Tom Homan Border Speech, MAGA Rally Robstown, Texas


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 22, 2022 | Sundance 

As a guest speaker today during the Trump MAGA rally in Robstown, Texas, former Acting Director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Tom Homan, delivered a full fire speech discussing the current border crisis created by Joe Biden.  The last five seconds are epic. {Direct Rumble LinkWATCH:

.

@5:00 “I’ll tell you what I told [President Trump]. He comes back, I come back, and we fix this shit”…

President Trump MAGA Rally, Robstown Texas – 8pm ET Livestream Links


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 22, 2022 | Sundance

Tonight, President Donald Trump heads to Robstown, Texas, for a MAGA rally at the Richard M. Borchard Regional Fairgrounds.  President Trump is scheduled to deliver remarks at 7:00pm CDT / 8:00pm EDT.  Livestream Links Below:

Trump Campaign Rumble Link – RSBN Rumble Link – Alternate Rumble Link

.

.

.

Will He Get Away With It? Exclusive Fauci Interview


Awaken With JP Published originally on rumble on October 20, 2022 

Fauci tells all in our exclusive exit interview!

Montage of Washington Claiming Vaccines Prevent Transmission


Armstrong Economics Blog/Corruption Re-Posted Oct 22, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Insufferable J6 Committee Files Political Subpoena for President Trump Testimony as a Midterm Loss Election Shield and Insurance Policy


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 21, 2022 | Sundance

Yesterday, Politico noted President Trump had enlisted the law firm of Harmeet Dhillon as a proactive measure against a J6 subpoena. “Former President Donald Trump has hired a firm to engage with the Jan. 6 select committee on its forthcoming subpoena of him, POLITICO has learned.” {link} Less than a day later the J6 committee issues the formal subpoena.

Once again, the corrupt DC institutional system, and specific media participation, are identified by the leaks and recipients. The injustice system, DOJ/FBI always use the New York Times and Politico as their advanced public relations firms. The insufferable J6 subpoena details can be FOUND HERE.

WASHINGTON DC, J6 Committee – “Pursuant to a unanimous vote of the Select Committee, Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-WY) today announced that the Select Committee has issued a subpoena to former President Donald Trump for testimony under oath and records relevant to the Select Committee’s investigation into the attack on the January 6th on the United States Capitol and its causes.

In a letter to Mr. Trump, Chairman Thompson and Vice Chair Cheney underscored his central role in a deliberate, orchestrated effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and block the transfer of presidential power, a matter central to the committee’s investigation as it reviews the facts and considers recommendations to prevent a recurrence of the violence of January 6th.” {link}

The committee is giving President Trump until November 4th to comply with the document request, with a demand for testimony by November 16th.

No president (executive branch) has ever been forced to give testimony to a legislative committee (legislative branch) because the very foundation of the demand violates the separation of powers as established in the constitution.  This legal argument will take some time to work itself out, and the (un)likelihood of the subpoena being successful speaks to the political nature of the theatrics in advance of the 2022 midterm election.

That said, having been the recipient of two J6 subpoenas, successfully defeated – in part thanks to your support, I can provide some insight into why President Trump enlisted the Dhillon Law Firm.

At least from my experience, there are only a handful of potential lawyers or law firms who will even take the case of a fight against a J6 committee subpoena because: (1) it is just so fraught with politics, and (2) the entire enterprise is a litigious and financial black hole.

The weaponized J6 committee has a bottomless budget, the J6 targets do not.  Ultimately, the financial cost is the root cause of why Lawfare succeeds.  It’s just too damned expensive to fight them off, even with great lawyers.  I can only imagine how much Steve Bannon has spent, and how much President Trump will have to spend.

Even a simple responsive letter to the committee, depending on scale and scope, starts around $10,000 and goes up from there; that’s just for the initial response.  If the initial response isn’t successful, the fight retainer starts around six figures for the next round… and that’s just a single and simple case.  The more complex legal arguments are exponentially more costly for the targets.  Justice system? Yeah, good luck with that.

Now, given the J6 subpoena against President Trump is likely to fail on constitutional grounds, let’s talk about the motive for why they would do this.

The J6 Committee has a timeline that is now extended beyond the midterm election.  This is not accidental.  The midterm election is likely to result in the House flipping from Democrat control to Republican control.  Keep in mind both Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are lame ducks right now.  Additionally, the people inside the J6 committee machinery are Lawfare agents like Mary McCord.

The committee is timing their political effort to extend beyond the midterms in order to shield itself from Republican scrutiny.  The oft familiar “ongoing investigation” shield becomes a purposeful technique to protect themselves, a transparent motive surfaces for their timeline.

Post-election, the committee will lean heavily on the media to avoid any/all discoveries of their malicious targeting conduct if the midterm elections remove the Democrats from power. This is the way these conniving and corrupt political lawfare agents work.

Unfortunately, the Republican wing is not an opposing force against the Democrat wing.  They are both wings of the same DC UniParty vulture.  So, we should not anticipate any full combat in the post-election House by an angered GOP against Democrats.  Everything will be optics; nothing will be substantive.

Bottom line, the J6 subpoena against Trump should fail, but that’s not the real motive for the J6 to push the subpoena against Trump.  They are using this Trump subpoena, and the long battle that will ensue over it, as a shield against scrutiny by a flipped power structure in the House of Representatives.

If Republicans win the House, Nancy Pelosi will retire. Bookmark it. There is no scenario where Nancy Pelosi will remain in congress after all of the political manipulation, she has done in the past four years.  Adam Schiff will likely be minority leader.

Steve Bannon Sentenced to Four Months Jail Term for Contempt of Congress for Defying J6 Subpoena, Sentence Deferred Pending Appeal


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 21, 2022 | Sundance 

Earlier today Steve Bannon was sentenced to four months in jail for refusing to appear and be questioned by the congressional J6 committee.  However, Judge Carl Nichols has temporarily deferred the sentence pending an appeal by Bannon which will likely go into next year.

More than half the country holds contempt for congress, and the targeting of Bannon is transparently political. A defiant Steve Bannon spoke outside the courthouse after his sentence was delivered.  WATCH (prompted):

WASHINGTON DC – A federal judge has sentenced longtime Donald Trump adviser Steve Bannon to four months in jail for defying a subpoena from lawmakers investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob. He will also be required to pay a $6,500 fine if his convictions stand.

U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, said Bannon inappropriately defied the House’s select committee on a matter of significant national interest, and even after roadblocks to his testimony had been removed.

“Flaunting a Congressional subpoena betrays a lack of respect for the legislative branch which represents the will of the people of the United States,” Nichols said during a sentencing hearing at the federal courthouse a few blocks from the Capitol. “In my view, Mr. Bannon has not taken responsibility for his actions.”

Nichols cushioned the blow of the four-month jail term by opting to allow Bannon, 68, to remain free pending appeal, which is likely to push the issue well into next year and perhaps longer.

A jury convicted Bannon in July on two charges of contempt of Congress — one for refusing to testify to the Jan. 6 select committee, another for refusing to provide relevant documents to the panel.

The select committee subpoenaed Bannon in September 2021 as it sought testimony from close Trump aides involved in efforts to help him subvert the 2020 election. Prosecutors charged him in November 2021, three weeks after the House voted to hold him in contempt.

[…] Under federal law, the two misdemeanor counts Bannon was found guilty of each carried a minimum term of one month’s incarceration and a maximum of a year in prison. The Justice Department had asked Nichols to sentence Bannon to a six-month prison term. Prosecutors contended that the minimum sentence is mandatory, but Bannon’s lawyers argued that he could be sentenced to probation or to home confinement, rather than prison.

Nichols said several favors weighed in favor of a “substantial” sentence for Bannon — from the seriousness and significance of the Jan. 6 select committee probe to Bannon’s continued defiance of the select committee even after Trump purported in July to “waive” any assertion of executive privilege over his cooperation.

While many legal commentators have insisted that Bannon could not have had privileged conversations with Trump after Bannon left the White House staff in 2017, Nichols pointedly said Friday that such discussions might be covered by executive privilege.

However, the judge also seemed troubled that Bannon never produced any documents to the committee, even those that seemed certain not to be covered by any privilege Trump was asserting.

Nichols did acknowledge that Bannon appeared to rely on his lawyer’s advice, and he noted that the Jan. 6 select committee opted against a civil lawsuit to enforce its subpoena. (read more)

Another Appeals Court Finds Progressive Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Unconstitutional


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 20, 2022 | Sundance

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CPFB) was originally created by congress (Elizabeth Warren lead) as a quasi-constitutional watchdog agency to reach into the banking and financial system, under the guise of oversight, and extract money by fining entities for CFPB defined regulatory and/or compliance violations.

Essentially, the CFPB is a congressionally authorized far-left extortion scheme in the banking sector.  The CFPB levies fines; the fines generate income; however, unlike traditional fines that go to the U.S. treasury, the CFBP fines are then redistributed to left-wing organizations to help fund their political activism.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was the brainchild of Senator Elizabeth Warren as an outcome of the Dodd-Frank legislation. Within the CFPB Warren tried to set up the head of the agency, the Director, in a manner that that he/she would operate without oversight. Unfortunately, her dictatorial-fiat-design collapsed when challenged in court.  Backstory #1 – Backstory #2

Previously, a federal court found the CFPB Director position held too much power and deemed it unconstitutional. The court decision noted that giving the President power to fire the Director would fix the constitutional problem.  However, a second set of legal challenges targeted the core of the CFPB scheme, the financing.

WASHINGTON DC – An appeals court on Wednesday ruled that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s funding mechanism is unconstitutional, in a victory for lenders that have targeted the agency’s structure in a years-long bid to tamp down regulation.

A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the design of the CFPB violated the Constitution because it receives funding through the Federal Reserve, rather than appropriations legislation passed by Congress. Democrats established the structure when they created the CFPB in the 2010 Dodd-Frank law as a way to shield the bureau from political pressures that could impact its oversight of the finance industry.

The judges also vacated a 2017 small-dollar lending rule targeted by the payday lending advocates who brought the case — the Community Financial Services Association of America and the Consumer Service Alliance of Texas.

“Congress’s decision to abdicate its appropriations power under the Constitution, i.e., to cede its power of the purse to the Bureau, violates the Constitution’s structural separation of powers,” the judges wrote.

The appeals court ruling marked the latest victory for the finance industry, which has fought for years in Congress and the courts to blunt the CFPB’s reach and limit its ability to police financial services. Republican lawmakers have also worked for years to stifle the CFPB and revamp its structure, arguing the agency lacks accountability.

“Even among self-funded agencies, the Bureau is unique,” Judge Cory Wilson wrote Wednesday. “The Bureau’s perpetual self-directed, double-insulated funding structure goes a significant step further than that enjoyed by the other agencies on offer.”

The CFPB Wednesday declined to say whether it would appeal the decision to the full 5th Circuit. CFPB spokesperson Sam Gilford said “there is nothing novel or unusual about Congress’s decision to fund the CFPB outside of annual spending bills.” (read more)

Here’s where we remind everyone of the importance of regular budget appropriations. There hasn’t been a standard federal budgetary spending process in place since 2008. Every budget since Obama’s first term has been a series of continuous resolutions, omnibus spending bills and appropriations without regular order.

This has not been an accidental outcome.

Ballot Harvesting in Arizona


Armstrong Economics Blog/Corruption Re-Posted Oct 20, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Biden received more votes than any president in US history, but not legally. There is documented evidence of people voting numerous times, and the documentary “2000 Mules” shows exactly how people swung the vote in Biden’s favor. Mail-in ballots changed the 2020 US Presidential Election. No ID was required to vote, forms were sent to deceased Americans, and countless forms mysteriously disappeared in transit.

Arizona was a swing state battleground during the last election. The Office of the Arizona Attorney General is now calling upon the compromised FBI and IRS to investigate the damning documentary as they want it to be labeled a conspiracy theory. They do not want the people to know that our elections were rigged.

Elsewhere in Arizona, a sensible judge is cracking down on ballot harvesting. For the first time in the state’s history, a person has been sentenced for ballot harvesting. Again, no one in the state of Arizona has EVER been charged with this serious act. Guillermina Fuentes, former mayor of the city of San Luis, has been sentenced to 30 days in jail and two years of probation.

Yuma County Superior Court Judge Roger Nelson does not believe Fuentes is remorseful. “The defendant acknowledged responsibility for carrying ballots for someone else however, she stated, ‘I’m not a criminal.’ Well, you are a criminal,” Nelson declared. “You committed a criminal offense. I don’t think you recognize that as a criminal offense. That’s the problem that I have.”

We need more judges like Roger Nelson who are willing to rule in favor of the people. Finally, someone is experiencing the consequences for rigging the 2020 US Presidential Election.

Trump’s EPIC Response to Jan 6th Committee Subpoena!


Nick Moseder Published originally on Rumble on October 14, 2022

Lets hope and pray that this is true!