Replay – President Trump MAGA Speech, Farmers for Trump – Council Bluffs, Iowa (Full Video)


Posted originally on the CTH on July 7, 2023 | Sundance

Earlier today President Trump kicked off a new coalition of Farmers for Trump in Council Bluffs, Iowa

While much of the first segment of the speech covers topics of significant importance to farming and agriculture, President Trump also expanded his remarks to cover current political events. WATCH:

FULL SPEECH: President Donald J. Trump Holds MAGA Rally in Council Bluffs, IA – 7/7/23

The Rule of Law – Trump is Finished?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted Jun 13, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty; This seems that the onslaught against Trump is a desperate attempt fearing that he would stop the war and reverse climate change. I have been reading you for years. You have great sources but also a great insight into what is happening in this corrupt world. I used to question your warnings that the United States would end up in a civil war. I’m at the point I cannot see how it is not possible.

Are they really this stupid to go after Trump if he could still become president even if convicted?

FS

ANSWER: This is an absolutely desperate attempt to make sure Trump does not ever get back to the White House. Even if he does, the talk in DC is that they will use this conviction for impeachment. But that would not really pass the test since it would be before taking office unless they stretch it out until January after he is sworn in. Nevertheless, there is far too much on the line for the Neocons. They will assassinate him as a last resort. These people assume the public is stupid and it will all blow over in 30 days anyhow when football season begins. They really do believe like the Romans, give us sports and they can do as they like.

If we look at the indictment, 31 of the 37 counts brought against Trump allege he willfully retained national defense information, which is a violation of the Espionage Act. This is really a stretch for the intent of that act was espionage and nobody is making a case that Trump was handing it to an enemy. Nevertheless, the indictment was extremely dangerous and far more serious than what Nixon faced. They are not playing games.

They are desperately staging this to put him in prison. Still, there is no actual smoking gun as they say. Trump has spoken about the classified documents acknowledging that they were classified. This is a serious risk and only a jury with common sense would find him not guilty. They use conspiracy so they do not have to prove everything beyond a reasonable doubt. It will be a case arguing what they “think” was in his mind at the time. Even this is selective prosecution after Biden had classified documents thrown in his car.

They are already trying to recuse the judge. They want a hanging judge and that is how the government works. When Judge McKenna was protecting me, they made a recusal motion. He denied it. So they went to the Chief Judge and had the case removed and sent to a hanging judge – John F. Kennan – a former prosecutor. Here is my docket sheet. How they remove Judge McKenna was sealed. I was NEVER allowed to see how they did that. This was an outright violation of Due Process of Law. It does not matter. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals refused to ever address anything in my case whatsoever!

I confronted Judge Owen that he was altering the transcripts which is a felony. I forced him to admit it. Under the law, he should have recused himself for now he was a witness in my case. I tried to appeal that and the Second Circuit lost the appeal 3 times and then claimed I was out of time to appeal. On top of that, changing the transcripts is a felony in addition to obstruction of justice which they are charging Trump with. The Second Circuit ignored everything. I wrote to the SEC prosecutor Dorothy Heyl. I said since you people change transcripts, why not just make one up and claim whatever and throw in I killed JFK, and let’s get this over with. She obviously did not reply.

Now you can see what Thomas Jefferson was writing about. There is no rule of law in the United States. If they want you, you have ZERO constitutional or human rights. They even tried to kill me in the same place they killed Jeffrey Epstein. I was in the hospital in a coma but to their dismay, I survived.

Shakespeare’s famous line from Henry VI, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” must be put in its proper context. At that point in history, a charged person had NO RIGHT to counsel. The ONLY lawyers were actually the king’s prosecutors. So you can see, even Shakespeare understood how the rule of law is a joke. That is why we have the Sixth Amendment – the right to counsel. In my case, they attacked all the lawyers and removed them. When Richard Altman said he would defend me for free, the government claimed they were investigating him as my co-conspirator to throw him out of court. So much for Constitutional rights – it’s all fake!

Even Charles Dickens has written about how corrupt the legal system had become back in 1853. Dickens wrote in Chapter I, “In Chancery” of his celebrated Bleake House,

“Suffer any wrong that can be done you, rather than come here!”

Indeed, the current state of American federal courts has once again reached the lowest point completing the revolution of the wheel of political fortune. Perhaps this is in line with what we should expect as we move into 2032 where governments around the world will collapse from their own internal corruption. Trump should kiss the wife and kids goodbye, for he has little chance of defeating this corrupt system. As Herbert Hoover wrote:

“Sometimes when a government; is enraged, it burns down the barn to get the rat.”  

This is how the law is just always abused. If a parent is against transgenderism, in California, Newsom wants to charge them with child abuse. That would allow courts to take custody of children awake from the parent under old laws. If a child under 18 cannot have sex consensually, how can then change their sex? Good luck with ANY California judge ruling in your favor. Kiss your children goodbye as well if they are brainwashed into thinking they should change their sex even at age 7 to 12.

A 17-year-old cannot consent to sex, but to vaccinate minors without parental consent was OK because a minor can consent to be vaccinated, but they could not even open a bank account. Epstein was a pedophile with a 17-year-old but a vaccine could have life-threatening consequences and that’s ok for a school to do that claiming even a 7-year-old gave consent? Thomas Jefferson warned that the United States will collapse because of the abuse of the application of the law. He knew history!

The other six counts against Trump claim he caused false statements to be made and conspired to conceal documents from investigators and obstruct justice. This is exactly what the FBI and the DOJ have been doing to protect Hunter Biden and the Big Man.

Our computer has been forecasting that a major Directional Change took place in 2022 and 2023  going all the way into 2026 is basically tearing the very fabric of society apart at the seams. It is not just Trump, it is WOKE. Everywhere you turn, this is the same agenda of the left under Marxism. They MUST destroy the family unit and the children are to look to the state as their real parent and great protector. Communism taught children to report their biological parents if they ever spoke against the state. Hello, California is joining Stalinism.

This is what they are doing right before our eyes. This whole transgender issue is to also reduce the population. Thank you, Bill Gates, Soros, Buffett, and the rest of you. I think the money has gone to your heads and you are all playing God because you, like Soros, perhaps believe God is dead or never existed.

Please Scotty – Beam me the heck out of this world. It has gone completely insane!

Sunday Talks – The Encapsulation


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)

.

[Support CTH HERE]

How Corrupt Is Our Current Situation? It’s Worse Than Most Can Fathom…


Posted originally on the CTH on May 4, 2023 | Sundance 

The football spiking by AG Merrick Garland today deserves some context, and I am going to take you through a story that will highlight just how bad the situation really is.

Everything that preceded the 2020 federal election was a complex system of control by a network of ideologues, federal agencies, allies in the private sector, financial stakeholders and corrupt interests all working toward a common goal.  There’s no need to go through the background of how the election was manipulated and how the government and private sector, specifically social media, worked to influence the 2020 outcome because you have all seen it.

Whether it was local election officials working to control outcomes, federal agencies working to support them (CISA, FBI, DHS), financial interests working to fund them (Zuckerberg et al), or social media platforms controlling the visible content and discussion (Twitter Files, Google, Facebook etc.), the objective was all the same.  It was a massive one-sided operation against the freewill of the American voter.

In the aftermath of the 2020 election, those same system operators, govt officials, corporate media, private sector groups and social media platforms then circled the wagons to scatter the evidence of their conduct.  If you questioned anything you were a threat.  That’s the context to the dynamic that unfolded.

Lawfare operatives joined forces with Democrat staffers, and allies in social media platforms all worked in concert to target the voices of anyone who would rise in opposition to the corruption that was stunningly clear in the outcome of the election process.  Corporate media then labeled, isolated, ridiculed and marginalized anyone who dared to point out the obvious.

When AG Merrick Garland says this of January 6, 2021: […] “the Justice Department has conducted one of the largest, most complex, and most resource-intensive investigations in our history. We have worked to analyze massive amounts of physical and digital data. We have recovered devices, decrypted electronic messages, triangulated phones, and pored through tens of thousands of hours of video. We have also benefited from tens of thousands of tips we received from the public. Following these digital and physical footprints, we were able to identify hundreds of people.” {link} The targeting operation needs context.

Do you remember on April 27th when DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz recently said, “more than 3.4 million search queries into the NSA database took place between Dec. 1st, 2020 and Nov. 30th, 2021, by government officials and/or contractors working on behalf of the federal government.”  The result was “more than 1 million searches of private documents and communication of Americans that were illegal and non-compliant,” and over “10,000 federal employees have access to that database.” {OIG Testimony}.

Put the statement from Garland together with the statement from Horowitz, and you get an understanding of what was done.

Hundreds of stakeholders in the Lawfare network joined forces with hundreds of people who became staff researchers for a weaponized Congress.  Hundreds more social media background agents then poured thousands of hours into feeding private information to the DOJ, FBI, J6 Committee and all of their hired staff working on the project.

How do I know?

I was one of their targets.

Before telling the rest of the story, some background is needed.

I am well versed in the ways of the administrative state and the corrupt systems, institutions and silos that make up our weaponized government. I can (a) see them; (b) predict their activity; and (c) know where their traps and operations are located.

Traveling the deep investigative weeds of the administrative state eventually gives you a set of skills.  When people ask how the outlines on this website can seem so far ahead of the sunlight that eventually falls upon the outlined corruption, this is essentially why.  When you take these skills on the road, you learn to be a free-range scout, and after a long while you learn how to track the activity.

When I was outlining how the Fourth Branch of Government works and/or Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop and the DHS system operating inside it, I wasn’t shooting from the hip. However, people will always seek to dismiss the uncomfortable truth.

Sometimes you just have to wait for the evidence you know exists to surface, or for a situation to unfold that is driven by a self-fulfilling prophecy. The bizarre CTH predictions turn out to be the truth of the issue because they are based on the factual evidence of the issue.

That level of how the system works came in very handy when I received this subpoena from Chairman Bennie Thompson and the J6 Committee.  Warning, things are about to get very uncomfortable if you don’t accept the scale of corruption that exists.

Pay attention to the red box on the page shown. This is essentially the probable cause that justifies the subpoena itself.  I have redacted a name in the box for reasons you will see that follow.

I was never in Washington DC on January 6, 2021, nor did I work with or communicate with anyone who was involved in any of the activities that are subject to the J6 committee investigative authority.

I’m going to skip a lot of background noise, irrelevant legal stuff, jurisdictional issues, discoveries from discussions with lawyers and the experience gained in association with this ridiculous subpoena.  I am going to focus on the biggest story within it.

Sticking to the information in the Red Box above, notice how the J6 committee has evidence, “public-source information and documents on file”, showing my participation, communication, and contact with people and technology that are material interests to the committee.

Here’s the kicker…. I had no clue what the hell they were talking about.  There’s not a single aspect of their outline that I had any knowledge or connection of.

I had no idea what Zello was. I had no idea who 1% watchdog might be. I had never heard of “Stop the Steal J6” or associated “channel.”  I had never heard of the person redacted, and I had never communicated with any Oath Keeper, any communication system, or platform, or anyone or anything – nothing – that is outlined in that subpoena.

Those points of evidence outlined in the subpoena had no connection to me at all.

The subpoena might as well have been asking me to appear in Michigan because my Red Ferrari was involved in a hit and run accident, during my trip to Detroit.  I don’t own a Ferrari; I have never been to Michigan; I certainly never had an accident; I wasn’t on a trip and have never visited Detroit.  The entire construct of their probable cause for the subpoena was silly. Complete and utter nonsense.

That said, how could there be “public records” and “documentary” evidence of something that never happened?

At first, I thought this was some silly case of mistaken identity and they just sent a subpoena to the wrong person.  However, the investigators were adamant the evidence existed, and the need for testimony was required.

After taking advice from several smart people, and after discovering the costs associated with just the reply to the committee and/or representation therein; suddenly I realized there might be more value for me in this subpoena than the committee.  After all, how can there be public-records and documents that I own a red Ferrari and went to Michigan when I don’t and never did.

After several back and forths I discovered, through their admissions of their own research, and through documents they extracted as an outcome of their tasks to prove the merit of their claims, that someone *inside* Twitter had created a fictitious identity of me associated with the networks and communications as the investigators described them.

Think about what was discovered here.

Someone inside the Twitter platform, an employee of Twitter, had made a decision to target me. As a result: (a) they had been doing this for a long time with a specific goal in mind; and (b) they created an elaborate trail of background activity and identity that was entirely fabricated.

Eventually, my assigned investigative unit admitted this.

Once, the federal investigators realized what took place they wanted to get rid of me -and my snark filled curiosity- with great urgency.

They also had an ‘oh shit’ moment, when they contemplated everything, including what they had revealed to me from the outset of my contact, now several months prior.

What I discovered in this experience was that DHS, and by extension DOJ/FBI and the January 6 investigators, had direct administrative level backdoors into all social media platforms.

Overlay the Twitter files now, and then expand your thinking….

In their quest to prove that I owned a Red Ferrari, traveled to Michigan and had a hit-and-run accident, these investigators outlined to me how the United States Government, through their DHS authority, has employees, agents and contractors with open portals into all social media platforms.

Yes, the federal government is inside the mechanics of the systems (Twitter, Facebook, Meta, Instagram, Google, YouTube, WhatsApp, Zello, etc) and they have administrative access in real time to monitor, review, extract and evaluate everything, soup-to-nuts.

It was only because the investigators and forensic data knuckleheads have these portals, that they were able to locate the source of the fabricated evidence they were originally attributing to me.  This was an investigative process and research discovery being conducted in the data processing systems of Twitter in real time as they questioned me.

Once they realized what had taken place, and as soon as I started asking how they were making these admissions (now carrying an apologetic certainty), suddenly the investigators wanted no further contact or communication with me.  You’re good, whoopsie daisy, our bad, sorry.

Now, take some time to fully digest and absorb what I have just shared.

The U.S. government is worried about TikTok, because U.S. citizen data might be extracted?

Meanwhile, the U.S. government, at a fully unrestricted administrative level, is inside Twitter, Facebook, Meta, Insta, YouTube etc., running amok and extracting anything – including private messages… and they’re somehow worried about protecting us from TikTok data collection.  Think about it.

Provide your thoughts in the comments and I will try to fill in any blanks or questions you might carry.  In the interim, live your best life.

Ears of an elephant, eyes of a mouse.

The Legislative Branch’s Biggest Leaker of Classified Intelligence, Rails Against Small Fry Ability to Leak Classified Pentagon Intelligence


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

Some insider threats are more equal than others; so goes the position of the nation’s biggest leaker of classified documents in modern history, and it’s not Jack Teixeira.

This story shows the importance of what was hidden by the combined efforts of the national security apparatus in 2018.

Readers here are familiar, but most Americans are not, with how Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner leaked a top-secret classified Title-1 FISA application in March of 2017.

Then the Vice-Chair of the SSCI, Senator Warner instructed Senate Security Director James Wolfe to leak the 82-page FISA application assembled against Carter Page.  On the afternoon of March 17, 2017, Wolfe took 82 pictures of the “Read and Return” document that was delivered to the SSCI basement SCIF by FBI Supervisory Special Agent Brian Dugan from the Washington Field Office.

Later that evening, Wolfe sent the images to journalist Ali Watkins using an encrypted messaging app.  Ms. Watkins then shared the FISA content with her peers and used the information to leverage a top-tier job at the New York Times.  The media were off to the races talking about FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign and using the leaked FISA as evidence of the ongoing investigation, later known as Crossfire Hurricane.   Three days later, March 20, 2017, after coordinating the intent of the narrative creation with Mark Warner, FBI Director James Comey publicly admitted the Trump-Russia investigation for the first time.

After James Wolfe was arrested for the FISA application leak, his defense lawyers threatened to expose the role of the Senate Intelligence Committee in the leak and subpoena the members as witnesses.  The Mueller/Weissmann team, then in charge of all DOJ operations that touched on Trump-Russia, took apart the evidence of Wolfe’s conduct, and DC Attorney Jessie Liu dropped most of the charges against Wolfe.  Mueller then ran cover for Mark Warner, and eventually – out of an abundance of caution to maintain the need for the coverup operation – the Mueller/Weissmann team then made the FISA application public. The rest is history.

Keep in mind, I could be civilly sued if anything written above as an asserted truth was false.  I’m not, because the truth is the defense.  All of this happened.

At the time of the Mark Warner TSCI leak, no one outside the DOJ-FBI and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) had ever seen a FISA application.  Heck, in 2017 through early 2018, it was considered a classified intelligence breech to even discuss the FISA process, the procedures or the court itself.  People forget that.

The 2017 leaking of the FISA application was the biggest national security breach in years, perhaps seconded only to the 2017 leaking of the TSCI transcript from National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s call with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, given to the Washington Post by the FBI a month earlier.

So, it’s somewhat hypocritical and ironic to see SSCI Chairman Mark Warner now railing against the Pentagon and Director of National Intelligence over not being provided the details of documents leaked by a low-level military servicemember in the Massachusetts Air National Guard.

WASHINGTON DC – The Senate Intelligence Committee is demanding the Pentagon hand over copies of all the classified documents leaked by Massachusetts Air National Guardsman Jack Teixeira.

The 21-year-old serviceman was accused by the Department of Defense of leaking “sensitive and highly-classified material” into a chat on the encrypted communications platform Discord. It then made its way onto other social media platforms. He was charged on Friday.

In a letter addressed to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., and ranking member Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said the leak prompted concerns about “serious deficiencies” in the government’s security protocols.

“According to public reporting, A1C Teixeira began sharing classified information and classified documents within a social media platform as early as December 2022—nearly four months before the government’s discovery,” the letter, obtained by Fox News Digital, read. “These disclosures indicate serious deficiencies in the government’s insider threat and security vetting protocols.”  (read more)

The Leak Was the Op – White House and Congress Demand New Powers, Think Restrict Act, in Aftermath of Classified Intel Leaks


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

Never letting a crisis go to waste is very useful tool, especially when the government creates the crisis.  As CTH has said from the first discussion of the classified intelligence leaks, the “leak is the op.”

The intel leak is the operation created by the Intelligence Community to support new expanded powers for the Fourth Branch of Government.  It should not be a surprise to discover the institution now leading the charge to give more power for U.S. intel agencies, is…. wait for it….. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

The SSCI is the organizational institution that supports the Fourth Branch of Government, the intelligence branch.  The SSCI previously created a bipartisan Restrict Act, to deal with dangerous information on the internet.

According to SSCI Chairman Mark Warner, ‘The Restrict Act’ will give more power and authorities to the Executive Branch to deal with internet danger.  Now the SSCI sees the classified intel leaks as evidence for the importance of the Restrict Act.

Well, butter my buns and call me a biscuit, surprise-surprise!  Funny how that happens.

(Via NBC) – The Biden administration is looking at expanding how it monitors social media sites and chatrooms after U.S. intelligence agencies failed to spot classified Pentagon documents circulating online for weeks, according to a senior administration official and a congressional official briefed on the matter. 

The possible change in the intelligence-gathering process is just one potential shift as officials scramble to determine not only how the documents leaked but also how to prevent another damaging incident.

[…] The president and other officials were dismayed when they learned the documents had been online for at least a month.  “Nobody is happy about this,” said the senior administration official. 

The administration is now looking at expanding the universe of online sites that intelligence agencies and law enforcement authorities track, the official said.

[…]  If the administration tries to check online chatrooms more closely, it will have to navigate legal safeguards designed to protect Americans’ privacy and freedom of expression, former intelligence officials said.

Watching a public chatroom is fair game, but law enforcement agencies don’t have the legal authority to monitor a private online chatroom without probable cause, the former officials said.

“We do not have nor do we want a system where the United States government monitors private internet chats,” said Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel of the National Security Agency from 2015 to 2020. 

[…] Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., said the leak raised yet more questions about how the government manages its secrets, only months after revelations that successive administrations appeared to have mishandled classified documents.  […] “I think it’s time that Congress plays a role here in setting some parameters,” Warner said.  (read more)

Just a few “parameters“…

Swear.

Promise.

Uh huh….

The Restrict Act, also known as Senate Bill 686 [SB686 HERE], also known as the bipartisan bill to empower the executive branch to shut down TikTok.  Also known as the ‘online Patriot Act’.

Poor Kids (documentary)


Armstrong Economics Blog/North America Re-Posted Apr 10, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

This documentary is extremely hard to watch but accurately depicts the hardships millions face in the modern industrialized world. We cannot turn a blind eye to the pain and suffering that poverty creates. This is happening today in the wealthiest country in the world.

Below is an update from the documentary that aired in 2012. There was a slight glimpse of hope when Obama left office and the economy improved under Trump. Still, the funds we send overseas are needed at home. Those with the least suffer the most when the economy turns down.

This a raw reminder to count your blessing on this Easter Monday.

“Indicted We Stand” Rap Song


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Apr 8, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Above is an “extreme MAGA terrorist” rapping about the largest witchhunt in US political history. Americans from all walks of life are disgusted with our political system. “After Trump, I believe they’re after us all.”

About that New York Times Story Concerning the “Online Leak” of U.S. Ukraine and Geopolitical Plans


Posted originally on the CTH on April 8, 2023 | Sundance

By now people are familiar with a New York Times (original source) story of a leak of sensitive classified information regarding U.S. operations in Ukraine and other geopolitical efforts.  The New York Times was the first with the story, as shared with them by “senior Biden administration officials.”

WASHINGTON — Classified war documents detailing secret American and NATO plans for building up the Ukrainian military ahead of a planned offensive against Russian troops were posted this week on social media channels, senior Biden administration officials said. (more)

Now, let’s use this opportunity to expand our knowledge base, overlay the known frameworks that operate within our government, and simultaneously give a perspective that will not surface anywhere else.

First, the story surfaces from the New York Times.  What does that tell us?  It tells us the stakeholders in a background narrative surrounding the issue as constructed are domestic intelligence interests.  If there was a State Dept stakeholder interest, the story would have been presented by CNN.  If there was a U.S. foreign intelligence operation stakeholder interest, the story would have surfaced in the Washington Post.

The story surfaces in the New York Times, indicating a U.S. domestic intelligence interest; and the story is sourced directly to the White House via “senior Biden administration officials.”  What does that mean?  It means the narrative that flows from the story has a direction to shape opinion from the perspective of U.S. government domestic public relations.  It means the narrative is intended to sway a domestic audience with a motive toward something else.

Secondly, and in full alignment with the first point, the centerpiece of the story is focused on a leak that surfaces in “social media.”  This fits perfectly with the domestic intelligence stakeholders (DHS, National Security Council, etc).   We know domestic intelligence operates in the backbone of social media platforms.  An example is DHS and domestic Intelligence Community (IC) work as outlined in the Twitter files.

Put them together, a domestic IC product surfaced (being called leaked) into social media platforms containing portals controlled by domestic IC.

The domestic IC then report on the leaks to the outlet used by the domestic IC.   See how these fit?

If you follow the bouncing ball, what you immediately suspect is the domestic IC planted the ‘classified information’ in the platforms they can access, then turn around and report on the leak of the classified information to media they use for domestic narrative engineering.

♦ Motive – But why would the IC plant classified information, then turn around and report on the classified information they planted?  This is where you need to learn how the motives work, against a bigger picture.

The leak (planted information) and then the telling of the leak (NYT story) creates an opportunity for the domestic IC to frame a Russian dis/mis/mal-information narrative.

But why would the IC want to immediately stir up a misinformation or disinformation narrative against Russia?

♦ Answer: 18 hours before the leak/story construct.  Two Russian gremlins, perhaps state sponsored, or perhaps just state aligned, tricked former French President Francios Hollande into admitting the U.S. government and western alliance were behind all of the events in Ukraine after 2014, with the expressed intention to construct a proxy war against Russia using Ukraine.

Russian Pranksters Vovan and Lexus, posing as former Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko, got French ex-President Francois Hollande to admit the Minsk Accords were a NATO ruse to militarize Ukraine, and Western nations overthrew Ukraine’s democratically-elected government in 2014. (Full YouTube Conversation)

As noted by Gonzalo Lira, “François Hollande, former president of France, confirms that the 2014 coup d’etat in Ukraine was part of a long-term plan to have Ukraine fight a proxy war against Russia. The Americans have been preparing this war since the Obama administration—it is now confirmed beyond doubt.”

The admission by Hollande aligns with every element of the U.S. effort to use Russia as a bad guy, including the use of Russia against Donald J Trump.  A proxy war against Russia was in the works going all the way back to the Euromaidan efforts, the color revolution in Ukraine, as constructed by the U.S. State Department, and facilitated by U.S. allies in Europe.

This is the most explosive dose of geopolitical sunlight in years, and obviously these statements by Hollande were a serious issue for the White House and U.S. Intelligence Community.   Hollande was tricked by two Russian pranksters into spilling the real story about Ukraine and U.S. involvement therein.

Now do you see the need?  The Hollande admission is an urgent problem.

Less than one news cycle later, the IC has dropped the Ukraine counteroffensive strategy in the platforms the IC has access to (a purposeful leak).  Then the IC tells the story of the classified strategy leak to the New York Times and begins framing a Russian mis/disinformation campaign.   The intent is to mitigate any issues with the Hollande story, fall under the same claims of Russian mis/disinformation.

The leak of classified intelligence, and the attribution to Russian misinformation, is like a brushback pitch toward the heads of the media on the explosive Francios Hollande story.  It worked.  Have you seen the admissions by Francios Hollande in any MSM?   Unified UniParty interests at play.

That’s how the control agents operate.  Deflection and adverse information removal is what IC narrative engineering is intended to control.  This was a successful IC operation.

Once you see the strings on the DC marionettes, you can never return to that moment in the performance when you did not see them.