CENTCOM Commander General McKenzie Calls Drone Strike Killing 10 Innocents in Kabul, a Tragic Mistake – The Signals Intelligence Was Wrong


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 165 Comments

Earlier today, General Kenneth Franklin McKenzie Jr. admitted a claimed U.S. drone strike against the ever evolving and mysterious ISIS-K, actually killed 7 children and three innocent adult civilians. General McKenzie calls it a “tragic mistake.” Four days after the August 29th strike Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called the strike “righteous.”

General McKenzi says he takes “full responsibility”, yet he retains his position.   No one is being held to account. No one at the Pentagon is facing discipline. Both McKenzie and Milley claim it was solid intelligence that led them to watch, follow, and eventually target and kill Zemari Ahmadi, an Afghan relief worker who arrived home. The missile struck his vehicle as his children ran out to welcome daddy home from work, killing all occupants in the car and those in the vicinity.

As noted by Politico, “The command now assesses that “it is unlikely” the man and vehicle targeted was affiliated with ISIS-K, the Afghanistan branch of ISIS, or “a direct threat to U.S. forces,” Gen. Frank McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command told reporters Friday.”

Many people suspect part of the “intelligence” they used was a tip from their Taliban “partners” at the time.  Ten people killed, including three children.

The other aspect to this situation that raises MASSIVE alarm bells is McZenzie emphasizing this strike was the result of overwhelming “signals intelligence” or SIGINT.   Remember, the Intelligence Apparatus, writ large, is part of Team-1, and aligned with the State Department.  The White House and Pentagon are part of Team-2.  At the time this took place, there was a severe battle to avoid accountability between both teams.

Two Questions:

First – Was the signals intelligence provided by Team-1, purposefully wrong in order to set up the Pentagon (Team-2) with a major crisis, and as a result, put more of the Afghanistan blame on the DoD and White House?

Second – Did the evidence of that erroneous targeting then arrive at the New York Times after an assist by the background operators of Team-1 to get it to them?

Think about it.

♦ TEAM One – The Department of State is aligned with the CIA.  Their media PR firms are CNN, CNNi and the Washington Post. Their ideology is favorable to the United Nations.  Their internal corruption is generally driven by relationship with foreign actors.  References: Hillary Clinton, Clinton Global Initiative, John McCain, Qatar, Muslim Brotherhood, Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, Cass Sunstein, Brookings Institute, Lawfare, China-centric, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Intel Committee, Council on Foreign Relations.

♦ TEAM Two – The White House is aligned with the Pentagon (DoD) and National Security Council (NSC).  Their media PR firms are domestic in nature. New York Times, Politico, etc.  Their internal corruption is generally driven by domestic influence.  References: Barack Obama, George Bush, Wall St, Big Banks, Multinational Corporations, Defense Contractors, FBI (state police), Judicial Branch, and community activists writ large.

[Presidential elections only affect Team Two (nationalism -v- globalism).  In the modern era, Team One is independent.]

Both teams were responsible for the Afghanistan mess.  However, in the aftermath of the mess; and with the situation in/around Kabul gaining massive attention, each team is positioning to avoid scrutiny.  Scrutiny on either team runs the risk of identifying massive institutional corruption; so the objective is to push the spotlight onto the other team.

State Dept. blames White House/Pentagon…. Pentagon/White House looking to avoid sunlight.

Did the DoS/CIA set up the White House and DoD using their knowledge of relief worker Zemari Ahmadi and his family as useful collateral damage?

FDA Advisory Panel Rejects Pfizer Booster Shots


Posted originally on the conservative tree house September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 526 Comments

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory group who evaluate the efficacy and safety of vaccines have rejected the request for Pfizer booster shots.  However, the White House – desperately trying to push as many needle jabs as possible – was already on track to begin giving booster shots this month.  The implication here is that the White House was not following the recommendations of the FDA or the science.

WASHINGTON DC – A U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel voted Friday against approval of Pfizer (PFE)/BioNTech’s (BNTX) third dose for the U.S.

The vote comes after a heated debate in recent weeks over the need for booster or additional shots, which both mRNA companies — Pfizer and Moderna (MRNA) — have advocated for.

Dr. Peter Marks, the FDA’s leading expert on vaccines, touched on the controversy in his introductory remarks. “We know that there may be differing opinions of the interpretation of the data regarding the potential need for additional doses, and we strongly encourage all the different viewpoints to be voiced and discussed regarding the data, which is complex, and evolving,” Marks said.

He added the meeting focused on almost real-time analyses compared to what is happening in the world, and the goal remains slowing the spread of COVID-19, which is killing almost 2,000 Americans daily.

The question the advisory panel was given to consider only used the U.S. data, a small dataset, despite the presentations including data from the U.K. and Israel.

Marks instructed the panel to consider all the data, noting, “This is not a legal proceeding, this is a science proceeding, so you can take all the data into account.”

The meeting precedes a September 20 start date for additional doses, announced last month by the White House COVID-19 Response Team, despite U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data showing some Americans are already receiving third doses. Last month, the CDC recommended additional doses for immunocompromised people.

A CDC advisory panel will meet next week to discuss recommendations for who should receive a booster dose. (read more)

This happens on the same day the CDC announces a study [Data Here] showing the Moderna vaccine remained stronger in protecting against hospitalization compared to Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ).

Among U.S. adults without immunocompromising conditions, vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization during March 11–August 15, 2021, was higher for the Moderna vaccine (93%) than the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (88%) and the Janssen vaccine (71%).  (link)

However, Moderna has now highlighted their own diminished benefit study [DATA HERE] showing the vaccine effectiveness wanes after 8 months:

[…] “In the analysis, 88 breakthrough cases of COVID-19 occurred in the more recently vaccinated group (49.0 cases per 1000 person-years) compared to 162 cases in the group vaccinated last year (77.1 cases per 1000 person-years). The reduction in incidence rates for participants vaccinated more recently compared to participants vaccinated last year was 36% (95% CI: 17-52%). A Cox proportional hazards model showed similar results after adjusting for age and risk factors for severe COVID-19. Fortunately, only 19 severe cases were observed. While not significant, there was a numerical trend towards a lower rate of severe cases in the group vaccinated more recently (3.3 per 1000 person-years) compared to the group vaccinated last year (6.2 per 1000 person-years).” (read more)

Once you get locked in the vaccine roller coaster, you ain’t getting off until the ride’s over…

President Trump Releases a Statement After Ohio Rep Anthony Gonzalez Announces He Will Not Run For Reelection


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 131 Comments

Short and sweet:  “1 down, 9 to go!

The 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach President Trump.

Grant Stinchfield and John Solomon Report Trump Declassified Documents January 19th and White House Counsel Withheld Them


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 283 Comments

Last night, following the indictment release of Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann, Newsmax’ Grant Stinchfield made a strong accusation against former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.  The claim is that in the final days of the Trump Presidency, the President declassified all of the pertinent documents related to DOJ and FBI misconduct surrounding the false Trump-Russia collusion case.

According to Stinchfield, speaking of ‘high level’ Trump administration sources, thousands of documents were declassified with instructions to release them to the public and also provide them to journalist John Solomon.  The public release never took place; and Stinchfield as well as other Trump allies blame Pat Cipollone for withholding them.  After explaining what his sources said took place, John Solomon joined as a guest to confirm the basic outline as presented.  WATCH:

Right off the bat, something about this doesn’t pass my sniff test. That is not to say that events, as described, are not accurate; but something about the presentation doesn’t seem right.

FIRST – If John Solomon has known about this for nine months; and if Solomon has a partial list of those documents; and if Solomon is of the same frustrated mindset as outlined….. then why didn’t John Solomon ever write about the issue before?

SECOND – I am not excusing White House counsel Pat Cippolone, not even close; however, I think there is some context being ignored in the way Stinchfield and Solomon are framing this.  Cippolone’s position as White House counsel is not to represent Donald Trump, his job is to represent the Office of The President.  The White House counsel is a legal officer of the executive branch as an institution, not the president as a person/individual.   Here is where the missing context and issue surfaces….

When Bill Barr appointed John Durham, officially appointed John Durham (October 19, 2020) as a special counsel, essentially what Bill Barr did was put the proverbial investigative shield over all material evidence that falls under the definition of the investigation Durham was charged to conduct.

Just like Robert Mueller’s appointment made him the controlling authority over everything related to Trump-Russia; which I might add was done with specific and purposeful intent; that made the Mueller special counsel the arbiter of anything that would ever be released to the public. That controlling authority is exactly how Mueller, Weissmann and crew kept a lid on anything that would be detrimental to the political narrative they were attempting to assemble (May 2017 through April 2019).

This process is one that we see used often in order to control and/or coverup wrongdoing.  The material evidence, or any investigative discussion therein, becomes hidden under the cover of “an ongoing investigation“, which blocks the release and puts the control of all evidence into the hands of the investigators.

Understandably, our most familiar reference points are often when this “subject of an ongoing investigation” justification is used with malicious and corrupt intent to keep things hidden from the public.  That corrupt reference is a stark and frustrating reality.  However, there are valid reasons why material evidence is kept in the control of the investigators until they determine it is no longer useful; this is also true.

Back to Cippolone.  With John Durham appointed as the special counsel with control over all evidence subject to the purpose of his investigation, well, right there is a valid reason why the counsel for the Office of the Presidency could not just release it.   Cippolone would have to give it to John Durham because it was materially relevant to his ongoing investigation.  The declassified material would have to go through John Durham, gain his approval that investigative value is exhausted (ie. it is no longer needed), and then the material can be released.

Through the prism of that approach, Pat Cippolone not making the material public (giving it to special counsel John Durham) would be following the appropriate step.

Inasmuch as it is extremely and righteously frustrating, and the greater sunlight of transparency is annoyingly kept at bay, as with many of these legal constructs, they are potentially subject to Machiavellian manipulation; so, I grant no benefit of honorable intent.

Cippolone should be asked that specific question very publicly:  “Was the declassified information withheld under the auspices of first giving it to John Durham for review and use?”  If yes, then that response establishes the framework for public pressure on John Durham to release it; or make a statement that he is not yet ready to do so.

Devin Nunes Reacts to the Clinton Lawyer, Michael Sussmann, Indictment


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 90 Comments

An optimistic Congressman Devin Nunes reacts to latest developments in the Durham probe, the indictment of Perkins Coie and Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann making a false statement to the FBI.  {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:

Have Central Banks Crossed the Line into Tyranny?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis Re-Posted Sep 17, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

With all the conspiracy theories that somehow the bankers are the real culprits in creating excess money supply, there has been an evolution in central banks that has finally crossed the line since 2019. The Federal Reserve was, once upon a time, responsible. The Fed was originally designed as an authority to create money, which was an elastic money supply. That made perfect sense when the Fed was designed in 1913.

Yes, the bankers owned the shares BECAUSE the Fed was actually designed to do what JP Morgan did in herding the bankers together to save the day during the Panic of 1907. Morgan convinced the bankers that if they did not chip in money to bail out the troubled banks, panic would unfold, and ALL the banks would be hit as a contagion. They listened and joined his effort to stem the Panic of 1907. The design of the Fed was to recreate what JP Morgan put together. The shareholders were the bankers because it was a bail-out fund for the bankers, and TAXPAYER money should not be used to bail out the bankers.

Democrat President Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Act, creating the Federal Reserve as well as the income tax. Wilson signed the Revenue Act of 1913, which lowered average tariff rates from 40 percent to 26 percent. It also established a one percent tax on income above $3,000 per year; the tax affected approximately three percent of the population. The Federal Reserve, as designed, was independent, and thus there was the Fed policy v fiscal policy set by Congress.

The elastic money was a brilliant idea where the Fed would buy-in corporate paper to provide lending of the last resort when the bankers could not lend due to the hoarding of cash in a crisis. The corporate paper was typically 90 days. When World War I came, Congress ordered the Fed to buy its paper because they would need to issue a lot of debt. They never returned the Fed to its original design to “stimulate” the economy by directly purchasing corporate paper to prevent companies from laying off employees. Therefore, the structural alteration of the Federal Reserve for World War I transformed the theory of Quantitative Easing into an INDIRECT stimulus rather than DIRECT. When the Fed bought only corporate paper, it directly stimulated the economy. When it was instructed only to buy only government paper, which the government NEVER pays off, any idea of the stimulus was wiped out, for at best, it became INDIRECT.

Then Roosevelt came, and he wanted to control everything. He seized the Federal Reserve and took the power of all the branches, and consolidated it into Washington. Section 203 of the Banking Act of 1935 changed the name of the “Federal Reserve Board” to the “Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.” Roosevelt’s Banking Act of 1935 also made major structural changes increasing the number of members of the Board appointed by the president from six to seven to ensure he now controlled the Fed. He created for himself the authority to designate one of the persons appointed as “chairman” of the Board and one as “vice-chairman” of the Board, each to serve in such role for a term of four years.

As I have explained in “Manipulating the World Economy,” there was a huge confrontation between the Federal Reserve and the White House. The Fed was directed during World War II to maintain par on US government bonds to fund the war. The Fed was ordered to engage in what we call Quantitative Easing. Then the Korean War came, and the Fed rebelled. They refused to continue to engage in Quantitative Easing. The Fed asserted its original independence over politics.

Politics began to creep back in during the Financial Crisis of 1998. The Federal Reserve then stepped in to bail out Long-Term Capital Management in 1998, a failed hedge fund, because if it did not, it would have taken down Goldman Sachs. So instead of allowing that, the Fed bailed out the hedge fund when they really had no authority to do so. That abuse of power led the Fed to then support the bankers who were engaged in manipulating markets to create guaranteed trades. The bankers warned if they failed, then the government would be broke for it was the bankers who bought the new debt and resold it.

Then the Financial Crisis of 2007-2009 took place when the bankers got AIG to guarantee their dodgy mortgage-backed securities. When that all collapsed, the Federal Reserve again bailed out AIG, an insurance company that was operating from London, instead of the US banks. They claimed they did not have the authority to bail out Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, which were competitors of Goldman Sachs and investment banks. But they apparently had the authority to bail out an insurance company in London, which again saved Goldman Sachs. I believe they deliberately let two of the 5 investment banks fail to help Goldman Sachs rise to the top.

Now, the automated clearinghouse (ACH) system is changing to allow direct deposits from non-banks – i.e. Big Tech in repayment for censorship. On December 23, 2019, the Board approved modifications to the Federal Reserve Banks’ National Settlement Service and Fedwire Funds Service to support enhancements to the same-day ACH service preparing for digital currencies. On September 25, 2020, the Board amended the implementation date for certain modifications. They are preparing for a digital currency, but this means two things.

By this Fed expansion, they are planning for the long-term for the elimination of public debt, in which case there will no longer be primary dealer banks, and hence no need to bail out the banks when they blow up on trading, assuming they will still be allowed to trade in the future.

Once the Fed moves to create its own digital currency, it is no longer the independent entity it was once supposed to be. Welcome to the new 21st century of a hybrid central bank, end of primary dealers, and the elimination of government debt. All for your security, so you do not revolt when the government system collapses.

The World Of PC/WOKE


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politically Correct Re-Posted Sep 17, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

Ok, now they are saying we should no longer refer to incidents with sharks as an “attack.” That unfairly demonizes them as killers. Instead, we should refer to such incidents as an “encounter.” So if someone kills another at gunpoint in a robbery, he is not a killer, it was just an encounter. Interesting logic since a shark is not a ruthless killer; it is just hungry. So a thief is not a robber; he is a materially deprived person entitled to what you have because “equality” makes it just.

Slovenia Protests over COVID Passports which are Clearly to Just Control People


Armstrong Economics Blog/Tyranny Re-Posted Sep 16, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

Slovenia: The police used tear gas and cannons to break up a mass demonstration against the vaccination certificate in front of the parliament in Ljubljana. The vaccination certificate has become compulsory in almost all places of daily life, including shopping centers and petrol stations. You cannot buy gas without a COVID Pass. Our sources say that the EU is intending to follow with this directive. They are trying to completely convert Europe into a new Communist State.

This is the total agenda and they are also trying to figure out how to bring this to North America.

One Down, Ohio Republican Who Voted to Impeach President Trump Announces He Will Not Seek Re-Election as Trump-Backed Challenger Positioned to Win


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 17, 2021 | Sundance | 73 Comments

Anthony Gonzalez (OH-16) was one of the ten House republicans (pictured above) who voted to impeach President Trump.  As President Trump announced his support for Gonzalez’s challenger, Max Miller, former House Speaker John Boehner went to Ohio to support Gonzalez.  Apparently the support of Paul Ryan and John Boehner was not enough to help.  Max Miller was in position to primary Gonzalez.

Tonight, Gonzalez conceded his seat:

GOP Redistricting Group Names Chris Christie, Mike Pompeo and Karl Rove to Leadership


Posted originally on the conservation tree house on September 16, 2021 | Sundance | 110 Comments

Just because the buttons on the GOP vending machine say Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite, Fanta and Root Beer, doesn’t mean the machine slots are filled with anything except diet ginger ale.  Cue the audio visual demonstration….

WASHINGTON – […]  The National Republican Redistricting Trust (NRRT), in an announcement shared first with Fox News, said that former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie will serve as national co-chairs of the organization, with longtime GOP strategist Karl Rove joining the group in the role of senior adviser.

NRRT president and executive director Adam Kincaid highlighted that Pompeo and Christie “will be tremendous assets as we raise the resources needed to fight back against the left’s attempts to sue to blue.”

I’m surprised they didn’t throw Frank Luntz into the mix.