Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 20, 2022 | sundance
During an interview with Maria Bartiromo {Direct Rumble Link Here} incoming Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy discusses his outline to become Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Additionally, Leader McCarthy states his intention to disallow Democrats Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell to maintain status on the House intelligence committee, and also remove Democrat Ilhan Omar from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. {Segment Rumble Link} WATCH:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 20, 2022 | sundance
This interview is excellent news as Paul Ryan delivers a full-throated dismissal of Donald Trump and puts himself as the arbiter of “acceptable republicans” moving forward.
This Big Club operation in public is exactly what we need to see happen in order to wage a war against uniformed enemies within the republican party. Keep in mind, as Paul Ryan talks about winning elections he recently campaigned for Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger in their failed 2020 midterm reelection campaigns.
Nothing about this interview where Paul Ryan positions himself against the blue-collar working-class MAGA movement is bad. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and for Paul Ryan to openly proclaim his anti-Donald Trump allegiances, which will soon evolve into open promotion for Ron DeSantis, will only help the awakening as we highlight the Republican Club strategy for 2024. WATCH:
As I have said for years, there was no doubt in my mind that Paul Ryan was positioning himself to lead the “establishment” republican wing of the UniParty. He has now openly and publicly embraced that role. Pretenses are dropping, and that is a glorious thing. However, in reality, Paul Ryan as a candidate for Vice-President in 2012 received less votes in his own state of Wisconsin than candidate Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020.
The ‘America First’ national agenda, both economically and in larger global terms, was not represented in either wing of the UniParty system until Donald Trump came into politics. The economics of the thing, the financial graft that oils the wheels of politics, is the source of all opposition.
On the part where Ryan outlines his view of the current financial situation, I can only laugh in his face.
This is the guy who was Speaker of the House of Representatives when he dispatched regular budgetary order in order to facilitate President Obama’s need for omnibus spending and continuing resolution bills. Obviously, Ryan needs to pretend not to know that, and counting on, as Jonathan Gruber would say, “the stupidity of the American electorate.”
This battle into 2024 is going to be epic and fun.
Ryan named Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott as his three favorites. {source} DeSantis fighting Disney was “really good for him, from a political perspective,” Ryan said.
As the House Speaker, Paul Ryan undercut President Trump at every turn in the first two years of his administration. Ryan’s duplicity included his unwillingness to support Devin Nunes and other House chairman in their subpoena efforts against the bad actors in the intelligence community. Paul Ryan was, in deliberate terms, knowingly and with specific intent protecting the corrupt DC interests.
Yes, it is something he would rather people not remember, but it was Speaker Paul Ryan who blocked republicans in the House from issuing subpoenas in 2017 and 2018 for the election surveillance and FBI lies against President Trump. It is also worth remembering that Paul Ryan’s leadership PAC funded democrat Conner Lamb in the 2018 mid-term election after Ryan announced his intended departure.
Paul Ryan has always been the type of DeceptiCon who could get the CPAC audience to stand and cheer for him only minutes after passing a massive omnibus spending package to support President Obama. Thus, the UniParty maneuvers are always present; including when Ryan said: “I am not going to defend Trump – not now, and not in the future.”
Additionally, former House Speaker Paul Ryan previously held a fundraising event for Liz Cheney (March 2021), and then Paul Ryan announced a failed attempt to fundraise for Illinois Representative Adam Kinzinger.. ..
A week after saying any Democrat who made the 2020 presidential race about “Trump’s personality” will beat him, Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch hired Paul Ryan to serve as a board member for the news organization. This announcement followed on the heels of Fox News hiring the former head of the DNC, Donna “Debate-Gate” Brazile, as a contributor. Yes, it is clear to see the direction and intent of Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch.
[…] 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)
It must also be remembered that in 2013 Fox News worked behind the scenes to facilitate the Senate’s comprehensive immigration reform platform. Additionally, a year later, Murdoch himself advocated for Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio as the preferred candidates in 2016, using Megyn Kelly to achieve their objective.
Yes, it is all one unfortunate, political and ideological continuum.
PRESIDENT TRUMP – “RINO Paul Ryan, who became a lame duck Speaker of the House, lost all vote-getting capability with the people he represented in Wisconsin, and was the single biggest factor, other than Romney himself, for the monumental Romney/Ryan loss in the Presidential race of 2012 (I got more votes by far, 75M, than any sitting president in history!), and he is now speaking to other Republicans telling them how to win elections. Interestingly, I was in the Great State of Wisconsin when they booed him off the podium—I literally had to come to his rescue.
Ryan should instead be telling them how to stop the cheating of elections and that we would have won if Republican leadership fought the way the Democrats did.
It was the day that Ryan went on the board of Fox (Fox will never be the same!) that Fox totally lost its way and became a much different place, with millions of its greatest supporters fleeing for good. Paul Ryan has been a curse to the Republican Party. He has no clue as to what needs to be done for our Country, was a weak and ineffective leader, and spends all of his time fighting Republicans as opposed to Democrats who are destroying our Country.
As a Republican, having Paul Ryan on your side almost guarantees a loss, for both you, the Party, and America itself!” (link)
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 20, 2022 | sundance
If you doubted the intent of the primary function of the appointment for Special Counsel John Smith, you can put that doubt to rest now. Appearing on CBS FtN Democrat Rep Zoe Lofgren confirms the intent of the Garland appointment is to receive evidence from the J6 Committee and utilize that evidence in the targeting operation against Republicans in congress.
Read the carefully worded statements from Lofgren and compare them to the background we previously outlined. Everything is clear. WATCH:
Primary goal, create enough of a legal mess as to obstruct any republican legislative effort against the Biden White House. Additionally, if Smith’s DC team can pick-off a few republican House members under charges of “supporting an insurrection“, the political power will revert back to the Democrats in office.
They didn’t just think this up overnight.
This is why the January 6 committee never ended. They are using J6 as a weapon against their losing the House to republicans. The Democrats are now structurally targeting Republicans with the appointment of Jack Smith. It’s actually a brilliant move. The executive is now investigating the legislative branch; the legal structure of this eliminates the separation of powers issue.
The DOJ is not investigating republicans, they are investigating defined criminals; insurrectionists that are national security threats, that happen to be republicans. See how that works?
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to California Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren. She serves on the Judiciary Committee and the Select Committee investigating January 6. Good morning to you, Congresswoman. I want to get straight to it. Does the refusal of the Vice President and the former president to comply with your investigation in any way impede the impact or outcome?
REP. ZOE LOFGREN: Well, we wish they had come in. Certainly other Presidents have come in when asked by the Congress, including Gerald Ford, Teddy Roosevelt, many others. It is almost Thanksgiving, and the committee turns into a pumpkin at the end of December. So we don’t have time to litigate this. But I think they’ve cheated history. And they should have done otherwise. We, on the other hand, have received substantial information from other sources. And we’re in the process of, as I’m sure you know, writing our report now, and —
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re continuing to gather information, as I understand it, speaking to two Secret Service officials recently. What more do you need? And are you still sharing that information with the Justice Department?
LOFGREN: Well, we’re not sharing information with the Justice Department. We’re doing our own investigation. However, we anticipate when our report is released, to release all of the evidence that we have assembled so the public can see it, including the Department of Justice.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, what do you have? I understand the committee has released documents to the Department of Justice, is that not the case?
LOFGREN: Well, we’re not – we’re no, we’re, we’re, we’re doing our own investigation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
LOFGREN: And within a month, they – the public will have everything that we’ve found, all the evidence. For good or ill. And I think we’ve, as we’ve shown in our hearings, made a compelling presentation, that the former president was at the center of the effort to overturn a duly elected election, assembled the mob, sent it over to Congress to try and interfere with the peaceful transfer of power. It’s pretty shocking.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, as we know, the Justice Department has its own investigation. And that’s what led us to the Attorney General making news just a few days ago with this special counsel to take up the events surrounding January 6. But what does putting this in the hands of a Special Counsel accomplish here? Do you think it actually removes politics? Or does it still just keep it there since the Attorney General will still have oversight of the special counsel?
LOFGREN: Well, I think from what the Attorney General said he sought to depoliticize this investigation. Obviously, career professionals are doing it and to have a special counsel overseeing it. But you know, the right wing never fails, up is down and down is up. The effort to depoliticize they are now criticizing is somehow a political measure. So, you know, the effort to say segregated the investigation from the Attorney General himself, is in the eye of the beholder. And of course, the former president is saying he won’t partake as if you know, it’s a – it’s a slice of pizza. I mean, it’s not up to him. He is being investigated for these offenses, and we’ll see what they find.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You sit on the Judiciary Committee, you just heard Rod Rosenstein say that he thinks the US Attorney in Delaware is sufficient in terms of being able to independently decide on what to do with Hunter Biden and that case. I wonder if you agree with that, or if you think your Republican colleagues are right to ask for a special counsel to deal with the current president’s son?
LOFGREN: Well, I don’t know anything about that case. Certainly, in the case of –
MARGARET BRENNAN: But you do have oversight of the Justice Department?
LOFGREN: Yeah. Yes, but we don’t, you know, I served with Mike Pence on the Judiciary Committee. We don’t oversee and interfere with individual investigations in cases. That would be improper in terms of oversight. You know, if if the president’s son has committed offenses, then, you know, there’ll be a judgment on whether to prosecute or not, and that’s the rule of law. Just as the rule of law applies to the former president, people in this country have to adhere to the law. And, you know, if you don’t, if you commit an offense and the facts are there, then there’ll be a prosecution. And that’s what it’s about living in a country where the rule of law, not just politics, leads us. That’s about our democratic republic.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the issue of what to do with Hunter Biden will come before your committee as the chair – the incoming chair of it has said along with the head of oversight, they want to lead investigations.
LOFGREN: There’s nothing – no role for the legislative body and a prosecution.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood, but are you prepared as Democrats for this knife fight?
LOFGREN: Well, I mean, we’re going to be there and the incoming Judiciary Committee Chair has a history of playing fast and loose with the truth. We’re aware of that. And we will be there as truth-sayers.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We will be watching Congresswoman. Thank you.
The overarching Lawfare framework has been transparently created by President Obama’s former White House Legal Counsel and current U.S. Asst Attorney General Lisa Monaco.
In essence, the J6 investigation – with an emphasis on congress – transfers to Special Counsel Jack Smith:
The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021, as well as any matters that arose or might arise directly from this investigation or that are within the scope of [Special Counsel Regulations 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)]. (pdf)
This is an extension of the January 6th Committee special investigation that transfers the committee’s investigative findings, ie phone records, text messages, transcripts, emails, prior testimony and all evidentiary records, into the newly appointed Special Counsel.
However, all prior and current DOJ prosecutions against citizen individuals will remain within the control and direction of Main Justice. This structure frees up Jack Smith to target the new republican controlled congressional members, their staff, families and/or communication network. Main Justice keeps focus on the citizen insurrectionists, Jack Smith now appointed to go after the public officials.
J6 Committee staff, committee investigators, FBI agents and DOJ lawyers will now transfer from the committee to the special counsel office.
As you can see from the simple (non-pretending) explanation of what is being done, the Lawfare process becomes clear.
Everything a republican congress now begins to question falls under the protective blanket of an “ongoing investigation,” exactly as we predicted. Plus, you get the additional Lawfare elements of congressional leadership under investigation which provides an entirely new ‘conflict of interest dynamic’ to the political equation.
Then you have the congressional representatives under investigation and search warrants on their phones, text messages, emails, etc…. AND the added benefit of using DOJ-NSD defined terms of “national security threat” (that’s why they emphasized insurrection) to gain FISA warrants on an entire incoming congressional delegation.
How slick is that?
All of the congressional J6 and DOJ main justice teams will now assemble in new DC offices to set up the 2023 targeting operation. The announcement was made a few days ago, but the planning of the construct has been in place for months, contingent upon the number of actual House seats that could flip. The Lawfare design is transparent when you stop looking at the obfuscation reporting from mainstream media.
Think of it like the legal ideology of the United Nations (democracy as defined by progressives) prosecuting members of the United States government for acts of rebellion under the framework of a constitutional republican form of government they abhor. That’s Jack Smith.
In addition, the same ideological Lawfare elements will be targeting the threat represented by U.S. nationalist politician Donald J Trump. It’s like The Great Reset crew inserting an operative inside a corrupt and friendly United States Dept of Justice, with the intent to remove the threat Donald J Trump represents to their interests.
On the multinational corporate side, while all this is special counsel stuff is taking place, the Wall Street billionaires and multinationals -those who control the two Big Clubs known as the DNC and RNC- will be providing the illusion of choice for the American electorate.
The pretending is severe as CBS recruits former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to discuss the decision by Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate republicans in congress and President Donald Trump.
You can tell the pretending is severe because neither Rosenstein nor Brennan even touches on the primary aspect to the written instructions by Garland to special counsel John Smith. The primary function of the special counsel is completely avoided in the interview, [again, read the pdf of the appointment]. Instead, the conversation with Rosenstein focuses on the second, lesser included instruction, the Trump-centric portion.
The corporate media engineers, working on concert with the DC agenda, are pulling Rosenstein into the picture to frame the narrative toward an announcement of an indictment against President Trump. WATCH:
In response to the question of the appointment itself, Rosenstein noted he “probably would not” have made the decision to appoint a special counsel. However, don’t get too caught up in the granules of the interview itself. Instead, ask why the media is pulling Rosenstein into the prosecutorial debate? What benefit is there? Within those answers you then overlay the fact the primary function of the appointment itself is not part of the conversation. [Transcript Below]
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We begin this morning with former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. He appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel for the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and to determine if there were links between that country and former President Trump’s campaign. And he joins us in studio. It is good to have you here in an extraordinary week.
FORMER DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN: Good morning. Glad to be here.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to get right to it. Due to the former president launching his campaign, the current president may also run for president, the attorney general said it is absolutely necessary to have a special counsel oversee this investigation into the classified documents found at Mar a Lago and what happened with trying to change the outcome of the 2020 election. If you were in that old role you once had, would you have appointed a special counsel?
ROSENSTEIN: You know, it’s easy to second guess from outside the department. I don’t know exactly what Merrick Garland knows, what information was available to him. He didn’t say that he was required to appoint the special counsel. He said that he thought it was the right thing to do. I believed the circumstances that I faced, that the appointment of Robert Mueller was the right thing to do with regard to the Russia investigation. But I think in this case, Merrick Garland clearly made a discretionary decision. The department had been handling this itself for two years. Could have continued to handle it itself. But he believed that this would help to promote public confidence. I think it remains to be seen whether that’s the case.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you wouldn’t have done this to yourself?
ROSENSTEIN: As I said, it’s it’s easy to second guess from outside. I think, you know, my inclination, given that the investigation had been going on for some time and given the stage which they’ve reached, is that I probably would not have, but I just can’t tell from the outside.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So from where you sit, does the appointment of a special counsel indicate at least a willingness on Merrick Garland part to go ahead with a prosecution, or is that overreading the decision?
ROSENSTEIN: I think what it indicates is that, you know, despite the fact the department has been at this for some time, almost two years on the January six investigation, close to a year, the Mar a Lago investigation, that they still believe that they have a viable potential case. It doesn’t mean they made a decision to go forward. But it certainly is an indication they believe it’s a possibility.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Now, one case that’s been going on longer, the investigation into Hunter Biden, which CBS has learned the FBI has gathered sufficient evidence to charge him with tax and gun related crimes, and that is before the U.S. attorney in Delaware. David Weiss, I believe you know him since he was a Trump appointee. Can he independently oversee this or do we need another special counsel?
ROSENSTEIN: Well, yeah, This investigation, as you said, has been going on for a very long time, which is not good for anybody. You know, it promotes conspiracy theories and suspicions. So my hope is the department will make a decision in the near future about whether to go forward. And hopefully that decision will be accepted by the public. I do believe that the U.S. attorney in Delaware- I know has the right experience to make that decision. So I think we can be confident that he’ll make the right decision in that case.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So not in that case. But let me ask you about the content of what is being scrutinized here with the former president. I know when you were U.S. attorney in Maryland, you dealt with individuals who took classified material, sometimes top secret, high level clearances and kept it at home. And you prosecuted them to the full extent of the law. Why should the president be any different?
ROSENSTEIN: Well, you’re right. We did have a lot of federal agencies in Maryland. And so we had a number of cases that came up during my 12 years as U.S. attorney, both under President Obama and President Bush. And we prosecuted those cases because we believe the facts justified it. Now, if the facts justify prosecution, President Trump, I think the department will make that decision. But we just don’t know from the outside. You know, there are extenuating circumstances when it’s the president, when there are a lot of staffers and lawyers involved. And so I think we have to wait to see how that all shakes out.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Former Attorney General Barr sat with PBS, and this was right before Merrick Garland’s announcement. But he said that to indict the Justice Department needs to show Mr. Trump was consciously involved. Let’s hear what he had to say.
FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL BARR: I personally think that they probably have the basis for legitimately indicting the press. I don’t know. I’m speculating, but but given what’s gone on, I think they probably have the evidence that would check the box. They have the case.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you agree?
ROSENSTEIN: Well, I don’t know. I think the Attorney General Barr, that is, you know, mentioned later in that interview that he was speculating. And I think it’s you know, there are multiple levels of issues that the department needs to consider, Margaret. Number one is, you know, is the evidence sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction? Number two, is, is it an appropriate use of federal resources to bring that case and a case against a former president, obviously, with the extraordinary would raise unique concerns. And so I would hope that Merrick Garland and his team would be very careful about scrutinizing that evidence, not just checking the box, but making sure that they’re prepared to stand behind the decision that they make.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So when you say sustain a conviction, what do you mean by that? Does that mean looking at the courts that are likely to prosecute me, where would you prosecute this case, Florida or Washington, D.C.?
ROSENSTEIN: Well, it means ensuring that, number one, you get past a jury that has been able to persuade 12 random citizens that your case proves the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. And number two, that it will be sustained or upheld on appeal. You know, the department sometimes brings cases in which they use novel theories that prevail in district court but are overruled on appeal if they’re to bring a case against the former president, you want to make sure they had a solid case and they were confident both of conviction and of prevailing on any appeal.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And that there wouldn’t be some national security implication such as political violence?
ROSENSTEIN: Well, you know, that’s and that’s a difficult issue, Margaret, as to whether or not the attorney general should consider the the potential for public unrest if they were to bring a case against the president,
MARGARET BRENNAN: It has to be considered.
ROSENSTEIN: I think it highlights the importance of the department ensuring that they have a solid case that is that they’re going to win a conviction and they’re going to be able to sustain an appeal. The circumstances, the stakes are higher than an ordinary case. You need to make sure if you bring that case that you can persuade people that is meritorious that you deserve to win.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, that gets at the fundamentals, the distrust of institution where we are these days. But the former president is already said he’s not going to comply with any investigations. He said that on Friday. So what does this mean for the timeline? Are we running right into the 2024 presidential campaign?
ROSENSTEIN: I’m concerned about about the timing. Obviously, the the new special counsel, Jack Smith, needs to get up to speed in the case. He’s not even in the U.S. so he needs to come back and get engaged and supervise his team. He may need to bring in additional team members, people he trusts to review the circumstances. And then there are other potential delays as well. You know, one of the downsides of appointing a special counsel is the possibility of litigation over the validity of the appointment of the special counsel. And that has always been upheld by the courts. But litigation can impose additional delay. So I think there’s a fair chance that this is going to drag in well into the campaign season.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And then the question of whether the candidate wins or not. Rod Rosenstein, thank you for your insight and for joining us today.
QUESTION: Marty, It was a fantastic WEC. You tied it all together brilliantly and how the real issue is this liquidity crisis. Suddenly the ECB came out and said that inflation will not subside given a recession. It appears they were watching the WEC. Do you think that the ECB is at least listening now?
NG
ANSWER: For Christine Lagarde to publicly state that a “mild recession” will not reduce inflation is admitting that inflation has been instigated by COVID lockdowns that disrupted the supply chain and unleashed shortages. The Bank of England has come out and stated that we will see the longest recession in 100 years.
The ECB has just forced banks to repay their loans withdrawing $300 billion euros from the banking system in a desperate effort to stop inflation. This will not help for Legarde knows that even an economic recession will not prevent this type of inflation that is more akin to the STAGFLATION of the ’70s where costs rose thanks to the OPEC crisis and where we have the COVID Crisis that created shortages mixed with the climate change zealots determined to end fossil fuels despite the fact there are no alternatives. How do you even make steel without coal?
Everything is now unfolding on schedule. We are facing 2023 which will be known as the year of chaos.
Dick Armey is the former House Majority Leader and an Economist from Texas. He was elected to Congress in 1984,and arrived in Washington as a novice. Dick, being an economist, was a strong believer in the policies of Ronald Reagan. He was a staunch supporter of his policies, which were revolutionary for Washington. Because of his background, Dick quickly rose through the ranks of his party in Washington and became the primary author of the “Contract with America.” That was actually a collection of ten bills that would be brought up for a vote during the first 100 days of a Republican-controlled Congress.
Bill Archer served as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1970 to 2001. Bill was a lawyer and originally a Democrat who saw the light of failed Marxism and switched to the Republican Party in 1969. He later on represented Texas in the House of Representatives for 30 years, from 1971 until 2001. Bill’s last six years was as chairman of the most powerful committee, the House Ways and Means Committee.
Dick was for the Flat Tax and Bill was for the Retail Sales Tax. I found myself trying to negotiate between the two and that was the end of my effort to try to contribute in Washington and ended my naivety. I was sitting in Dick’s office and he said to me, “Marty, you know cycles.” He explained that he could not support Bill because without repealing the 16th Amendment that created the income tax, “when the Democrats get back in, we will have both.”
It was at that moment that I realized my effort was hopeless. I said: “Dick, you are right.”
An amendment to the Constitution may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose.
There is no way the Democrats were being honest. They knew they could NEVER create a Constitutional Amendment on abortion, gay marriage, or repealing the Income Tax. Such amendments are impossible for even getting passed in the House and Senate, they still must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.
Perhaps all the women who voted Democrat solely because of the lies they told about abortion will wake up and realize in politics, all is fair as in war. It NEVER has anything to do with truth.
I can run for office and promise whatever is fashionable to win. However, when you get to Washington, you are given a little greeting ceremony and then you are told that means nothing. You will be instructed what to vote for and that is why you see all these votes down party line. You NO LONGER vote for any politicians individually, you vote for the party and people in the backroom determine what will be the vote – the unelected bureaucrats.
So the Democrats outright lied to win. They could NEVER get abortion as a constitutional right – total BS just as repealing the 16th Amendment to end income taxes. We do not live in a Democracy for We the People have no direct right to vote on anything.
We live in a Republic which is becoming an Authoritarian Regime abandoning the foundation of civilization turning one group against another until the whole thing comes crashing down, Civilization exists ONLY when everyone benefits – not what we have today rising hatred and political arguments pitting man against his brother until mankind exists no more.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 18, 2022 | Sundance
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) recently questioned FBI Director Chris Wray about the nature of how the FBI is receiving or retrieving surveillance information on domestic U.S. citizens, through the use of social media and electronic data collection. {Direct Rumble Link}
At the core of the issue is a system created in the last 14 years where private social media companies and the intelligence apparatus, to include the FBI, have formed partnerships in the larger surveillance network. The fact that FBI Director Chris Wray cannot and will not answer specific questions about the issues, only exemplifies the nature of the issue as it relates to unconstitutional violations of privacy.
There is ample & overwhelming evidence, much of it open-sourced, highlighting how federal law enforcement and social media companies are working together to assemble, filter and investigate data based on a collaborative agreement. Legal protections for privacy are being destroyed in this assembly of constructs. WATCH:
Paul: “Are you purchasing what is said to be anonymous data through the marketplace and then piercing the anonymous nature to attach individual names to that data?“
Wray: “I think it’s a more complicated answer than I could give here.”
In the era shortly after 9/11 the DC national security apparatus, instructed by Vice President Dick Cheney, was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.
After 9/11/01 the electronic surveillance system that was originally created to monitor threats from abroad was retooled to monitor threats inside our country. That is when all of our electronic ‘metadata’ came under federal surveillance.
That inflection point, and the process that followed, was exactly what Edward Snowden tried to point out.
What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their political opposition became the target of this new national security system.
The problems we face now as a country are directly an outcome of two very distinct points that were merged by Barack Obama. (1) The post 9/11 monitoring of electronic communication of American citizens; and (2) Obama’s team creating a fine-tuning knob that it focused on the politics of the targets.
The modern Fourth Branch of Government is only possible because of a Public-Private partnership with the intelligence apparatus. You do not have to take my word for it, the partnership is so brazened they have made public admissions.
The biggest names in Big Tech announced in June their partnership with the Five Eyes intelligence network, ultimately controlled by the NSA, to: (1) monitor all activity in their platforms; (2) identify extremist content; (3) look for expressions of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE); and then, (4) put the content details into a database where the Five Eyes intelligence agencies (U.K., U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand) can access it.
Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft are all partnering with the intelligence apparatus. It might be difficult to fathom how openly they admit this, but they do. Look at this sentence in the press release (emphasis mine):
[…] “The Group will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.”
Think about that sentence structure very carefully. They are “adding to” the preexisting list…. admitting the group (aka Big Tech) already have access to the the intelligence-sharing database… and also admitting there is a preexisting list created by the Five Eyes consortium.
Obviously, who and what is defined as “extremist content” will be determined by the Big Tech insiders themselves. This provides a gateway, another plausible deniability aspect, to cover the Intelligence Branch from any oversight.
When the Intelligence Branch within government wants to conduct surveillance and monitor American citizens, they run up against problems due to the Constitution of the United States. They get around those legal limitations by sub-contracting the intelligence gathering, the actual data mining, and allowing outside parties (contractors) to have access to the central database.
The government cannot conduct electronic searches (4th amendment issue) without a warrant; however, private individuals can search and report back as long as they have access. What is being admitted is exactly that preexisting partnership. The difference is that Big Tech will flag the content from within their platforms, and now a secondary database filled with the extracted information will be provided openly for the Intelligence Branch to exploit.
The volume of metadata captured by the NSA has always been a problem because of the filters needed to make the targeting useful. There is a lot of noise in collecting all data that makes the parts you really want to identify more difficult to capture. This new admission puts a new massive filtration system in the metadata that circumvents any privacy protections for individuals.
Previously, the Intelligence Branch worked around the constitutional and unlawful search issue by using resources that were not in the United States. A domestic U.S. agency, working on behalf of the U.S. government, cannot listen on your calls without a warrant. However, if the U.S. agency sub-contracts to say a Canadian group, or foreign ally, the privacy invasion is no longer legally restricted by U.S. law.
What was announced in June 2021 is an alarming admission of a prior relationship along with open intent to define their domestic political opposition as extremists.
July 26 (Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.
Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes, adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.
The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove it. (read more)
The influence of the Intelligence Branch now reaches into our lives, our personal lives.
In the decades before 9/11/01 the intelligence apparatus intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize against domestic enemies.
After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after 9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence apparatus being granted a massive amount of power. Simultaneously the mission of the intelligence community now encompassed monitoring domestic threats as defined by the people who operate the surveillance system.
The problem with assembled power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own malicious benefit. That is exactly what the network of President Barack Obama did.
The Obama network took pre-assembled intelligence weapons (we should never have allowed to be created) and turned those weapons into political tools for his radical and fundamental change. The target was the essential fabric of our nation.
Ultimately, this corrupt political process gave power to create the Fourth Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. From that perspective the fundamental change was successful.
This is the scale of corrupt political compromise on both sides of the DC dynamic that we are up against. Preserving this system is also what removing Donald Trump is all about…. The targeting of President Trump in order to preserve the system, the system that was weaponized during the Obama administration, is what the actions of the DOJ and FBI were all about.
What would powerful people in DC do to stop the American people from finding this out?
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 18, 2022 | Sundance
It might, heck, -check that- it does seem overwhelming at times. But that is the nature of this collectivist strategy. That is the purpose of this bombardment. We must hold strong and push back against the lies and manipulations. If you look closely at the attack, it is weak and much of it is psychological bait. Do not fall into the trap of despair.
When I share the message “live your best life”, it is not without purpose. Every moment that we allow the onslaught to deter us from living our dreams, is a moment those who oppose our nation view as us taking a knee. Do not allow this effort to succeed. You might ask yourself how I can, one person, a flea looking into a furnace, retain an optimistic disposition while all around me seems chaotic and mad.
Simple answer, it’s your choice. Two wolves fight – one filled with despondency, isolation, despair and dark imaginings; the other filled with faith, something bigger, unrelenting hope, focus and driven to remain connected. Which wolf will win? The one you feed.
Shake it off. “Get up, get back on your feet, you are the one they can’t beat, and you know it.” WATCH:
The point? It ‘seems’ chaotic and mad because it has been created to appear that way. There are more of us than them; they just control the systems that allow us to connect, share messages and recognize the scale of our assembly.
And here we are… divided by a network of seemingly intoxicating systems; many purposefully driven by the modern dynamic of social media, steering a tribal outcome we are only now just beginning to fathom.
Ultimately the collective weight of progressive leftism is putting us is isolation. There are many historic references to this disconcerting sentiment to review with hindsight. However, ultimately the feeling of isolation first begins with a rejection of God. Defeat it by embracing Him.
In/around July 2020 it was obvious in my travels we were on the precipice of a disconnect from human interaction that would numb our psyche to what ultimately matters, fellowship.
Not only are various governmental agencies forcing the separation of people from their community networks, we were also seeing faith-based organizations, churches, buying into the fear.
Even in areas where churches were not forcibly shut down, we saw a structural shift where some faith leaders were willingly ostracizing their community under the guise of various medical, social and cultural alarms.
This is not good…. not good at all.
Fellowship is the essential ingredient to a purposeful life. How and why we interact with each-other is how and why we recharge our core humanity.
To see faith leaders willing to separate from the function of fellowship was alarming. However, as individuals we must not allow this foreboding sense to become the normal expectation.
Our nation needs more people like you, right now. Don’t wait… engage life, get optimistic however you need to do it. Then let that part of you shine right now… This is how we fight. Hold up that flag; give the starter smile… rally to the standard you create and spread fellowship again.
Throughout history large armies have been defeated through the process of division. It is not a leap to see the same strategic objectives being deployed against social assemblies including congregations. It is puzzling how many in leadership cannot see the danger in social and spiritual distance when the bond of fellowship is needed more than ever.
Each of us has a different connection to our community. Each of us has a different level of internal strength… such is the nature of living. However, the distance between people is manifestly not a good outcome when combined with the lack of food for the soul.
The influence of social media is already troublesome, physically distancing from human engagement only worsens the impact. There is no digital replacement for the true fellowship of humanity on a personal level.
Ultimately it is the currency of human connection that is the true value in our lives.
We have each felt how our positive influence upon the lives of others nourishes our own sense of purpose and fulfillment… Do not lose that. Do not think you can compensate for that through other arbitrary measures; you cannot.
With local, state and federal leaders moving increasingly toward self-interest; with disconnected workplaces creating social distance; with faith-based leaders unfocused on the value of fellowship; and now government entering your home to tell you the importance of separating yourself from your family we must dispatch these arbitrary decrees very deliberately.
Perhaps we are in this position today because we didn’t sit still enough and contemplate the real priorities in our lives. Fellowship is the essential ingredient to a purposeful life.
I will not divide my humanity, nor concede my core view of fellowship, simply to comply with the demand of another that I consider my brother or sister of greater or less value than myself. Any system that seeks to steer my path will not benefit from my participation. I choose freedom!
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 