Posted originally on the conservative tree house July 17, 2022 | Sundance
The families of the Uvalde Robb Elementary school shooting victims met privately Sunday with a Texas House committee who released an interim report on the events that took place. [Link to 77-Page Report Here] Following that private meeting the committee held a press conference where they spoke about the report and took questions.
The committee, led by State Rep. Dustin Burrows, shared what they learned as they looked into the school shooting. “If there’s only one thing that I can tell you is there were multiple systemic failures. I would invite everyone to read the entire report,” Burrows said at the press conference. “You cannot cherry-pick one sentence and use it to say everything without reading and without context. But if we need a simple phrase to describe what the report says, again I would tell you multiple systemic failures.” WATCH:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 17, 2022 | Sundance
Jason Furman is the former Chairman of the National Economic Council under Barack Obama; he is currently a professor at Harvard teaching economics. If you ever wondered why the economy under Obama included the weakest economic recovery in history, the advice of Furman might explain it.
In an interview with CBS this morning, Jason Furman says the best way to get inflation under control is to raise taxes and stop people from spending money. This approach will impact the demand side of the economy and as a result, with no one purchasing stuff, it will lower prices. Seriously, no joke, he said this. WATCH:
Jason Furm: …”Congress should be trying to do their part and helping out if they can cut the deficit, including raising taxes on high income households, that would reduce a bit of spending in the economy, it would cool the economy down a little bit, and actually take some pressure off the Fed.”…
Create a deeper recession to control inflation, brilliant!
Like I have been pointing out for months, these ideologues believe inflation is being driven by the demand side, by consumers purchasing too much. They pretend not to know it is the supply-side issue of energy policy that is driving the CORE inflation they seek to reduce.
.
Harvard Economics Professor Jason Furman reminds me of this:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 17, 2022 | Sundance
On May 31st, Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL) made an explosive announcement as an outcome of a whistleblower providing information to him and Jim Jordan. The claim was the FBI held a collaborative relationship with the Clinton/DNC law firm Perkins Coie. {Go Deep} Specifically, the explosive element surrounded the FBI having a workspace within the DNC law firm that would give Democrats an open portal into FBI databases for political opposition research.
Additionally, formerly indicted Clinton campaign lawyer, Michael Sussmann, was reportedly in charge of this arrangement within Perkins Coie for the past year. Obviously, the potential ramifications from this joint collaboration are vast. However, have you noticed that not a single media outlet has followed up on the claim?
Generally, in Washington DC when the media ignores an issue, especially a major issue with large consequences; and doesn’t even attempt to snarkily debunk an explosive claim or belittle the person bringing the information; it’s usually because the claim itself has merit and the DC defenders do not want to give it any fuel for further discussion or awareness. {Direct Rumble Link}
So, what happened?
Essentially, what is being claimed is that a portal exists into FBI databases within the law firm that represents democrats. This means access to FBI database searches exists inside the office of the DNC and Clinton legal group. Think about the ramifications here.
If the whistleblower claim is accurate, the FBI can exploit the NSA database to conduct searches of all cell phone, computer, email, text message, social media, electronic communication and all private data/communication belonging to Americans; this would include geolocation. If the FBI was operating within Perkins Coie since 2012, then the democrats have held access to fully intrusive electronic surveillance of their political opposition, or anyone else – anywhere, for a decade.
The FBI and DNC law firm working collaboratively on issues of joint importance goes far beyond the ‘image of impropriety or conflicted interest‘ and extends to the actual corruption within the foundational institutions of government.
Transparently, if these reports are accurate all of the inexplicable dynamics within the “two tiers of justice” suddenly reconcile. The FBI and Perkins Coie having the ability to conduct electronic surveillance of any target is a major level of sunlight, that would reconcile years of visible issues.
Where is the follow-up?
CTH has long claimed there was some kind of direct portal link between the Clinton campaign team and the FBI databases. There were too many trails of extracted non-minimized research evidence in the hands of the Clinton team that CTH could not trace to a transferring FBI official. If Perkins Coie operated a portal in their office that allowed them to conduct search queries of American citizens, then everything would make sense. That access portal is exactly what is being claimed and admitted in this report.
The start date of 2012 is important for several reasons, not the least of which is FISA presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer criticizing the scale and scope of unlawful FBI database access going back to exactly 2012. Keep in mind a FISA-702 search, is simply an unlawful FBI warrantless electronic search of an American (“702” represents the American citizen) into the central database -maintained by the NSA- that contains all electronic data and communication.
I have been in the deep hole of the FISA-702 database search query violations for so long I don’t even need a flashlight.
The report from Matt Gaetz about Perkins Coie access to FBI databases, is in direct alignment with Rosemary Collyer’s prior report on FBI abuses of the database, 702 violations. Notice the dates and scope Judge Collyer references [Source Link].
Non-compliant queries since 2012.
85% of the FBI and contractor searches are unlawful.
Many of those searches involved the use of the “same identifiers over different data ranges.” Put in plain terms, the same people were continually being tracked, searched and surveilled by querying the FBI database over time.
The non-compliant searches go back to 2012. The same date mentioned for the FBI portal to begin operating inside the Perkins Coie office.
This specific footnote is a key. Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.
Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.
♦Summary: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) system. The database was repeatedly used by persons with contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.
The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation. When the DOJ use of the IRS for political information on their opposition became problematic, the Obama administration needed another tool. It was in 2012 when they switched to using the FBI databases for targeted search queries.
This information from Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz had the potential to be extremely explosive. However, the absence of any follow-up reporting, or even debunking from the traditional guardians of the DC swamp is weird. What’s going on?
I wrote about these suspicions in depth throughout 2017, 2018 and eventually summarized in 2019:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 17, 2022 | Sundance
CBS pretentious pretender Margaret Brennan interviews Joe Biden’s Energy Security Coordinator Amos Hochstein about the trip to the Gulf Arab States and subsequent energy policy developments. [CBS Transcript Here] Hochstein spins the non-existing benefits of the trip by attributing the pre-existing Saudi cease-fire in Yemen as an outcome of Biden talking to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Quite a stretch.
Hochstein still thinks there is going to be a way for ‘western governments‘ to place price caps on Russian oil exports by getting the entire planet to agree only to pay Russia a set price for oil. With Russia an OPEC+ member, and the members of OPEC not in ideological alignment with the Biden administration on a host of geopolitical issues, good luck with that. The producers (OPEC) have control over what prices the consumers (Non OPEC) pay; they are not going to give up that mechanism just to please the Biden administration.
On the domestic front, while there is little possibility of a global oil production increase from OPEC, Hochstein claims to have assurances from U.S. oil producers they will increase their production capacity by November. At the same time the institutions in charge of Biden energy policy are going to keep targeting the oil producers to destroy them. Quite a weird dynamic. Hochstein finishes by saying solar and windmills are the future of U.S. energy production and if we invest more, well, we can save the planet. WATCH:
It is worth remembering what MbS said about the meeting: “We agree on many things, but we differ on a few others. Every country has its own culture and circumstances. I respect yours, you respect mine. Do not impose your culture on us. Do not impose your beliefs on us.” … “We agree we need to do more for climate change, but you guys are doing it wrong by favoring certain energy sources over others. The world needs energy security. We need all energy sources including oil & gas. We are doing our part on both fronts: climate change & energy security.” … “The stage of a country’s economic & social development must be considered in climate change negotiations.” … “We are increasing our production capacity to 13 million barrels per day (from 12 mb/d), but that is it. We cannot do more.”
The message here is: You guys do your part and invest more if you want to avoid energy crises, recessions and unemployment. Do NOT blame us!
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face The Nation. As President Biden met with Middle Eastern leaders last week, he was accompanied by Amos Hochstein, the Special Presidential Coordinator for International Energy Affairs. He’s with us now. Mr. Hochstein, Welcome to Face The Nation. Good to have you here in person.
PRESIDENTIAL COORDINATOR ON ENERGY SECURITY AMOS HOCHSTEIN: It’s great to be in person. Thank you.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you were one of the few US officials in the room when President Biden met with Saudi leaders. Why was this trip worth the political risk? What did you get?
HOCHSTEIN: Well, I think this was a historic trip. First, it started just landing in Saudi Arabia in Jeddah, as the first-ever flight from for a president to fly from Israel, directly to Saudi Arabia, with the backdrop of Saudi Arabia, opening the announcing that they’re opening the skies for the first time for Israeli Aircraft, for all aircraft, including flights to and from Israel over its airspace, comes on the backdrop of a major achievement over the last few months of a ceasefire in Yemen, where 1000s of people have been killed. Over the last seven years, this has been the longest ceasefire we’ve had with a commitment from Saudi Arabia to work to extend the ceasefire even further; major announcements for food security and achieving contributions from the GCC from the Gulf countries on food security.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But none on oil, yet.
HOCHSTEIN: Well, we had a major announcement on cooperation on energy writ large. And if you recall, just before the President announced his trip just a few days before that OPEC+ made a- a major shift and its policies, recognizing that since Putin started amassing forces, the markets have been affected, and that there was a supply-demand issue and announced increases in supply over 50% for July and August. And I’m, based on what we heard, on the trip, I’m pretty confident that we’ll see a few more steps in the coming weeks.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So OPEC+ meets August 3. Saudi has some, very little spare capacity. So are you saying you got a wink and a nod that they’re going to pump more?
HOCHSTEIN: I think what we discussed, first of all, it’s not just about Saudi, it’s about we met with with the GCC and with Saudi Arabia. There is, I’m not going to go into how much spare capacity there is in Saudi Arabia and in UAE and Kuwait, etc. But there is additional spare capacity, there is room for increased production. As we’ve told producers in the United States, we’ve had conversations over the last several months and weeks, with OPEC. And I believe that there is still more room to-to see additional steps.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Saudi says it’s got like a million spare barrel capacity.
HOCHSTEIN: Again, it’s not just about Saudi, this is OPEC. So, there are other countries as well. So, we needed to see a little bit more. But let’s-let’s look at what has happened since the President announced his trip. Oil prices at that point were at about $120. Today, oil prices are around $100, $101. So that’s a $20 decline based on the steps–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –some of that economic concerns, though China, looking like it’s slowing and concerns here about consumption going down.
HOCHSTEIN: So there’s no doubt there’s never one reason why oil prices go up while goes down. As you know, in oil prices go up, they tend to say there’s only one reason; that’s the part of the political leadership. But if you think about it this way, over the last few months, the President has supplied the US market with a million barrels a day, which is a historic level from the strategic reserve. We’ve never done that before.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And that, what, ends in September?
HOCHSTEIN: No that-that will end towards the end of the year.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Will it end towards the end of the year? Can you afford to stop putting emergency supply on the market?
HOCHSTEIN: Well, look at what has happened. The private sector, as we talked to them, the United States said they can increase production in the United States by about a million barrels a day. But it’s going to take time to invest in it, it will come at the end of the year. So we stepped in, the president stepped in and said ‘I’ll fill that gap.’ So hopefully, my expectation is that the private sector in the US will have those increases coming, so we don’t need to have the emergency from the US government. In the meantime, we’ve seen the prices, both the oil price, but also the price of the pump has come down at the fastest rate that we have seen in over a decade. So, from over $5. And remember this just a few weeks ago–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –still pretty high, but it’s still pretty high. It may have come down a bit.
HOCHSTEIN It’s not $5 anymore, it’s now $4.55. And I expect it to come down more towards $4. And we already have many gas stations around the country that are below $4. So we’re this is the fastest decline rate that we’ve seen against a major increase in oil prices during a war in Europe, where one of the parties in the war is the third largest producer in the world. So these are extraordinary circumstances we’ve taken very tough measures to address them right away, both for the American consumer but really for global economy, too.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we’ll watch to see if those gas prices continue to fall. I want to ask you about what the administration is pushing around the world which is this concept of putting a cap on the price of Russian oil that is sold, so that it’s not cutting back on the amount but rather the windfall profits Putin can profit off of it. What’s to stop Vladimir Putin from just saying, fine, I’m just going to stop pumping.
HOCHSTEIN: Well, I think that the wait, look the price cap is–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Does that ruin your plan, if he does that?
HOCHSTEIN: Well, first, he could do that tomorrow, regardless of what we do on a price gap. You know, Putin has been an unreliable supplier, unfortunately. But I think what we’re doing is we’re designing the mechanisms so that he can still, he’d still would have revenues he needs those revenues to, that’s the only revenues he really has in his country. There’s nothing else in Russia except for oil and gas.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, JP Morgan says he’s got enough cash that he’s sitting on, that he could cut by 5 million barrels in that extreme example, that the price of oil would go up to over $300 a barrel, almost $400 dollars a barrel.
HOCHSTEIN: Well, what we want to be able to do is to mitigate where the price of oil on the world market doesn’t actually impact Russia at all, because we’re going to put a price cap, so that all they have is to get that price at no more than that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
HOCHSTEIN: We believe that that is the way to do it. So if prices go up, he still won’t get that price and we can reduce that price.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Why would India or China comply?
Well, first, at the G7, a couple of weeks ago, the G7 endorsed this idea as a good idea. We’re now starting to have the conversations with the major consumers. And I would ask the question the other way around, doesn’t every buyer try to get a lower price? So, I think every buyer is incentivized to pay less. And I’ll go a step further. Right now, regardless of what you see as the global oil price. That’s not what Putin’s getting. So these headlines about Putin getting some kind of a math between how much is he selling times the price of oil in the world, that’s not his revenue, because he’s already agreed to major discounts–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –He’s still taking in money and he’s still funding this war. So–
HOCHSTEIN: That’s what we’re trying to stop.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. But in the meantime, I want to ask you quickly about the president’s climate change efforts, this bill, and his proposal is completely stalled right now. The president says he’s going to take executive action, what is the plan? What are you going to actually do here in the United States?
HOCHSTEIN: Well, I think we’ve tried to get a plan where we can incentivize, great incentives for US investors–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –But you can’t block new oil and gas drilling, right? You can’t do some of those things, because they would counter your efforts.
HOCHSTEIN: Well, I think what we want to do in this in this bill that we’ve proposed, and we are hopeful that we still hope that that’s what Congress does, is to give it the kind of incentive assurances that we can have additional American investment in climate, renewable energy electric vehicles. Why wouldn’t we want to do that? Why would we want to make-to create an environment in which China is ahead of us? The rest of the world is making the investments and we’re not. We want to be able to put the kind of incentives that will be additional investment in the infrastructure for renewable energy, for solar, for wind, and for electric vehicles and for our nuclear fleet in this country. That’s how we get to climate. We didn’t get that today. The President is determined to take some action that he can through executive orders, and through other actions. We’ll see what we can do this weekend in the coming weeks. But again, I think that the responsibility here is to be able to invest into our future, whether we like it or not this those-some don’t like it. This is the future of energy markets in the United States and around the world. We got to decide do we want the US to lead, or do we want the Chinese to lead this?
MARGARET BRENNAN: You got to convince Senator Joe Manchin, we’ll be talking about that ahead in the segment, thank you very much for coming in. [LINK]
…”And then he said, Texas has no wind for the windmills. Yes, Texas!”
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 17, 2022 | Sundance
The January 6th Committee in Washington DC has a much bigger bipartisan motive than most Americans understand. The elimination of Donald John Trump from the political landscape is an exercise in protecting a surveillance state from the threat that Trump represents.
That said, I’m not sure that even Donald Trump himself realizes and/or appreciates the scale of threat he is considered to a system created in the aftermath of 9/11/01. However, consider this a precursor to the next post on this website that will hopefully show exactly what the scale of the problem is.
Wyoming congressional representative Liz Cheney gets a lot of attention for her opposition to Trump; but what most people do not yet fully grasp is the direct and consequential nature of her opposition. Liz Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, has a vested interest in removing the threat of Trump because the real issue comes back to what her father created in the aftermath of 9/11, the domestic political surveillance state.
There are two defensive operations currently underway in Washington DC to protect the biggest issue that few people talk about. The first is the objective of Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, the former Obama White House senior national security advisor and legal liaison from the executive branch. The second objective is the J6 committee trying to stop Donald Trump from ever holding political office again.
Lisa Monaco is in place to protect the former Obama White House from legal and/or political responsibility in their weaponizing of domestic law enforcement operations inside the U.S. Dept of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation. Monaco’s undiscussed job is to target any entity who might reveal what Obama did, and what systems currently exist.
When you understand what Monaco is responsible for doing, you also understand why the National School Boards Association wrote a letter to the DOJ asking Attorney General Merrick Garland to use his influence and control over the FBI to target parents who attended School Board meetings in opposition to the agenda of the progressive left.
Alot has been written about that requested targeting operation, yet few people have wondered what mechanisms are known to the NSBA that would facilitate their request to the Dept of Justice. In the bigger picture, the request from the NSBA was a request to deploy tools that only exist thanks to the bipartisan work of Dick Cheney and Barack Obama.
There is a currently ongoing national surveillance system that monitors you, me and everyone else that Washington DC might consider a threat. It is within this system that you find the real issue and motive for why Democrats and Republicans would be united in their effort to remove Donald Trump as a perceived threat.
Many people have written about the political goals of the January 6th committee, yet few people really grasp what DC is trying to hide and protect from the American people.
It is only when you fully understand their motives that you can fully appreciate the scale of what they will do to keep the system in place. A national surveillance system that was created by Dick Cheney and then later refined by Barack Obama.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 16, 2022 | Sundance
Joe Biden is heading back from an embarrassing trip to Saudi Arabia and the middle east. Putting aside the fact that physically and mentally Biden looked weak, foolish, and generally incoherent, in an odd way he was appropriately representative of the current of U.S. influence on the global stage.
Before getting to detail, first it is important to emphasize a point that doesn’t get attention domestically. Democrats are exceptionally weak on all aspects of foreign policy, specifically because their modern ideology is based on hypocrisy of a stunning magnitude.
Domestically, the U.S. media protect democrats by spinning everything into the best light possible.
However, on the world stage the non-western leaders like Putin, Xi and MbS use that hypocrisy like geopolitical ammunition.
Examples… Domestically the U.S. media do not bring up the Joe Biden Afghanistan mess, the rise -and current legitimacy- of the terrorist Taliban; or the brutal mess Barack and Hillary created in Libya; or the unauthorized intervention into Syria that created ISIS; or the complete fubar that was an illegitimate invasion of Iraq; or Hillary’s insufferable “reset” in Russia; or their inability to deal with China’s proxy province of North Korea, because they pretend it’s not; or the current circus célebrè in Ukraine.
Each region, and there are many more, a typical example of how modern democrats are fundamentally weak on foreign policy. It is not just Joe Biden either; just about every leftist head of state within the alliance of “western democracies” are also pathetically impotent when it comes to influence on a global stage.
The U.K’s Boris Johnson, Canada’s Justin Trudeau, New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern and France’s Emmanuel Macron are collectively as pathetic as Biden when it comes to leadership and influence. Once they step out of their ‘liberal democracy‘ bubble, and head into a nation that doesn’t have state run media like CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, Politico and/or The New York Times, those leaders look like the pathetic fools they are.
Biden and the rest of the leftist heads of state decry “autocracy,” and wax philosophically about “western democratic values”, while standing atop two years of their authoritarian pandemic rules, regulations, mandates and unilateral fiats. Consider their chase for their beloved climate change energy policy and contrast it against their political pearl-clutching over the energy inflation they created.
Is it any surprise that Mexico’s President Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador want’s nothing to do with the other two knuckleheaded leaders of North America who are selling windmills while regulating traditional oil, coal and natural gas out of existence? At a certain point, a good neighbor has to look at the duct-taped landscaping and say this is ridiculous. I digress.
The point is that the so called “western values” are nothing more than high-minded think tank talking points. Nowhere in actual policy do you find western values exhibited in real world action. Biden wants to confront Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), or Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping over possible human rights abuses, while the same Joe Biden is locking up his political opposition under the justification of an insurrection? Wait, what?
Yeah, so we started a civil war in Libya and thousands of people are dying in the aftermath. So what? Biden is here to talk about the Khashoggi splinter your eye, not the Abu Ghraib plank in his. And, oh yeah, don’t you dare talk about Biden shutting down pipelines and his beloved Green New Deal, just give the U.S. more oil damn you, or something.
I remember well in 2016 when the U.S. media were saying Hillary Clinton was going to mop the floor with Donald Trump at a foreign policy debate. All Trump had to do was point out the stupid Clinton state dept hypocrisies and it looked like he just threw a bucket of water on the wicked witch. Hillary melted, and it was hilarious.
Fast forward four years later and another foreign policy matchup was scheduled between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. Do you remember what happened? If not, it wouldn’t be surprising, because THEY CANCELLED THE DEBATE. Why? …
…. Because Trump the peacemaker had just introduced the Abraham Accords. There was actual peace finally in the Middle east. The U.S. embassy in Israel was built in Jerusalem, without violence. The U.S. under Trump had a peaceful relationship and mutual understanding with North Korea and Kim Jong Un. North and South Korea were talking about reunification. ISIS was destroyed; there was no longer any issue with Syria, and Turkish PM Erdogan was both accountable and on a leash. There was no conflict with Russia; no expansion of NATO and every NATO country finally paying for their own defense. Yeah, go figure, THEY CANCELLED THE DEBATE.
Donald Trump had the upper hand in all of his foreign policy engagements, because Trump foreign policy was not inherently based on hypocrisy.
Joe Biden, not so much…
From MbS as interpreted: “We agree on many things, but we differ on a few others. Every country has its own culture and circumstances. I respect yours, you respect mine. Do not impose your culture on us. Do not impose your beliefs on us.” … “We agree we need to do more for climate change, but you guys are doing it wrong by favoring certain energy sources over others. The world needs energy security. We need all energy sources including oil & gas. We are doing our part on both fronts: climate change & energy security.” … “The stage of a country’s economic & social development must be considered in climate change negotiations.” … “We are increasing our production capacity to 13 million barrels per day (from 12 mb/d), but that is it. We cannot do more.” The message here is: You guys do your part and invest more if you want to avoid energy crises, recessions, and unemployment. Do NOT blame us!
(Via Wall Street Journal) – After his meeting with the crown prince, Mr. Biden said he felt confident that Saudi officials are supportive of increasing oil supply in the coming weeks. But Saudi officials tempered expectations, reiterating that the kingdom would do what is needed to balance the market if there is a shortage of supply.
Any action, Saudi officials said, would need to be coordinated with the rest of OPEC+, a coalition that includes the Saudi-led Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and a separate group of crude producers led by Russia. OPEC+’s current production agreement is expiring at the end of August, setting up some crucial decisions about output for the Saudis and Russians in the next month.
[…] Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said after the summit that there had been no discussion of military or technical cooperation with Israel.
Aside from the U.S. saying the Saudis would work to settle the war in Yemen, which it was already doing, the White House didn’t detail any specific human rights-related concessions that the kingdom agreed to during the meeting.
To the Saudis, the benefit of the visit was more immediately evident. From the moment Mr. Biden arrived at the gilded royal palace in this seaside city, Saudi officials enthusiastically held up the meeting as evidence of the crown prince’s renewed influence. State media promoted photos and videos of the two leaders together. Saudi newspapers later showcased images of the duo bumping fists and sitting together at a conference table. “All Weather Friends,” read one local headline.
“The fact that they’ve come and met means we can resolve these matters quicker and faster, because there’s a personal relationship, and the kingdom has historically had a personal relationship with the president of the United States,” said Princess Reema bint Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to Washington. “So, this isn’t a matter of turning the page. This is a matter of strengthening the relationship.”
Mr. Biden is the latest world leader to make the trip to see the 36-year-old crown prince after years of keeping him at arm’s length over the killing of Mr. Khashoggi. French President Emmanuel Macron traveled to Saudi Arabia in December, and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson made the trip in March. (read more)
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 16, 2022 | Sundance
MAGA Candidate John Gibbs (Michigan CD-03) appears with Steve Cortes to explain why he is running a campaign to primary congressional representative Peter Meijer; one of the ten House republicans who voted to impeach President Trump.
Five of the ten House DeceptiCons are either retiring or have already been defeated in the primary races. There are five left. The Michigan primary election is August 2nd.
John Gibbs is an excellent candidate as outlined in this exceptional interview. Additionally, Gibbs is fully endorsed by President Trump against Meijer – CAMPAIGN WEBSITE HERE – {Direct Rumble Link} WATCH:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 16, 2022 | Sundance
A few people have directed me to this recent podcast by Rich Baris, aka “The People’s Pundit, where he discusses the insufferable theater of republican club politics and how the professionally republican are trying to avoid winning too many seats in the 2022 mid-term election.
Baris accurately notes the battle for candidates inside the club dynamic comes down to people -vs- power. The Republican club, as a professional political system, is more in line with their allies in the Democrat club, than they are with the base of voters who want to see the corrupt DC system challenged and changed. Both wings of the UniParty are aligned to block any voting rebellion, democrat, independent or republican, from Main Street.
In all of these points Baris is correct and he goes into specific races where that dynamic is clear. Baris also notes the republican club generally supports the corrupt candidate who is compromised by some form financial scheme. However, where Baris doesn’t go deep enough, surrounds the issue of the DC apparatus having operational control via their black files on candidates. The perfect candidate, from the perspective of the club, is an insider who is compromised and therefore vulnerable to the influence of the DC system. It’s a long podcast, and he rambles a bit, but the larger message is accurate. {Direct Rumble Link} WATCH (if you have time):
The club dynamic Baris is discussing is accurate, but the origin of the most severe part of the compromise is directly tied to the efforts of Barack Obama. Obama weaponized the surveillance system so that it only targeted one side of the political dynamic. Obama broke with years of prior mutual agreement when he created the modern control mechanisms.
Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; the institutions were already weaponized by the Patriot Act.
Instead, what Obama and Holder did was to take the preexisting system and retool it so the weapons of government only targeted one side of the political continuum. This point is where many people understandably get confused.
In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus 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.
What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became the target of the new national security system. This is very important to understand as you dig deeper into this research outline.
Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01. DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed. When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.
The preexisting Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security apparatus. However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism based on political ideology. The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four pillars of this new institution. Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government.
We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake. However, we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in 2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the design. By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the aftermath. The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch of Government was quietly created.
As time passed, and the system operators became familiar with their new tools, technology allowed the tentacles of the system to reach out and touch us. That is when we first started to notice that something very disconcerting was happening. Those four pillars are the root of it, and if we take the time to understand how the Fourth Branch originated, questions about this current state of perpetual angst will start to make sense.
Grab a cup of your favorite beverage, and take a walk with me as we outline how this was put together. You might find many of the questions about our current state of political affairs beginning to make a lot more sense.
Remember, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding Fourth Branch of Government. Such an effort would be exhausting and likely take our discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.
History provided enough warnings from Dwight D. Eisenhower (military), to John F. Kennedy (CIA), to Richard Nixon (FBI), to all modern versions of warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell. None of those prior reference points are invalid, and all documented outlines of historic reference are likely true and accurate. However, a generational review is not useful, as the reference impacting us ‘right now‘ gets lost.
Instead, we pick up the expansive and weaponized intelligence system as it manifests after 9/11/01, and my goal is to highlight how the modern version of the total intelligence apparatus has now metastasized into a Fourth Branch of Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every facet of our life.
If we take the modern construct, originating at the speed of technological change, we can also see how the oversight or “check/balance” in our system of government became functionally obsolescent.
After many years of granular research about the intelligence apparatus inside our government, in the summer of 2020 I visited Washington DC to ask specific questions. My goal was to go where the influence agents within government actually operate, and to discover the people deep inside the institutions no one elected, and few people pay attention to.
It was during this process when I discovered how information is purposefully put into containment silos; essentially a formal process to block the flow of information between agencies and between the original branches. While frustrating to discover, the silo effect was important because understanding the communication between networks leads to our ability to reconcile conflict between what we perceive and what’s actually taking place.
After days of research and meetings in DC during 2020; amid a town that was serendipitously shut down due to COVID-19; I found a letter slid under the door of my room in a nearly empty hotel with an introduction of sorts. The subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After many hours of specific questions and answers on specific examples, I realized why our nation is in this mess. That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.
I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works: (1) to control every other branch of government; (2) how it functions as an entirely independent branch of government with no oversight; (3) how and why it was created to be independent from oversight; (4) what is the current mission of the IC Branch, and most importantly (5) who operates it.
The Intelligence Branch is an independent functioning branch of government, it is no longer a subsidiary set of agencies within the Executive Branch as most would think. To understand the Intelligence Branch, we need to drop the elementary school civics class lessons about three coequal branches of government and replace that outlook with the modern system that created itself.
The Intelligence Branch functions much like the State Dept, through a unique set of public-private partnerships that support it. Big Tech industry collaboration with intelligence operatives is part of that functioning; almost like an NGO. However, the process is much more important than most think. In this problematic perspective of a corrupt system of government, the process is the flaw – not the outcome.
There are people making decisions inside this little known, unregulated and out-of-control branch of government that impact every facet of our lives.
None of the people operating deep inside the Intelligence Branch were elected; and our elected representative House members genuinely do not know how the system works. I assert this position affirmatively because I have talked to House and Senate staffers, including the chiefs of staff for multiple House & Senate committee seats. They are not malicious people; however, they are genuinely clueless of things that happen outside their silo. That is part of the purpose of me explaining it, with examples, in full detail with sunlight.
We begin….
In April of 2016, the FBI launched a counterintelligence operation against presidential candidate Donald Trump. The questioning about that operation is what New York Representative Elise Stefanik cites in March of 2017, approximately 11 months later (First Two Minutes).
♦ Notice how FBI Director James Comey just matter-of-factly explains no one outside the DOJ was informed about the FBI operation. Why? Because that’s just the way things are done. His justification for unilateral operations was “because of the sensitivity of the matter“, totally ignoring any constitutional or regulatory framework for oversight; because, well, quite simply, there isn’t any. The intelligence apparatus inside the DOJ/FBI can, and does, operate based on their own independent determinations of authority.
♦ Notice also how FBI Director Comey shares his perspective that informing the National Security Council (NSC) is the equivalent of notifying the White House. The FBI leadership expressly believe they bear no responsibility to brief the Chief Executive. As long as they tell some unknown, unelected, bureaucratic entity inside the NSC, their unwritten responsibility to inform the top of their institutional silo is complete. If the IC wants to carve out the Oval Office, they simply plant information inside the NSC and, from their perspective, their civic responsibility to follow checks-and-balances is complete. This is an intentional construct.
♦ Notice how Comey obfuscates notification to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), by avoiding the fact James Clapper was the DNI from outset of the counterintelligence operation throughout the remainder of Obama’s term. When I get deeper into the process, we will understand how the Intelligence Branch has intentionally used the creation of the DNI position (established post 9/11/01) as a method to avoid oversight, not enhance it. Keeping an oblivious doofus like James Clapper in position held strategic value [Doofus Reminder HERE].
That video of James Comey being questioned by Elise Stefanik was the first example given to me by someone who knew the background of everything that was taking place preceding that March 20, 2017, hearing. That FBI reference point is a key to understand how the Intelligence Branch operates with unilateral authority above Congress (legislative branch), above the White House (executive branch), and even above the court system (judicial branch).
Also, watch this short video of James Clapper, because it is likely many readers have forgotten, and likely even more readers have never seen it. Watch closely how then White House national security adviser John Brennan is responding in that video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director, this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place. WATCH:
[Sidebar: Every time I post this video it gets scrubbed from YouTube (example), so save it if you ever want to see it again.]
The video of James Clapper highlights how the ODNI position (created with good national security intention) ended up becoming the fulcrum for modern weaponization, and is now an office manipulated by agencies with a vested interest in retaining power. The Intelligence Branch holds power over the ODNI through their influence and partnership with the body that authorizes the power within it, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).
Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in their favor. The checks create silos of proprietary information, classified information, vaults of information that work around oversight issues. The silos are part of the problem.
Ironically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been prevented. The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the 9/11 commission.
The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside the Executive Branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to analyze threats to the U.S. This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.
The DNI office created a problem for those who operate in the shadows of proprietary information. You’ll see how it was critical to install a person uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the Intelligence Branch of Government.
• The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George W. Bush. Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing resolutions and individual spending bills.
Why does this matter? Because many people think defunding the Intelligence Community is a solution; it is not…. at least, not yet. Worse yet, the corrupt divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign entities).
• When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007, they took office with a plan. Nancy Pelosi became Speaker, and Democrats controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader. Barack Obama was a junior senator from Illinois.
Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting. Baseline budgeting means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the next year budget. All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within baseline budgeting.
Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation. This is the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect. TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery Program), auto bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were all part of the non-budget spending. The federal reserve assisted with Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.
Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process since September of 2007.
• While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S. military was cut, but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded. We were all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican Party wanted to keep us that way. However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.
The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control over specific elements inside the U.S. government. Eric Holder played a key role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.
AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were aware of the larger institutional objectives. One of those objectives was weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the DOJ that had no inspector general oversight. For most people the DOJ-NSD weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting candidate Donald Trump many years later. However, by then the Holder crew had executed almost eight full years of background work.
• The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI. Why was that important? Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone who needs or holds a security clearance. The removal of security clearances could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they were assembling. Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security clearances were easy to justify.
Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this filtration within the security clearance process. How does that issue later manifest? Just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency has become, specifically including the FBI.
• At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making room for the next phase was being assembled. Names like Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.
Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional objective. Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his first foreign trip. The State Department worked with grassroots organizers (mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya. Obama leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan for contacts and support.
Why does this aspect matter to us? Well, you might remember how much effort the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources for the various mideast rebellions the White House and DoS supported. This was the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech social media.
In many ways, the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The U.S. intelligence community working with social media platforms and political operatives.
Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“. Where does this contractor activity manifest? In the FISA Court opinion of Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or MOU.
Hopefully, you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was. None of this was accidental, all of this was by design, and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally allowing most of this to take place.
That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the modern IC was created. Next, we will go into how all these various intelligence networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the President from knowing their activity.
♦ When Barack Obama was installed in January 2009, the Democrats held a 60 seat majority in the U.S. Senate. As the people behind the Obama installation began executing their longer-term plan, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was a tool to create the Intelligence Branch; it was not an unintentional series of events.
When Obama was installed, Dianne Feinstein was the Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and Democrat operative Dan Jones was her lead staffer. Feinstein was completely controlled by those around her including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The CIA was in the process of turning over personnel following the Bush era, and as a result of a massive multi-year narrative of diminished credibility (Iraq WMD), a deep purge was underway. Obama/Holder were in the process of shifting intelligence alignment and the intensely political Democrat Leader Harry Reid was a key participant.
THE TRAP – Many people say that Congress is the solution to eliminating the Fourth and superseding Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. This is an exercise in futility because the Legislative Branch, specifically the SSCI, facilitated the creation of the Intelligence Branch. The SSCI cannot put the genie they created back in the bottle without admitting they too are corrupt; and the background story of their corruption is way too intense to be exposed now.
Every member of the SSCI is compromised in some controlling manner. Those Senators who disliked the control over them; specifically disliked because the risk of sunlight was tenuous and, well, possible; have either left completely or stepped down from the committee. None of the SSCI members past or present would ever contemplate saying openly what their tenure involved.
[Note: You might remember when Vice Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages surfaced, there was a controlled Republican SSCI member who came to his defense in February of 2018. It was not accidental that exact Senator later became the chair of the SSCI himself. That Republican Senator is Marco Rubio, now vice-chair since the Senate re-flipped back to the optics of Democrat control in 2021.]
All of President Obama’s 2009 intelligence appointments required confirmation from the Senate. The nominees had to first pass through the Democrat controlled SSCI, and then to a full Senate vote where Democrats held a 60 vote majority. Essentially, Obama got everyone he wanted in place easily. Rahm Emmanuel was Obama’s Chief of Staff, and Valerie Jarrett was Senior Advisor.
Tim Geithner was Treasury Secretary in 2010 when the joint DOJ/FBI and IRS operation to target the Tea Party took place after the midterm “shellacking” caused by the Obamacare backlash. Mitch McConnell was Minority Leader in the Senate but supported the targeting of the Tea Party as his Senate colleagues were getting primaried by an angry and effective grassroots campaign. McConnell’s friend, Senator Bob Bennett, getting beaten in Utah was the final straw.
Dirty Harry and Mitch McConnell saw the TEA Party through the same prism. The TEA Party took Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts (Scott Brown); Sharon Angle was about to take out Harry Reid in Nevada; Arlen Spector was taken down in Pennsylvania; Senator Robert Byrd died; Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary to Joe Miller in Alaska; McConnell’s nominee Mike Castle lost to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware; Rand Paul won in Kentucky. This is the background. The peasants were revolting…. and visibly angry Mitch McConnell desperately made a deal with the devil to protect himself.
In many ways, the TEA Party movement was/is very similar to the MAGA movement. The difference in 2010 was the absence of a head of the movement, in 2015 Donald Trump became that head figure who benefited from the TEA Party energy. Trump came into office in 2017 with the same congressional opposition as the successful TEA Party candidates in 2011.
Republicans took control of the Senate following the 2014 mid-terms. Republicans took control of the SSCI in January 2015. Senator Richard Burr became chairman of the SSCI, and Dianne Feinstein shifted to Vice-Chair. Dirty Harry Reid left the Senate, and Mitch McConnell took power again.
Republicans were in control of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2015 when the Intelligence Branch operation against candidate Donald Trump was underway. [Feinstein’s staffer, Dan Jones, left the SSCI so he could act as a liaison and political operative between private-sector efforts (Fusion GPS, Chris Steele) and the SSCI.] The SSCI was a participant in that Fusion GPS/Chris Steele operation, and as a direct consequence Republicans were inherently tied to the problem with President Trump taking office in January of 2017. Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats was a member of the SSCI.
Bottom line…. When it came to the intelligence system targeting Donald Trump during the 2015/2016 primary, the GOP was just as much at risk as their Democrat counterparts.
When Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, the SSCI was shocked more than most. They knew countermeasures would need to be deployed to protect themselves from any exposure of their intelligence conduct. Dianne Feinstein stepped down, and Senator Mark Warner was elevated to Vice Chairman.
Indiana’s own Mike Pence, now Vice President, recommended fellow Hoosier, SSCI Senator Dan Coats, to become President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). [Apply hindsight here]
• To give an idea of the Intelligence Branch power dynamic, remind yourself how House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Chairman Devin Nunes, tried to get access to the DOJ/FBI records of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign via Carter Page.
Remember, Devin Nunes only saw a portion of the FISA trail from his review of a Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) previously given to President Obama. Chairman Nunes had to review the PDB at the White House SCIF due to compartmented intelligence, another example of the silo benefit.
Remember the massive stonewalling and blocking of the DOJ/FBI toward Nunes? Remember the back and forth battle over declassification surrounding the Nunes memo?
Remember, after Nunes went directly to House Speaker Paul Ryan for help (didn’t get any), the DOJ only permitted two members from each party within the HPSCI to review the documents, and only at the DOJ offices of main justice?
Contrast that amount of House Intel Committee railroading and blocking by intelligence operatives in the DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI, with the simple request by Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner asking to see the Carter Page FISA application and immediately a copy being delivered to him on March 17th 2017.
Can you see which intelligence committee is aligned with the deepest part of the deep state?
The contrast of ideological alignment between the House, Senate and Intelligence Branch is crystal clear when viewed through the prism of cooperation. You can see which legislative committee holds the power and support of the Intelligence Branch. The Senate Intel Committee facilitates the corrupt existence of the IC Branch, so the IC Branch only cooperates with the Senate Intel Committee. It really is that simple.
• The Intelligence Branch carefully selects its own members by controlling how security clearances are investigated and allowed (FBI). The Intelligence Branch also uses compartmentalization of intelligence as a way to keep each agency, and each downstream branch of government (executive, legislative and judicial), at arms length as a method to stop anyone from seeing the larger picture of their activity. I call this the “silo effect“, and it is done by design.
I have looked at stunned faces when I presented declassified silo product from one agency to the silo customers of another. You would be astonished at what they don’t know because it is not in their ‘silo’.
Through the advice and consent rules, the Intelligence Branch uses the SSCI to keep out people they consider dangerous to their ongoing operations. Any appointee to the intelligence community must first pass through the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, before they get a full Senate vote. If the SSCI rejects the candidate, they simply refuse to take up the nomination. The president is then blocked from that appointment. This is what happened with President Trump over and over again.
• Additionally, the Intelligence Branch protects itself, and its facilitating allies through the formal classification process. The Intelligence Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} This is something 99.9% of the people on our side get totally and frustratingly wrong.
No one can declassify, or make public, anything the Intelligence Branch will not agree to. Doubt this? Ask Ric Grenell, John Ratcliffe, or even President Trump himself.
• The classification process is determined inside the Intelligence Branch, all by themselves. They get to choose what rank of classification exists on any work product they create; and they get to decide what the classification status is of any work product that is created by anyone else. The Intelligence Branch has full control over what is considered classified information and what is not. The Intelligence Branch defines what is a “national security interest” and what is not. A great technique for hiding fingerprints of corrupt and illegal activity.
[For familiar reference see the redactions to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The Intelligence Branch does all redactions.]
• Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control. If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member? They have to go through the SSCI confirmation. See the problem?
Yes, there are ways to break up the Intelligence Branch, but they do not start with any congressional effort. As you can see above, the process is the flaw – not the solution. Most conservative pundits have their emphasis on the wrong syllable. Their cornerstone is false.
For their own self-preservation, the Intelligence Branch has been interfering in our elections for years. The way to tear this apart begins with STATE LEVEL election reform that blocks the Legislative Branch from coordinating with the Intelligence Branch.
The extreme federalism approach is critical and also explains why Joe Biden has instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the full power of the DOJ to stop state level election reform efforts. The worry of successful state level election control is also why the Intelligence Branch now needs to support the federal takeover of elections.
Our elections have been usurped by the Intelligence Branch. Start with honest elections and we will see just how much Democrat AND Republican corruption is dependent on manipulated election results. Start at the state level. Start there…. everything else is downstream.
♦ COLLAPSED OVERSIGHT – The modern system to ‘check’ the Executive Branch was the creation of the legislative “Gang of Eight,” a legislative oversight mechanism intended to provide a bridge of oversight between the authority of the intelligence community within the Executive Branch.
The Go8 construct was designed to allow the President authority to carry out intelligence operations and provide the most sensitive notifications to a select group within Congress.
The Go8 oversight is directed to the position, not the person, and consists of: (1) The Speaker of the House; (2) The Minority Leader of the House; (3) The Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI; (4) The Ranking Member (minority) of the HPSCI; (5) The Leader of the Senate; (6) The Minority Leader of the Senate; (7) The Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, SSCI; and finally (8) the Vice-Chair of the SSCI.
Example: When the Chief Executive (the President) initiates an intelligence operation on behalf of the United States, the President triggers a “finding memo.” In essence, the instruction to the intel agency or agencies to authorize a covert operation. When that process takes place, the Go8 are the first people notified. Depending on the sensitivity of the operation, sometimes the G08 are notified immediately after the operation is conducted. The notification can be a phone call or an in-person briefing.
Because of the sensitivity of their intelligence information, the Gang of Eight hold security clearances that permit them to receive and review all intelligence operations. The intelligence community are also responsible for briefing the Go8 with the same information they use to brief the President.
~ 2021 Gang of Eight ~
The Go8 design is intended to put intelligence oversight upon both political parties in Congress; it is designed that way by informing the minority leaders of both the House and Senate as well as the ranking minority members of the SSCI and HPSCI. Under the concept, the President cannot conduct an intelligence operation; and the intelligence community cannot carry out intelligence gathering operations without the majority and minority parties knowing about it.
The modern design of this oversight system was done to keep rogue and/or corrupt intelligence operations from happening. However, as we shared in the preview to this entire discussion, the process was usurped during the Obama era. {GO DEEP}
Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, that the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for over a year without informing the Go8. Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”
Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become. In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight…. and Congress just brushed it off.
Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact he said exactly the opposite, he said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC). The implication, the very direct and specific implication; the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was totally informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor.
Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?
Again, no one saw the immediate issue. What Comey just described on that March day in 2017 was the total usurpation of the entire reason the Gang of Eight exists; to eliminate the potential for political weaponization of the Intelligence Community by the executive branch. The G08 notifications to the majority and minority are specifically designed to make sure what James Comey admitted to doing was never supposed to happen.
Team Obama carried out a political operation using the intelligence community and the checks-and-balances in the system were intentionally usurped. This is an indisputable fact.
Worse still, the entire legislative branch of Congress, which specifically includes the Republicans that now controlled the House and Senate, did nothing. They just ignored what was admitted. The usurpation was willfully ignored. The mechanism of the G08 was bypassed without a twitch of condemnation or investigation…. because the common enemy was Donald Trump.
This example highlights the collapse of the system. Obama, the Executive Branch, collapsed the system by usurping the process; in essence the process became the bigger issue, and the lack of immediate Legislative Branch reaction became evidence of open acceptance. The outcomes of the usurpation played out over the next four years, Donald J. Trump was kneecapped and lost his presidency because of it. However, the bigger issue of the collapse still exists.
The downstream consequence of the Legislative Branch accepting the Executive Branch usurpation meant both intelligence committees were compromised. Additionally, the leadership of both the House and Senate were complicit. Think about this carefully. The Legislative Branch allowance of the intelligence usurpation meant the Legislative Branch was now subservient to the Intelligence Branch.
That’s where we are.
Right now.
That’s where we are.
Term-3 Obama is now back in the White House with Joe Biden.
Term-1 and Term-2 Obama usurped the ‘check and balance‘ within the system and weaponized the intelligence apparatus. During Trump’s term that weaponization was covered up by a compliant congress, and not a single member of the oversight called it out. Now, Term-3 Obama steps back in to continue the cover up and continue the weaponization.
Hopefully, you can now see the scale of the problem that surrounds us with specific citation for what has taken place. What I just explained to you above is not conspiracy theory, it is admitted fact that anyone can look upon. Yet….
Have you seen this mentioned anywhere? Have you seen this called out by anyone in Congress? Have you seen anyone in media (ally or adversary) call this out? Have you seen any member of the Judicial Branch stand up and say wait, what is taking place is not okay? Have you seen a single candidate for elected office point this out? Have you seen anyone advising a candidate to point this out?
This is our current status. It is not deniable. The truth exists regardless of our comfort.
Not a single person in power will say openly what has taken place. They are scared of the Fourth Branch. The evidence of what has taken place is right there in front of our face. The words, actions and activities of those who participated in this process are not deniable.
There are only two members of the Gang of Eight who have existed in place from January 2007 (the real beginning of Obama’s term, two years before he took office when the Congress flipped). Only two members of the G08 have been consistently in place from January of 2007 to right now, today. All the others came and went, but two members of the Gang of Eight have been part of that failed and collapsed oversight throughout the past 15 years, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.
♦ TECHNOLOGY – On a global scale – the modern intelligence gathering networks are now dependent on data collection to execute their intelligence missions. In the digital age nations have been executing various methods to gather that data. Digital surveillance has replaced other methods of interception. Those surveillance efforts have resulted in a coalescing of regional data networks based on historic multi-national relationships.
We have a recent frame of reference for the “U.S. data collection network” within the NSA. Through the allied process the Five Eyes nations all rely on the NSA surveillance database (U.K, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and U.S.) The NSA database provides the digital baseline for intelligence operations in defense of our allies. The portals into the NSA database are essentially an assembly of allies in like-minded ideological connection to the United States.
Unfortunately, there have been some revelations about the NSA database being used to monitor our allies, like in the example of Germany and surveillance on Angela Merkel’s phone. As long as “the good guys” are operating honorably, allies of the United States can feel confident about having protection from the NSA surveillance of global digital data. We warn our friends if we detect something dangerous etc.
The U.S. has nodes on communication pipelines to intercept and extract data. We have also launched hundreds, perhaps thousands, of satellites to conduct surveillance and gather up data. All of this data is fed into the NSA database where it is monitored (presumably) as a national security mechanism, and in defense of our allies.
However, what about data collection or data networks that are outside the NSA database? What do our enemies do? The NSA database is just one intelligence operation of digital surveillance amid the entire world, and we do not allow access by adversaries we are monitoring. So what do they do? What do our allies do who might not trust the United States due to past inconsistencies, ie. the Middle East?
The answers to those questions highlight other data collection networks. So, a brief review of the major players is needed.
♦ CHINA – China operates their own database. They, like the NSA, scoop up data for their system. Like us, China launches satellites and deploys other electronic data collection methods to download into their database. This is why the issues of electronic devices manufactured in China becomes problematic. Part of the Chinese data collection system involves the use of spyware, hacking and extraction.
Issues with Chinese communication company Huawei take on an added dimension when you consider the goal of the Chinese government to conduct surveillance and assemble a network of data to compete with the United States via the NSA. Other Chinese methods of surveillance and data-collection are less subversive, as in the examples of TicTok and WeChat. These are Chinese social media companies that are scraping data just like the NSA scrapes data from Facebook, Twitter and other Silicon Valley tech companies. [ Remember, the Intelligence Branch is a public-private partnership. ]
♦ RUSSIA – It is very likely that Russia operates their own database. We know Russia launches satellites, just like China and the USA, for the same purposes. Russia is also very proficient at hacking into other databases and extracting information to store and utilize in their own network. The difference between the U.S., China and Russia is likely that Russia spends more time on the hacking aspect because they do not generate actual technology systems as rapidly as the U.S. and China.
The most recent database creation is an outcome of an ally having to take action because they cannot rely on the ideology of the United States remaining consistent, as the administrations ping-pong based on ideology.
♦ SAUDI ARABIA – Yes, in 2016 we discovered that Saudi Arabia was now operating their own intelligence data-gathering operation. It would make sense, given the nature of the Middle East and the constant fluctuations in political support from the United States. It is a lesson the allied Arab community and Gulf Cooperation Council learned quickly when President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 and launched the Islamist Spring (Arab Spring) upon them.
I have no doubt the creation of the Saudi intelligence network was specifically because the Obama administration started supporting radical Islamists within the Muslim Brotherhood and threw fuel on the fires of extremism all over the Arab world.
Think about it., What would you do if you were Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan, Oman or Yemen and you knew the United States could just trigger an internal uprising of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood to seek your destruction?
Without a doubt, those urgent lessons from 2009, 2010, 2011 triggered the formation of the Arab Intelligence Network as a network to defend itself with consistency. They assembled the network and activated it in 2017 as pictured above.
♦ Israel – Along a similar outlook to the Arab network, no doubt Israel operates an independent data collection system as a method of protecting itself from ever-changing U.S. politics amid a region that is extremely hostile to its very existence. Like the others, Israel launches proprietary satellites, and we can be sure they use covert methods to gather electronic data just like the U.S. and China.
As we have recently seen in the Pegasus story, Israel creates spyware programs that are able to track and monitor cell phone communications of targets. The spyware would not work unless Israel had access to some network where the phone meta-data was actually stored. So yeah, it makes sense for Israel to operate an independent intelligence database.
♦ Summary: As we understand the United States Intelligence Branch of government as the superseding entity that controls the internal politics of our nation, we also must consider that multiple nations have the same issue. There are major intelligence networks around the world beside the NSA “Five-Eyes” database. China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel all operate proprietary databases deploying the same tools and techniques for assembly.
The geopolitical conflict that has always existed has now shifted into a digital battle-space. The Intelligence Agencies from these regions are now operating as the backbone of the government that uses them, and has become dependent on them. [<- Reread that].
Once you accept the digital-era intelligence apparatus of China, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, The United States and Israel, are now the primary national security mechanisms for stabilization of government; then you accept the importance of those intelligence operations.
Once you understand how foundational those modern intelligence operations have become for the stability and continuity of those governments…… then you begin to understand just how the United States intelligence community became more important than the government that created it.
♦ Public Private Partnership – 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.
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. 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 installation of Barack Obama was all about.
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.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 16, 2022 | Sundance
While Neil Oliver is describing the insufferable lack of political leadership amid the conservative party in the U.K, almost every point of his weekly monologue could just as easily apply to the United States or any other “western democracy.” The current candidates to replace Boris Johnson are just an extension of the high-minded political class who are pretending to be different, yet they are identical in their globalist outlooks.
….”always the same lines from one leader after another – great reset, build back better, rules based liberal order. The theatrical parallels just keep coming – soap opera, pantomime, now a chorus line of high kicking dancers in perfect time.”…
Oliver asks simple, albeit frustratingly and brutally obvious, questions about what is missing in the candidates who are asking to become the next British Prime Minister. Where is the candidate who represents the issues that matter, the one who isn’t playing a role in a never-ending soap opera that generates nothing except more drama to keep everyone distracted.
Neil Oliver’s points could just as easily be talking about the United States republican party, where almost every elected official is quite happily playing their acting role in the political soap opera, yet no one is doing anything to stop the insane policies that are destroying the foundation of life, liberty and the free pursuit of happiness. WATCH:
[Transcript] – The race for the leadership of the Conservative Party is a farce. Like a soap opera, it is no more than another distraction, something to take our minds off what’s really important in the world. It’s not just a Conservative Party problem, of course.
Across the political spectrum it is the same – a wholesale absence of truth – not their truth, the good old fashioned truth. They might be describing themselves as rival camps – Tory, Labour, Liberal – but where it matters, they’re all on the same page of the same script, written by someone else and delivered to them one page at a time.
Whoever ends up with the leading role, in Number 10 Downing Street this time, they intend for the show to go on, week after week and year after year. Old characters will be written out and new characters will fill in the gaps.
It seemed like madness to me – encouraging belief in a fiction. Anyway, for that reason among others, but mostly because I had more to do, I stopped watching. That was the soaps, of course. More recently I’ve realized the drama of Westminster is even less believable. Westminster is a pantomime. I turned off the soaps and more recently I have turned off Westminster.
Now we’ve reached that recurrent moment of whipped up and confected high drama in any soap, that the writers, journalists among them, evidently really enjoy – like a fire, or a plane crash, or a murder. It’s the leadership race.
I watched as much as I could bear of the televised debate the other night, which was about five minutes. God help us all, they’re not even good actors. I’m prepared to accept that one or two might have their hearts in the right place, or near enough – might honestly still genuinely be labouring under the misapprehension that parliament is a place where important decisions are made. There are therefore moments of apparent sincerity now and again. For the most part, the rest of them just phoned in their performances.
In the manner of a soap opera, or a panto, the plot moves on so fast you could break your neck keeping up with it. Most alarming and dispiriting for those of us with any kind of memory of plot lines just past, is the way the disaster of the last two years has been dismissed as though it never happened. Already we’re being offered a re-run, a repeat of an old series, all about five pence cuts on fuel duty and no mention at all of self-inflicted financial Armageddon.
Where, I want to know, is the candidate who will stand up and take some responsibility for the collective decision and disaster that was lockdown? Where is the candidate who will stand up and admit what we all know – what has been acknowledged across the board by economists, medics and a slew of other professionals – that lockdown was the most disastrous public policy decision of modern times? Most importantly of all, where is the candidate who will stand up and promise that while he or she is in Number 10, on no account will lockdown or anything remotely like lockdown be inflicted upon the people of these islands?
Where is the candidate who will speak out about what matters to the lives of people who live not on a stage or on a set, but in the real world? Where is the candidate who will declare that while she or he is in Downing Street, there will be no compulsory Digital IDs or vaccine passports or anything of the sort? Where is the candidate who will vow to protect the existence of real cash as the vital off ramp and alternative to any Digital Currency, programmable or otherwise?
Where is the candidate who will admit that the injections foisted upon billions of people around the world did not and do not work as advertised – cannot reasonably be described as vaccines because they do not prevent getting or transmitting the illness in question, getting sick with or dying from the illness in question? Where is the candidate who will declare that honest truth?
Where is the candidate who will say that while he or she is in office, there will be no mandated medical procedures for any man, woman or child?
Where is the candidate who will say that a woman is an adult human female, born that way? Where is the candidate who said that all along?
Where is the candidate who will say what we all know to be true – that the Green Agenda, Agenda 2030, Net Zero and the rest are the products of crippling stupidity that are already causing misery, and that can only cause much, much more misery in the months and years ahead if someone doesn’t find the brakes on this runaway train?
Where is the candidate who will stand up say it’s summer – and that for as long as there have been summers on this planet Earth, there have been some days, even here in these islands, that are uncomfortably hot? Where is the candidate who remembers when the TV weather maps used to have little celebratory suns dotted around them, instead of the islands coloured dark red as though on the point of bursting into flames at the same temperatures holiday makers jump on jet planes and head south in hope of finding and enjoying?
People’s lives and livelihoods are being destroyed – or shortly will be destroyed – unless someone is brave enough to admit that the emperor is not wearing any clothes. For as long as all the candidates just clap along with the rest of the wilfully blind – those that see the obvious and yet refuse to say so – then the cost of lockdown crisis will only deepen until none but the self-defined elite are clear of the rising floodwater.
I say that’s the least we might hope for, because it is my heartfelt belief that calling out the fiction of our present parliament is as much as any candidate might do for now. The meaningful decisions are taken elsewhere – by The City of London, by bankers, by the CEOs of planet-spanning corporate entities like Vanguard and Black Rock, by the place men fronting transnational NGOs – Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum, the WHO, the UN.
You don’t even have to subscribe to the idea of a one world government to acknowledge that our elected representatives are trumped by the agendas of big business and bigger banks in control of the world’s money supply. That our small fry are swimming in water dominated by whales and sharks who tell them what’s what is made plain by their use of language – always the same lines from one leader after another – great reset, build back better, rules based liberal order. The theatrical parallels just keep coming – soap opera, pantomime, now a chorus line of high kicking dancers in perfect time.
In the real world – the world we are discouraged from watching – farmers are rising in rebellion all across Europe – in the Netherlands, in Germany, in Italy, in Poland and many other places besides. Others are rising in support – the people of those countries, the truckers, the firemen.
These are real lives, real fightbacks against real imminent disasters, but we are supposed to look away and to be satisfied instead by watching to see who next warms her or his behind on the seat at the desk in Number 10 – anxiously opening the email every day that delivers the latest script – will he or she be written out next?
On the other side of the Atlantic is a soap opera that couldn’t be broadcast over here until after the watershed. President Joe Biden has to carry a cheat sheet to remind him of the script he can’t even remember from moment to moment. He has Ron Burgundy moments – Ron Burgundy, the legendary fictional news reader from the movie Anchor Man – who will read whatever is on the autocue, including his minders’ instructions about which lines to repeat for emphasis.
And then there’s the utterly compelling car crash role in the soap opera currently being performed by Biden’ own son, Hunter, not that we’re meant to tune in to that particular drama. Every day social media carries clips – apparently culled from that laptop of his, the one we’re still not supposed to know about, far less talk about – of a naked Hunter Biden, handgun in hand, or with prostitutes, or counting and weighing rocks of crack cocaine. Every time a clip is circulated, the social media platforms take them down. And then another crops up. And all the while Hunter is still at large, at events in plain view, at which the US media sees him and simply leaves him be, no questions asked either about his dodgy deals in China, Russia and Ukraine.
If we’ve got Downing Street, or The Only Way is Westminster, our cousins stateside seem to have Breaking Baddest.
I ask again – where is the candidate who will say that the sickness we need to talk about is the ideology that has infected all of our institutions, our politics, our schools, our universities, our civil service, our judiciary – the whole damned lot? Where is the candidate who will concede that we need to start again with fresh alternatives to those institutions that are beyond fixing, terminal cases?
Here is what’s needed. Here is the truth as I see it: the truckers who rose in Canada … the farmers rising in the Netherlands and across Europe … the people of Sri Lanka casting out their president … all of those are simply real people, flesh and blood with real lives, livelihoods, families, hopes and dreams, a sense of their own dignity and sovereignty.
Power belongs with the people, with us. What is wrong – and what more and more people are understanding is wrong – is control imposed upon people by corrupt institutions that long ago seized control of the creation of money.
The beginning and end of all that’s wrong now depends upon the people, the real people, regaining that control. This means remembering that governments exist to do what we tell them, not the other way around. We need a government that understands as much and that furthermore takes back control of money. Not the fantasy money banks create from nowhere and that doesn’t exist, anyway, until we pay it back with interest. I am talking about money that represents and is made real by its connection to the real wealth of the nation – its natural assets and, most of all, the creative potential of the people. Here in sovereign Britain that might be hundreds of trillions of pounds of debt-free money, unsullied by bankers’ hands.
What we’re being told and shown now … we’ve seen and heard it all before – delivered by better actors and dancers. Surely it’s time for the unalloyed truth – no fiction and no pretense. The honest truth delivered from the heart by someone real who properly cares about the people. Surely there are better songs to sing. (link)
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