humint resources to extract the political conversations that GOPe leadership inside those meetings do not wish to see exposed.

(SOURCE PIC)

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK, Nov 16 (Reuters) – Blackstone Inc (BX.N) Chief Executive Stephen Schwarzman [pictured left], who has been one of Wall Street’s biggest donors to Donald Trump’s election campaigns, said on Wednesday he will not back the former president in 2024.

Trump announced he would run in the 2024 U.S. presidential election on Tuesday, launching an early bid to become the Republican nominee in an effort to pre-empt potential rivals.

Schwarzman said it was time for new party leadership and that he would back a different Republican in the presidential contest. “It is time for the Republican Party to turn to a new generation of leaders and I intend to support one of them in the presidential primaries,” he said in a statement, which was first reported by Axios.

Schwarzman, 75, is a prominent Republican donor. He spent $35.5 million to support Republicans ahead of last week’s midterm election. Republicans are still one seat short of capturing control of the U.S. House of Representatives and have failed to take over the U.S. Senate. (more)

NEW YORK – Rupert Murdoch has reportedly warned Donald Trump his media empire will not back any attempt to return to the White House, as former supporters turn to the youthful Florida governor Ron DeSantis.

After the Republican party’s disappointing performance in the US midterm elections, in particular the poor showing by candidates backed by Trump, Murdoch’s rightwing media empire appears to be seeking a clean break from the former president’s damaged reputation and perceived waning political power.

[…] “We have been clear with Donald. There have been conversations between them during which Rupert made it clear to Donald that we cannot back another run for the White House.”

[…] Lachlan Murdoch, the heir apparent and eldest son, who co-chairs News Corp and runs the parent company of Fox News, has reportedly told DeSantis that the group would back him if he ran in the next election. “Lachlan has been keen on Ron for some time,” said the i’s source. “He’s viewed within the organization as a sanitized version of Donald.” (read more)

Once you see the strings on the corporate marionettes, it’s impossible to return to that moment in the political performance when you did not see them.

Nov 30 2022

Mitch McConnell Uses Mar-a-Lago Ambush to Hit President Trump


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 29, 2022 | Sundance

As NBC has now outlined in detail, a trio of dubious characters leveraged President Trump’s previous support for troubled Kanye West as an opportunity for an intentional smear campaign construct by Milo Yiannopoulos, Nick Fuentes and Kanye West himself. [Details Here]  Mr. West, now known as Ye, intended to make trouble by bringing uninvited guests along to carry out the operation.

The media and political opposition gleefully latched on to the successful targeting operation, in an effort to smear Donald Trump.  In typical Alinsky fashion, the goal is to controversialize the operational target.  Senator Mitch McConnell followed up today with his own pile on supported by his Senate leadership.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=g2DQLHqlq6g%3Ffeature%3Doembed

Given Mitch’s well known use of fabricated political racism to attack Republicans who do not bend a knee to him, his statements are pure skullduggery.

CTH has been warning about the scheming conniving Mitch McConnell for well over a decade.

While no one except Donald Trump is at fault for trusting Kanye West, you can clearly see how the entire apparatus of DC politics is working in concert to retain power and remove the threat that President Trump represents.

Nov 30 2022

Hired by the RNC, Harmeet Dhillon Teams Up with the Mitch McConnell Contracted Enforcer Who Destroyed the Tea Party


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 29, 2022 | Sundance

Obviously, the RNC Club realizes they have a problem.  They are majority funded by major billionaire donors who are opposed to the MAGA populist movement within the group.  People are awake to the dynamic.

RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel is also facing scrutiny for her inept party efforts in previous elections. Specifically scrutinized for not having any action plan to combat ballot assembly and collection and being hopelessly outmatched by the organized DNC.

In a transparent effort at damage control, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has enlisted Harmeet Dhillon and Henry Barbour to lead an internal club effort under the auspices of performing a midterm autopsy. [Politico Article]  However, the larger picture of intent gains clarity when looking at the participants.

In the first of a series of Tweets earlier today, Harmeet Dhillon noted she had moved on from failed legal efforts in Arizona, to focus on Georgia:

Let’s be very clear about something here.  Henry Barbour is not just some political consultant to partner with.  Henry Barbour is the nephew of the notoriously corrupt former Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, aka ‘Boss Hog‘.  Henry is also the attack dog hired by Mitch McConnell to use PACs to attack and destroy the Tea Party movement.

Henry Barbour was the architect of Mississippi attacks against Chris McDaniel on behalf of Mitch’s friend in the senate, Thad Cochran. {Citation}  Henry Barbour worked with Democrats in Mississippi and Georgia to construct racist attack ads against conservative Republican candidates {Citation}.

The entire Barbour clan, including Henry and Uncle Haley, have sketchy connections to various DC lobbying groups representing very dubious clients, including Amgen to help China {citation}, Qualcom to help China via Huwai {Citation} and BGR Government Affairs, a front group to help the Chinese Communist Party {Citation}.  As a bagman for corrupt political endeavors, Henry Barbour goes where the money is and attacks on behalf of his paid interests.

However, beyond the DC lobbying, Henry Barbour is a contract operative of Mitch McConnell, and as previously mentioned was instrumental in destroying the Tea Party movement in 2012 through 2014 as instructed and financed by Senate Leader McConnell.

(Clarion Ledger) – […] The Mississippi Conservatives PAC, under Barbour’s direction, funded (through illegal means) various operatives and organizations of dubious background to implement a deliberate and premeditated strategy of vicious race-baiting and fear mongering over issues of race during the runoff election between incumbent Thad Cochran and challenger Chris McDaniel. Henry Barbour deliberately chose to use well-known Democrat operatives and organizations in a character assassination scheme — the kind that the professional Left has perfected, and which Republicans abhor — in order to destroy the reputation of a loyal, fellow Republican, a current Mississippi state legislator in good standing and a Republican Party member since the age of 13, whose only offense was to announce and run for a Senate seat held by an incumbent Republican. (more)

Considering the 2022 MAGA populist movement is essentially in the same target field as the 2014 Tea Party; the billionaire donors to the RNC have admitted this goal; the open and willful alignment between Harmeet Dhillon and a character like Henry Barbour, with a known intent to maintain corporate establishment political priorities, sets off massive alarms.

That’s the initial takeaway from that first announcement by Dhillon earlier today.  More information from the Dhillon thread is below:

How could Harmeet Dhillon possibly claim representation for the grassroots (MAGA) activists, while teaming up with Henry Barbour who is the paid political operative intent on destroying those same grassroots (MAGA) activists?

It’s not an old ideology for Henry Barbour that he just dropped after the paid effort to destroy the Tea Party.  Henry Barbour carries that same anti-MAGA theme throughout all the years to today {citation}.

The alignment makes no sense at all.

No one with any goal of representing the “base voter” of the Republican Party would ever consider working with any Barbour, let alone Henry Barbour.

Questions were asked.

Then more sunlight appeared.

Harmeet Dhillon’s law firm partner is Ron Coleman who came immediately to her defense when questions started to be asked.

After a series of very obtuse statements, one of which implied that Henry Barbour was a client of the law firm, which was then denied by Coleman, then reversed to a position to present a Tweet that provides even more sunlight. {citation}

“Harmeet Dhillon and Henry Barbour are both members of the Republican National Committee. And yes, our firm represents the RNC.”

Harmeet Dhillon and Ron Coleman represent the RNC.  Now things start to take on a new dimension.

If you believe the interests of the RNC are to align and support the MAGA candidates, then this relationship would seem innocuous.  Harmeet Dhillon is under client contract with the RNC.  Dhillon works for the RNC, not the candidate.

However, if you accept that the interests of the RNC as a private club are *not* necessarily in alignment with supporting the MAGA candidates, then suddenly the weak legal defenses afforded to the grassroots candidates starts to take on a differing perspective.

With the diminished trust level of voters toward the RNC; combined with a pattern and history of weak legal defenses; then failing by intent starts to become part of the larger possibility.

Knowing that Mrs. Harmeet Dhillon is a lawyer representing the interests of Ronna McDaniel and the private RNC corporation, the lack of legal effort, vigor, and a pattern of consistent legal losses toward the MAGA Republican candidates starts to take on some clarity.

The RNC is in somewhat of the driver’s seat in this contested election dynamic.  Unless the candidate can afford on their own to fund the legal challenges to the situations they encounter, they are essentially dependent on the RNC to assist them legally.  If the RNC intentionally torpedoes the legal effort, the candidate is without a support mechanism.

Did that happen in Arizona?  Was MAGA candidate Kari Lake a victim of what Machiavelli called “lukewarm defenders?”  Has there been a seemingly transparent pattern of poor legal pushback and challenges from the RNC in recent elections?  You decide.

Regardless, Arizona has been abandoned by the RNC and, according to the priorities of Harmeet Dhillon, they have moved on to repeat the operational success in Georgia.  Perhaps in Georgia the RNC effort to support MAGA candidate Hershel Walker will be more effective than the RNC legal effort to support Kari Lake in Arizona.

Again, you decide what Georgia outcome is likely in the party interest.

For me, I find the sentiment by Steve Deace to be most in line with historic reference. “The GOP would rather lose to Democrats than lose control of the party to its base”, after all “that’s what electable means – someone they approve of.”

Additionally, standing back and looking at the bigger picture, what does become obvious from this Dhillon-RNC attorney-client relationship is the reason why Harmeet Dhillon would be teaming up with Henry Barbour.  They have both been selected by Ronna McDaniel to head up the creation of the next phase planning for the billionaire funded RNC.

Remember, post Citizens United, the RNC doesn’t need small donor contributions to run operations.  The RNC relies on massive corporate donations to fund their priorities.  By agreement, the RNC also gets a portion of the campaign funds raised by each of the respective Republican candidates.  If you are withholding direct contributions to the RNC, it means nothing to them.  Small dollar donations are only valuable to the club insofar as they politically hide the scale of the multinational donations when reports show average contributions.

Which brings me to the final point…

Knowing that attorney Harmeet Dhillon was hired by the RNC, specifically hired by Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, when Mrs. Dhillon says she will “take views to heart” when she votes next month at the RNC winter meeting for the next chairperson, do you really think she will vote against her client?

Nov 30 2022

Prepare…


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 29, 2022 | Sundance

My apologies for the light posting today.

The well-used machete blade may be dull this evening, but the clearing we achieved is sweet.

Trust me, no one is hitting refresh on the CTH website more than the DC apparatus of the professionally Republican tonight.

The receipts are coming next, and they will explain everything.

The truth has no agenda. 

Nov 27 2022

Neil Oliver asks “I Wonder What Would Happen If”…


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 26, 2022 | Sundance

Jumpin’ ju-ju bones, Neil Oliver is going to that place publicly and loudly, that many of us have contemplated and discussed quietly with hushed tones and knowing nods.

What Oliver outlines in this monologue does not need much discussion amid the audience awaiting its arrival.  After all, he is basically discussing the logical consequence to the current state of political affairs not only in the U.K but also in the United States.  However, that said, it is rather remarkable in the era of government sponsored fear of rebellion, complete with labels of domestic extremism attached, to see Oliver’s voice bravely citing the outcome.

With 87,000 new IRS agents authorized by the regime quietly assembling for their assault, as Oliver notes, “there is nothing to fear if we have each other” and are willing to stand the gap as an ally for our fellow man.  What Oliver is saying is profound, true and could – in the most significant of ways, lead to a new beginning.  Yes, it is talk of a united rebellion, and that’s exactly what we need.  WATCH: 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=IMlH7IbVpxc%3Ffeature%3Doembed

[Transcript] – People write to me every day to tell me they fear the future. People from all over the world, all ages, all walks of life. I say this: we should not be afraid. If anyone should be afraid it is our government, the whole of parliament, the State and the Establishment. They should be afraid because they are in the wrong – doing wrong things and behaving unforgivably.

You can tell they are afraid by the way they keep doing more and more, faster and faster, to make the people poor, cold and hungry – also demoralised, anxious and fearful about the present, never mind the future. The fear felt by people around the world is the deliberate consequence of the actions of so-called leaders all across the West and beyond.

I say again, we should not be afraid. Those plotting and working against us, against our interests both as individuals and as sovereign states, have no power and no money other than that which we, the people grant them. They are supposed to use that power and money to protect us, to keep us free and to provide opportunities for those hard working, free people to make happy and successful lives for themselves. Instead, they are working night and day to have us welcome a state of being that is nothing less than digital enslavement.

Many of the people who contact me ask:

What should we do? How can we fight back?

I think about the answers to those questions all the time. Right now, I wonder what would happen if those who are cold in their homes – millions of people – just turned on their heating and turned off their direct debits and standing orders. What would happen if, when the bills came, we all just agreed to toss them on the fire? All of us together? What would happen, if millions of us, peacefully acting as one just stood together in quiet defiance? I could be wrong, but I don’t think there’s enough cells in the prisons, enough judges to hear the cases. If the system wasn’t already broken – by them – such actions would break it.

What would happen if we all withdrew our money from the banks on the same day? What would happen if we all asked, as we are entitled to, for the cash? The banks don’t have the money to meet all those demands and so presumably they would close their doors. Then what? Would their inability to pay out all that cash be evidence of the fraud that is fiat money? I wonder.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: the social contract – that notion by which we surrender power to the state in return for services and safety – is broken beyond repair. They broke it, not us. Successive governments – not just the present bunch of cardboard cut-outs … have, over decades, knowingly and deliberately betrayed every aspect of that contract. It is null and void and we, the blameless party, are no longer bound by its conditions.

We the people – the sovereign people of this country – don’t just hold the power: we ARE the power. We loan some of it – a short-term loan – to governments. And those governments are supposed to serve us, do our bidding. NEVER the other way round. We tell them what to do.

Hundreds of years’ worth of governments has quietly and secretively presided over a financial system that is no more than state-sanctioned fraud. Power to create money out of thin air was put in the hands of an entirely private, unelected, unaccountable business and this power has been abused to make a tiny group unimaginably rich by enslaving all of US with debt. That system is now on the point of collapse. The West is bankrupt, and governments and bankers are scrambling to solve a problem: how to subtract every last shekel from the people while still having a handful of wealthy bankers, and their enablers, left over.

Britain has no functioning border against the rest of the world. Hundreds are arriving in this country every day and night, many ferried across the Channel by agencies paid for by British taxpayers. British people have to wait longer for health and social care and accommodation – to make way for economic migrants with their eyes on a soft touch, who have paid illegal gangs thousands of pounds a head to get here. They send their luggage on ahead and collect it at their hotels. We are at the back of the queue while anyone else, from anywhere else, is looked after hand and foot. And always the loudest calls are not for stopping it, but for more money and faster processing. I wonder if the illegal immigration isn’t just convenient for the State … softening up the citizens for a supposed solution … like digital ID perhaps? And then borders open once and for all. I wonder.

The British people are no longer kept safe by the police force they pay for. Burglaries of properties and assaults on the person are barely investigated, while officers prioritise thought crimes on social media. Uncounted thousands of little girls are abandoned to organised gangs of rapists up and down the country, because the State turned a blind eye to the relentless raping of children rather than ruffle community feathers.

A tenth of the population is on the waiting list for treatment by the NHS. The National Health Service is not keeping the nation healthy. All this about free at the point of delivery is about as much use as a magic spell. You can call a lunch a free lunch – but you’ll still be left hungry if you can’t get into the restaurant. So-called free steaks won’t fill you up if you have to wait so long in the queue you starve to death in the meantime. Free becomes another word for something you’ve heard about but can’t have.

I say again, though – we have nothing to fear. Not if we decide to be unafraid. In many ways, the worst has already happened: we have been shown where we stand, in the eyes of the State – which is beneath their contempt.

I don’t have the answers to all of the questions, but I know this much – even just asking them, airing the thoughts, should make the government, the State, the Establishment – sit up and pay attention.

More and more strikes are happening – rail workers, teachers and university lecturers, nurses next. What about the self-employed who were abandoned for the last two years? They can’t strike. What would happen if they withheld their taxes, all at the same time? I wonder.

But history tells us we should never underestimate the power of the many.

Just over a hundred years ago, during World War I, thousands of workers were pulled into the City of Glasgow to work in the munitions factories. At that time there wasn’t a single council house or flat in the whole of Britain. Private landlords owned 100 percent of homes for rent. They could and did raise rents as often as they wanted. Tenants either paid up or were evicted.

In February 1915, landlords across the city told tenants their rents were going up by as much as 25 percent. This was against a backdrop of the steeply rising cost of living generally, food scarcity and the rest. There was a war to win – remember – and sacrifices were expected from the people if the enemy was to be defeated.

In the case of many homes, the man of the house was away fighting in the war, leaving just women and children.

Into this crisis for poor people stepped Mary Barbour, an ordinary Glasgow woman with two children. She and others realized their only hope lay in sticking together. A mass non-payment campaign got under way. Arrears built up and soon Sheriff’s Officers were turning up to demand back rent or to evict non-payers.

But whenever anyone got wind of an eviction, hundreds of women would descend on the address and block the entrance to the home. A Glasgow MP, Willie Reid, described a typical incident:

“A soldier’s wife in Parkhead, had an eviction notice served on her, with a warning that if she failed to vacate her house by 12 noon the Sheriff’s Officer would call to enforce it. The strike committee got busy. They instructed every mother in the district with a young child to be there for 11 am on D-Day, complete with prams.

“Long before noon the close and street were packed with prams, and every pram had at least one youngster in it. No raiding party could have got near the house. Moreover, the men of Parkhead Forge and other works in the district decided to down tools at 11.30 am and lend a hand if necessary…”

People began to talk about Mary Barbour’s Army. On 17 November, 18 tenants appeared in court for eviction. Tens of thousands of Glasgow people lined the streets outside. In the end, on 25 November 1915, rents were frozen at pre-war levels. The Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest Act 1915 was passed and some elements of it remained in force as late as 1989.

I wonder what would happen if all of us … opposed to what is going on now … came together like those Glasgow women of 1915 – AND JUST SAID NO.

I wonder.

When thinking about that time, I am reminded of real leaders. I’ve been talking again this week about Ernest Shackleton who, when all seemed lost – his ship sunk beneath the Antarctic ice and with nothing but flimsy tents, three little boats, and 28 men trapped on the pack ice and depending on him for life itself he said,

“Well … now we’ll go home.”

Our so-called leaders tell us our lives must be filled with hardship while they warm themselves in centrally heated homes paid for with our taxes … and look forward to Christmas parties and food and drink and decorations paid for by all of us. That is not leadership. That is an abusive relationship.

Shackleton put himself through every hardship he expected his men to endure. He did it first and for longest. What he asked of them, he did too. He said they should leave behind on the ice anything that would not help keep them alive.

Some saying he walked to a hole in that ice and dropped in his gold watch and cigarette case, to the bottom of the ocean. He led from the front, every step of the way and over nearly a thousand miles of the cruelest sea on earth. And in the end, he got every man home.

They called him The Boss.

He cared not a jot for the comforts of home. Back home once more he wrote:

“We had pierced the veneer of outside things. We had suffered, starved and triumphed, groveled down and grasped at glory, grown bigger in the bigness of the whole.”

He was a leader who saw that it was shared endeavor and shared striving that made all else possible.

Our leaders? … our leaders would pick our pockets for any gold watches and valuables before climbing aboard their private jets and flying home, leaving us behind on the melting ice.

I say we owe them nothing – not our loyalty and not our obedience. If we continue to comply, we build our own prison around ourselves, for their benefit.

They have promised us the earth while stealing it from us – raping and pillaging its resources only for their own enrichment. I say again, there is nothing to fear if we have each other.

Here’s the thing: if we set a course for ourselves and back each other every step of the way, we will cross this ocean of darkness together, all the way to where we want to be. [Transcript End]