More Russian Sanction = World War III


Armstrong Economics Blog/Russia Re-Posted Jan 29, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

For the life of me, there is absolutely no logic to any of this attack on Russia except the desire to conquer and destroy it as any sort of a superpower or independent nation-state. Every President always sought peace until Biden who seems to be reading the cur cards for Armageddon. Even Henry Kissinger said every president has invited him to the White House EXCEPT Biden.

Even if we assume that the sanctions worked and forced Putin to withdraw from protecting the Russians in the Donbas whom the West had all agreed were entitled to their human rights and self-determination with the fake Minsk Agreement, what would happen in the political crisis in Russia? We confiscated all Japanese assets, put energy embargoes on them, and threaten to prevent them from dealing with any other country for energy. Roosevelt did everything he could to get Japan to attack Pearl Harbor. Biden has done the same to Russia.

The risk of overthrowing Putin would lead to a potential civil war and the further breakup of Russia with more nukes than the West. Of the 14,500 nuclear weapons on the planet, Russia and the United States own the lion’s share, with a combined total of approximately 13,350 nukes. The remaining 1,150 weapons are held by seven countries. The USA has 6,500 nukes and Russia has 6,800. Destabilizing Russia is just insane. Russia will wipe out Europe in the blink of an eye if pushed and they now know that this Ukraine bullshit is really a war of the USA and NATO against Russia and we are the aggressors.

I can say that US troops have been told that we will be at war with China by next year.

All my sources are saying that the Biden Administration is DOMINATED by inexperienced climate zealots who are demanding we have no time to wait and we MUST end fossil fuels NOW before there are any alternatives in place. They are the ones pushing to destroy Russia which is embraced by the Neocons, all because the majority of their GDP is all fossil fuels.

The sanctions now are imposed by the European Union and will ban imports of refined Russian fuels on February 5th, 2023, adding to its embargo on seaborne Russian crude oil that began in December. The EU is putting its entire future and the lives of ALL its population at risk for the Donbas which has been occupied by Russians for centuries and two former Russian leaders came from that region. It was Khrushchev who drew the border within the USSR purely for administrative purposes. That region was never occupied by Ukrainians.

There is no difference if Mexico had demanded Texas and everyone who lives there must surrender their language and their religion to fit the norm of being Mexican. Then Texans have no right to vote on their future. The entire Minsk Agreement has been a joke. It was a deliberate ploy to buy time for war. This has now confirmed to both China and Russia that the United States and Europe cannot be trusted. Treaties mean absolutely nothing! this stupid ploy has opened the door for World War III because there is no point negotiating with the EU, Germany, France, or the United States when they will not HONOR their agreements. That means there can be no resolution!

That leaves only All Out War to the Death

But hey! There will be new business opportunities as well. Just think of the guided tours to show how foolish these mortals have been. There will be plenty of nuked cities to explore. The good news, we will exterminate all the climate change zealots who insisted on destroying Russia. Yet it may be up to us to prevent the politicians from crawling out of their safe underground bunkers to the new light of CO2 free world after they killed off all those nasty trees and plants that need CO2 to survive. They say the one bug that will survive a nuclear attack is cockroaches. I guess that’s why we are supposed to eat bugs now.

Deep Triggered, The CIA and Intelligence Community are Very Worried About the House Subcommittee on Federal Government Weaponization


Posted originally on the CTH on January 28, 2023 | Sundance 

The website Just Security, author former CIA operative Douglas Johnson, is very concerned about the House Subcommittee on Federal Government Weaponization. [SEE ARTICLE HERE} The concern is clouded under the auspices of fearing politicization by questioning the intelligence community about weaponized government.

The article is a mainstream bureaucratic outlook where the professional intelligence apparatus views themselves as beyond being accountable to the elected public officials, specifically the House members of the committee. The permanent unelected officials have a self-perception above the reach of the elected officials.

In essence, there is no public accountability model within their view of their operation. There can only be concealment, secret briefings, darkness and ‘trust us’ type reviews of their authorities. It’s quite a remarkable thing to read.

Just Security […] that’s oversight, a bipartisan endeavor conducted in the interest of all Americans, regardless of political affiliation. The oversight structure that came from the Church Committee investigations adopted legal and sensible rules of the road and protections for all stakeholders. Such supervision is conducted in controlled settings, shielded from public exposure, in a way that promotes candor and trust among both the auditors and the audited, facilitating transparency.

Note: How has that worked out for the American people?

[…] Jordan’s committee will not be oversight. Rather, it promises to be the very politicized weapon it claims interest in exposing. The body’s spectacle and powers pose dangerous implications for the ability of the U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities to effectively conduct their mission.

[…] The greatest danger, though, is the impact on these communities’ protection from political pressure. Professionals dedicated to national service will have to assess the risks of telling it like it is and speaking truth to power. Even those at the bottom of the professional ladder might find themselves having to lawyer up and consider the prospect of subsequent purges depending on who is in office. (read full)

Why would the CIA, FBI or any Intelligence Community member, who works for the American taxpayer, need to “lawyer up” if they are doing nothing unlawful, unconstitutional, or illegal against the interests of the taxpayers who fund them?

REMINDER – Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; the institutions were already weaponized by the Patriot Act.  What Obama and Holder did was 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.

Elevator Speech:

(1) The Patriot Act turned the intel surveillance radar from foreign searches for terrorists to domestic searches for terrorists.

(2) Obama/Biden then redefined what is a “terrorist” to include their political opposition.

DEEP DIVE:

Twitter is to the U.S. government as TikTok is to China. The overarching dynamic is the need to control public perceptions and opinions.

DHS has been in ever increasing control of Twitter since the public-private partnership was formed in 2011/2012.  However, it’s not just Twitter.  The same fundamental relationships are now at work within Google, Microsoft, YouTube, Instagram and Facebook.

With all the shiny things surfacing from the Twitter Files, few are looking at the origin of what the government is trying to keep hidden….

In the era shortly after 9/11 the DC national security apparatus, instructed by Vice President Dick Cheney, was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

After 9/11/01, the electronic surveillance system that was originally created to monitor threats from abroad was retooled to monitor threats inside our country.  That is when all of our electronic ‘metadata’ came under federal surveillance.

That inflection point, and the process that followed, was exactly what Edward Snowden tried to point out.

What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their political opposition became the target of this new national security system.

The problems we face now as a country are directly an outcome of two very distinct points that were merged by Barack Obama. (1) The post 9/11 monitoring of electronic communication of American citizens, and (2) Obama’s team creating a fine-tuning knob that it focused on the politics of the targets.  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.  The Department of Homeland Security came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was formed.

When President Barack Obama and Attorney General 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: a domestic surveillance state. 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.

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 metastasized into a Fourth Branch of Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every facet of our life.  We The People are under surveillance.

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 and 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).

Things to note:

♦ 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, which include the exploitation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court, or FISC) 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.

However, the creation of the DNI office also created an unconstitutional surveillance system of the American people.  The DNI office became the tool to take massive amounts of data and use it to target specific Americans.  Weaponizing the DNI office for political targeting is now the purpose of the DNI office as it exists.

The illegal and unlawful nature of the surveillance creates a need for careful protection amid the group who operate in the shadows of electronic information and domestic surveillance. You will 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.  The tools the government used to monitor threats were now being used to monitor every American.  WE THE PEOPLE were now the threat the national security system was monitoring.

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 prior intelligence conduct.  Immediately Senator Dianne Feinstein stepped down from the SSCI, 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 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?

Oh, how quickly we forget:

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 arm’s 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 DEEPHow 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 unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was 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 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 then specifically included 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.

NOTE: Former Obama National Security aide and counsel to the President, Lisa Monaco, is in her current position as Deputy Attorney General, specifically to make sure all of these revelations do not become a legal risk to Barack Obama and the people who created them.  The SSCI confirmed Monaco for this purpose because the Senate is just as much at risk.

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, complicit senate intelligence committee, 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, in fact most of it is on record.

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.

From that point it is then critical to understand that domestic intelligence operations are underway to monitor the electronic communication of American citizens inside our own country.  YOU are under surveillance.  The parents who confront school boards are under surveillance.  The political operatives inside the FBI are monitoring everyone who comes onto the radar, that is why the National School Boards Association asked the White House, then the DOJ, to have the FBI start targeting parents.  Are things making sense now?

♦ 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.

[The Intercept] – […] Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

In a March meeting, Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government. Dehmlow, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.” (read more)

In the decades before 9/11/01, the intelligence apparatus intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize against domestic enemies.

[…]  The extent to which the DHS initiatives affect Americans’ daily social feeds is unclear. During the 2020 election, the government flagged numerous posts as suspicious, many of which were then taken down, documents cited in the Missouri attorney general’s lawsuit disclosed. And a 2021 report by the Election Integrity Partnership at Stanford University found that of nearly 4,800 flagged items, technology platforms took action on 35 percent — either removing, labeling, or soft-blocking speech, meaning the users were only able to view content after bypassing a warning screen. The research was done “in consultation with CISA,” the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Prior to the 2020 election, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives. According to NBC News, the meetings were part of an initiative, still ongoing, between the private sector and government to discuss how firms would handle misinformation during the election. (keep reading)

After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after 9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence apparatus being granted a massive amount of power.  Simultaneously the mission of the intelligence community now encompassed monitoring domestic threats as defined by the people who operate the surveillance system.

The problem with assembled power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own malicious benefit. That is exactly what the network of President Barack Obama did.

The Obama network took preassembled intelligence weapons (we should never have allowed to be created) and turned those FBI, DOJ-NSD, DHS and ODNI 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 and a massive nationwide surveillance state. From that perspective, the fundamental change was successful.

This is the scale of corrupt political compromise on both sides of the DC dynamic that we are up against.  Preserving this surveillance system, a public-private partnership, is also what removing Donald Trump was all about.  The targeting of President Trump in order to preserve the system; the system that was weaponized during the Obama administration, is what the actions of the DOJ, FBI and DHS are all about.

What would powerful people in DC do to stop the American people from finding this out?

A controlled 2020 election?  An increased censorship in the aftermath?  A raid on Mar-a-Lago?

…The need for control is a reaction to fear.

Tucker Carlson Discusses Pfizer Effort to Recreate Modified COVID Viruses Under Term “Directed Evolution”


Posted originally on the CTH on January 26, 2023 | Sundance

Tucker Carlson covered the Project Veritas story about a Pfizer executive talking about the pharmaceutical company engineering new COVID strains via a process of modifying the virus called “directed evolution.”  After the monologue segment, Tucker Carlson interviews Dr. Robert Malone. {Direct Rumble Link}  WATCH:

The full crazy video of the Project Veritas confrontation with Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner, is below.

.

Project Veritas Catches Pfizer R&D Official Stating Company Mutating COVID Viruses to Proactively Create Vaccines


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 25, 2023 | Sundance 

Project Veritas goes undercover and finds another top-level Pfizer Research and Development executive admitting the company is mutating COVID viruses to create vaccines. Instead of calling it “gain of function” research, which is illegal, they are calling it “directed evolution.”  This is very disturbing.

[NEW YORK – Jan. 25, 2023] Project Veritas released a new video today exposing a Pfizer executive, Jordon Trishton Walker, who claims that his company is exploring a way to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution” to preempt the development of future vaccines.

Walker says that Directed Evolution is different than Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that confers new or enhanced activity on a protein.” In other words, it means that a virus such as COVID can become more potent depending on the mutation / scientific experiment performed on it. (read more)

Why do Neocons Want War with Russia?


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted Jan 24, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Lindsey Graham is the twin brother of John McCain. I had asked John McCain once why he hated Russia so much. He never responded with any reason. It was always the same nonsense he always spread before Putin and after. It has baffled me as to what the difference is between Germany and Russia. We do not belittle Germany or hate its people solely because of Hitler. When it comes to Russia, it does not matter who is president, nothing ever changes. Graham said:

“If Putin gets away with this, there goes Taiwan. If Putin’s successful in Ukraine and isn’t prosecuted under international law, everything we’ve said since WWII becomes a joke. He will continue beyond Ukraine.” 

Lindsey Graham is an outright neocon who will say anything to achieve his dream – the destruction of Russia even though it is not communist. There is absolutely ZERO evidence since the fall of the USSR that anyone has sought to conquer Europe. Both Hitler and Napoleon were seeking to re-establish the old Roman Empire and rule over all of Europe. Both attempted to take Egypt to relive the glory of Rome. Some say to fulfill the prophecy that the end will come when the Holy Roman Empire Rises for that will be the time when we die. Don’t worry, Putin does not aspire to that dream. I’m not so sure about the American Neocons.

To even say if Putin wins in Ukraine, “there goes Taiwan” is an absolutely delusional statement. If anything, China would be better off taking Taiwan as the US foolishly keeps sending military arms to Ukraine. The US has already transferred thousands of artillery shells from a military weapons stockpile in Israel to Ukraine. They did the same sending weapons from South Korea to Ukraine. It was reported back in March of 2022 that planes take off almost daily from Dover Air Force Base in Delaware filled with Javelins, Stingers, howitzers, and everything else they can fit. Likewise, Germany began the same in February 2022.

Just this past week, the US military warned Biden that Is the U.S. Running Out of Weapons to even send to Ukraine. The EU foreign policy chief  also warned that “the military stocks of most [EU] member states has been, I wouldn’t say exhausted, but depleted in a high proportion, because we have been providing a lot of capacity to the Ukrainians.”

While the US aid to Ukraine came in at $113 billion far greater than Russia’s budget of 65.9 billion, it is double the military budgets of both France and Germany. It is approaching 50% of the annual budget of China. Just looking at the military spending, Russia has not been preparing to invade Europe. This is absolutely an absurd argument.

John McCain has never changed his view of Russia regardless of who is at the helm. Politico called him the “American antagonist of Russia.” It was McCain who kept pushing NATO Eastward up to the border of Russia all on his claims that if the West does not expand NATO, then Russia will. He proclaimed that those in power did not want to restore the “Soviet Union, but the Russian empire.” There was NEVER a single move that Russia ever made to imply that theory was remotely correct post-1991 and the fall of the USSR.

Lindsey Graham is carrying the banner of hatred for all Russians. It does not matter if Russia overthrows Putin, he dies, or retires. He will still hate Russia and want an all-out war to destroy Russia wiping it off the map once and for all.

The Russian people like Europeans and Americans, do not want war. Like everyone else they just want to enjoy life and take care of their families. It is always the leaders who create all the wars. We are just the dirt beneath their feet – the great unwashed who are always expendable because there are too many of us anyway.

This hatred of Russia is a strategic psychological tactic to sell the idea of war to the common people so they are willing to die for something they think is noble. Not much different from the young arab terrorists who are told this is a holy war and God will reward them if they blow themselves up. The leaders there too will never blow themselves up either.

So why do people like Lindsey Graham just hate Russians and wants war at all cost? It is hard to say. We do not hate Germans today because of Hitler. So why do we hate Russians because of Stalin? One thing is for sure, this hatred of Russia is exhausting our own conventional military supplies so while we cheer claiming Ukraine is winning, we will not be in a position to defend even ourselves if China and North Korea, as well as Iran, decide to join the party.

Showdown Ahead – Hakeem Jeffries Resubmits Schiff and Swalwell to House Intel Committee


Posted originally on the CTH on January 23, 2023 | Sundance 

House Democrat Leader Hakeem Jeffries has resubmitted Eric Swalwell and Adam Schiff to be placed on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), despite notice from House Speaker Keven McCarthy that Swalwell and Schiff would not be permitted.

Due to the sensitivity of the House intel committee, there are special rules permitting the Speaker to assign or reject nominations without a House vote, so this effort by Jeffries is political posturing.

WASHINGTON DC – The head of House Democrats has submitted Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) to sit on the powerful Intelligence Committee, setting up a battle with Republican leaders who are vowing to keep them off the panel.

Separately, Democrats this week are also expected to seat Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, according to a source familiar with the Democrats’ plans, which will likely prompt GOP leaders to hold a floor vote to remove her.

In a letter sent Saturday to Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said Schiff, the top Democrat on the Intelligence panel, and Swalwell are both “eminently qualified” to continue their service on the committee. Jeffries requested that McCarthy seat them there.

“Together, these Members have over two decades of distinguished leadership providing oversight of our nation’s Intelligence Community, in addition to their prosecutorial work in law enforcement prior to serving in Congress,” Jeffries wrote.

Unlike most committees, however, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has special rules empowering the Speaker to assign the panel’s members, in consultation with the minority leader. That means McCarthy can also decline to seat members without relying on a full House vote. (read more)

Former FBI Counterintelligence Lead Officer Who Investigated Trump-Russia Collusion, Arrested for Colluding with Russia


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 23, 2023 | Sundance

There is A LOT going on inside this story, and the pair of indictments only scratch the surface.

[WaPo – New York Times – ABC News]

According to the DOJ, “A former Special Agent in Charge of the FBI New York Counterintelligence Division [Charles F. McGonigal, 54, of New York City] and a former Soviet and Russian diplomat [Sergey Shestakov, 69, of Morris, Connecticut] were arrested Saturday on criminal charges related to their alleged violating and conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and conspiring to commit money laundering and money laundering.

Interestingly, there are two sets of indictments.  The first is in New York related to the U.S. sanctions against Russia, specifically Oleg Deripaska  [SEE HERE].  The second is in DC related to money laundering, payments from Deripaska [SEE HERE].  The New York case is related to post retirement activity in 2021.  The DC case is related to activity when Charles F McGonigal was taking money from Russians, and apparently others, while simultaneously investigating Donald Trump, “from August 2017 and continuing through and beyond his retirement from the FBI in September 2018.”

It would appear, Main Justice in DC is concerned about the timeline and are structuring the money laundering prosecution to keep tight control in Washington DC, for the period when McGonical was a special agent in charge.   However, given the backstory of the players involved, and known 2021 FARA filings that hit on the organizations involved, the FBI and DOJ have known about this issue for quite some time, at least 18 months prior to the indictments today.

These indictments are a rabbit hole that runs sideways from the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense and includes the use of “contractors” in 2021 that McGonigal had to know from his time in the FBI counterintelligence operations.

Charles McGonigal was the operational lead who kickstarted the Trump Crossfire Hurricane investigation in 2016 (a false construct) per testimony by Jonathan Moffa [pg, 32/33], and was also the lead official in charge of the investigation into the DNC email leak (WikiLeaks), claimed by the U.S. government to have stemmed from Russian hackers (another false construct).

Following his work in the DC bureau of the FBI, McGonigal was moved to be Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division in New York.  He retired Sept ’18 from New York.

From the DOJ (New York Case):

“In 2021, McGonigal and Shestakov conspired to provide services to Deripaska, in violation of U.S. sanctions imposed on Deripaska in 2018. Specifically, following their negotiations with an agent of Deripaska [likely, Yevgenyi Fokin], McGonigal and Shestakov agreed to and did investigate a rival Russian oligarch in return for concealed payments from Deripaska.

As part of their negotiations with Deripaska’s agent, McGonigal, Shestakov and the agent attempted to conceal Deripaska’s involvement by, among other means, not directly naming Deripaska in electronic communications, using shell companies as counterparties in the contract that outlined the services to be performed, using a forged signature on that contract and using the same shell companies to send and receive payment from Deripaska.

McGonigal and Shestakov were aware that their actions violated U.S. sanctions because, among other reasons, while serving as SAC, McGonigal received then-classified information that Deripaska would be added to a list of oligarchs considered for sanctions as part of the process that led to the imposition of sanctions against Deripaska. In addition, in 2019, McGonigal and Shestakov worked on behalf of Deripaska in an unsuccessful effort to have the sanctions against Deripaska lifted. In November 2021, when FBI agents questioned Shestakov about the nature of his and McGonigal’s relationship with Deripaska’s agent, Shestakov made false statements in a recorded interview.” (link)

Within the indictment [pdf here, page #12] the methods McGonigal intended to use to assist Oleg Deripaska in the investigation of a competing oligarch:

[Source pdf, page #12]

Now if you were a former FBI counterintelligence special agent and high-level officer within the organization, what subcontractor would you be reaching out to for support and research assistance on behalf of a client?  Occam’s Razor = the same subcontractors you used when you were in office.   Where would those subcontractors be able to look?… likely the same FBI/NSA databases we have been discussing for years.

Now, put your reference thinking cap back on, remember when we were saying back in 2017/’18/’19, that if FBI contractors had this kind of database access as described by the NSA and FISA court, wouldn’t it stand to reason there were also people inside these contracted agencies that would monetize their access to sell information.

Remember that conversation?

Well look at what is outlined above under the auspices of “dark web” files and McGonigal “obtaining funds from Deripaska to purchase” them.

Dark Web” files my ass, these are the files extracted by government contractor access to the FBI and NSA database.  It’s not a leap, heck, it isn’t even a nudge, to see the connection here.  I digress.

Back to the filings, let’s jump to the Money Laundering one in DC (SEE HERE).  The bold name is my suspicion on who the unnamed character is:

[…] Charles F. McGonigal, 54, a former FBI Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Office, has been arrested on charges relating to his receipt of $225,000 in cash from an individual who had business interests in Europe and who had been an employee of a foreign intelligence service [Evgeny Fokin], while McGonigal was serving as Special Agent in Charge of FBI counterintelligence efforts in the New York Office. McGonigal retired from the FBI in September of 2018.

According to the nine-count indictment, unsealed today, from August 2017 and continuing through and beyond his retirement from the FBI in September 2018, McGonigal concealed from the FBI the nature of his relationship with a former foreign security officer and businessperson [Fokin] who had ongoing business interests in foreign countries and before foreign governments. 

Specifically, McGonigal requested and received at least $225,000 in cash from [Fokin] and traveled abroad with the individual and met with foreign nationals.  The individual later served as an FBI source in a criminal investigation involving foreign political lobbying over which McGonigal had official supervisory responsibility.  McGonigal is accused of engaging in other conduct in his official capacity as an FBI Special Agent in Charge that he believed would benefit the businessperson financially. (more)

Likely due to his senior official status and close relationship with the DC FBI, the investigation of McGonigal was/is being handled by the Los Angeles office of the FBI.  According to the press release, “the FBI Los Angeles Field Office is investigating the case, with significant assistance provided by the FBI Washington Field Office.”

If you read the indictment pdf here and are curious about the New Jersey businesses and law firm involved, there is an excellent article from 2021 [SEE HERE] about a FARA notice that connects all of these dots together. “On Nov. 29, 2021, Sergey Shestakov, the former Soviet diplomat, registered as a Foreign Agent for Fokin, the alleged former senior Russian intelligence official.” (more)  That FARA filing is likely the construct of the issue that led to the indictments today.

Last point.  Why would the Washington FBI turn on one of their senior FBI officials?

It seems odd, knowing the corruption inside the DOJ and FBI, they would throw a bag over Charles McGonigal.  In normal DC operations they would retain this information as leverage against McGonigal for later use; and/or as an insurance policy against him. Something triggered the FBI and DOJ-NSD to act.

McGonigal did nothing on behalf of Oleg Deripaska, much different than Chris Steele or Adam Waldman did.  Chris Steele was at one time working for Deripaska, and Waldman -a lawyer/lobbyist with deep DC connections- was representing Deripaska’s U.S. interests.

Sure, the sanctions regime against Russia might have changed things, but essentially trying to get sanctions removed wasn’t by itself illegal.  It’s the money exchange where things get into legal trouble.  “Money laundering” only applies if the source or origin of the money is illegal; thus, the action to conceal the origin of the money creates the issue of money laundering and conspiracy therein.

…”In 2021, McGonigal and Shestakov conspired to provide services to Deripaska, in violation of U.S. sanctions imposed on Deripaska in 2018. Specifically, following their negotiations with an agent of Deripaska, McGonigal and Shestakov agreed to and did investigate a rival Russian oligarch in return for concealed payments from Deripaska.”…

The DOJ-NSD, FBI and U.S. government knew this from the FARA registration.

… And McGonigal was leveraging his FBI knowledge to get investigative searches conducted deep within the NSA/FBI database.   But apparently neither he nor the subcontractors are getting in trouble for that part.  Go figure.

Sunday Talks, Senator Joe Manchin Doing that Purple Thing Again – Admits No Federal Budget in Last 12 Years


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance 

West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin appears with his good friend Chuck Todd for an interview about ongoing political events to include the debt ceiling.

As Manchin and Todd finish each other’s sentences, the discussion hits on the upcoming debt ceiling battle.  Manchin surprisingly pulls out the purple card and states the super-secret thing that no one in DC will admit.  The last federal budget was signed into law September 2008, for fiscal year 2009.  From that moment forward, there has been nothing except continuing resolutions and omnibus spending bills [SIDENOTE: this approach was by design by Obama/Pelosi].

This 12-year timeline includes the entire tenure of House Speaker Paul Ryan, former Budget Committee Chair, who now uses the absence of the budget as a tool to advance his outside impression that DC is fiscally reckless, insert pearl clutching here. I digress.  Manchin is positioning himself as the ‘purple’ option for 2024. WATCH (or read):

[Transcript] – CHUCK TODD: And joining me now is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Senator Manchin, welcome back to Meet the Press.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, it’s always good to be with you.

CHUCK TODD: Look, I want to get into the debt ceiling. I want to get into all this stuff. But I — we got some developments overnight with those classified documents, an FBI search — the White House said it was coordinated with the FBI. But we’ve now had an FBI search of former President Trump. Now we have an FBI search into President Biden’s residence. What’s your assessment of how the president has handled the situation?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, I mean, it’s just hard to believe that in the United States of America, we have a former president and a current president that are basically in the same situation. How does this happen? You know, only thing I can tell you, Chuck, is when I go into the SCIF with the secure documents, they always ask, “Are you clean?” when you walk out. They want to make sure you’re not carrying anything out. You know, and it might be a mistake. You might just put it in your other papers, but you double-check right there. To be held accountable and responsible is what we all are. And to put those in unsecured spaces is irresponsible.

CHUCK TODD: Do you see similarities, or do you see more differences in how President Trump versus how President Biden —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m not going to make —

CHUCK TODD: — has handled this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — that decision, but I think that Merrick Garland did the right thing by putting the special counsel.

CHUCK TODD: You do?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And I think that we should wait until the special counsel, rather than making this a political circus. Let them find out the facts. What — was one more damaging? Are they both about the same, did not cause any problem, or is one more reckless and irresponsible than the other? I can’t answer that question, but I think the special counsel will do a better job than the politicians and the political circus that is going to follow.

CHUCK TODD: President Biden said he had no regrets in how he handled this. Do you have any advice for him on how he should handle this going forward?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, I think he should have a lot of regrets. Yeah. I would —

CHUCK TODD: What are those —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I would think that. I said, “Whoever’s responsible.” I mean, if I hold people accountable, and I use — whether my chief of staff or, you know, my staff, who, that were doing this, that I’m looking at, then I’m going to hold someone accountable. But basically, the buck stops with me.

CHUCK TODD: So you think he should be out there, “Look, I mess — I messed up –”

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: That’s all. Just say —

CHUCK TODD: “Maybe I didn’t do it.” Just say it —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — “I made a mistake.”

CHUCK TODD: Just fall on your sword here?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We’re all human.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We make mistakes. I can tell you I don’t think anyone intended, he sure didn’t intend for it to fall in wrong hands and use it against our country. I know they didn’t intend that to happen. Could it have happened? I don’t know. And yeah, you just might as well say, “Listen, it’s irresponsible. It was something we should’ve had a better check and balance on.”

CHUCK TODD: Now, former President Trump defied a subpoena. So in that sense, the, the way each has handled it is different.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yes.

CHUCK TODD: Do you acknowledge that?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Absolutely. Much different than the other. One’s saying, “Okay, I hope I didn’t make any mistakes.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — I hope no one’s compromised. I hope we didn’t hurt our country.” And the other one says, “Ugh, no. I know it didn’t. Believe me.” Well, you know what? What they said, verify? You have to verify.

CHUCK TODD: Trust but verify?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Trust but verify. Let’s find out. And that’s what the special counsel’s —

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you want here? Both special counsels to sort of resolve this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: First of all, every one of us, in our life, have to be held accountable and responsible for our actions because people want accountability. And they want basically when you’re held accountable, are you responsible or not? If you are, would you — can you fix that? Did you make a mistake? Fine. You’re, you know —

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you think – the president needs to get out there and just get in front of this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Cicero, Cicero said, “To err is human.” You’re a human being. You’re going to make mistakes. Did you intend to make it? Did you intend to harm somebody? Did you intend to basically do an irresponsible thing? I don’t think — hopefully, neither one of them did.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIIN: But it sure turned out to be irresponsible.

CHUCK TODD: Let’s talk about the debt ceiling. You’re — as always, you’re trying to find a compromise, middle ground.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: I know your instinct here. But why should Republicans get the benefit of the doubt on the debt ceiling here, considering that it’s a — that they’re sort of manufacturing a crisis that’s a bit unnecessary right now?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all, if one side thinks that the other one’s more responsible for the debt at $31.4 trillion, that’s, that is totally not accurate and it’s deceptive. We’re all responsible. We’ve got a $31.4 trillion debt. It’s a runaway debt, and no one’s holding themselves accountable. And basically, I think you said it, use the budget process. I’ve been here 12 years. We haven’t had a budget yet.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah. I — that’s what I don’t get here.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We haven’t had a budget yet.

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what I question —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, you should.

CHUCK TODD: — you want to do this special committee here.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m —

CHUCK TODD: And I’m sitting here going, “Why add more “bureaucracy?” We have a budget committee. We have two budget committees. We have a Joint Committee on Taxation. We have all these different committees that have already been created to deal with this process. Why can’t we use the congressional bureaucracy that exists?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We have 12 appropriations committees —

CHUCK TODD: They’re —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They’re supposed to do their job. Why don’t you basically put a time certain on —

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — what you can do and what you can’t and when you do it? I can’t speak for that. I was a former governor of the state of West Virginia.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I was responsible for a balanced budget amendment and basically staying within the realms of my Constitution. So, you know, I met every week. Every week like clockwork they walked in my office on a Tuesday or Wednesday and sit down and go over it. You’re either going to be — have to make some cuts now, make some adjustments now, so we end the year with a balanced budget or a surplus. There’s nothing that holds us accountable. Nothing at all. We can say, “Oh, we’re going to do it.” As I’ve said before, 12 years, haven’t had a budget. That’s ridiculous.

CHUCK TODD: So, let me — you want to do this sort of, that you and Senator Romney, to have committee that deals with the trust fund issues. But right now, neither party wants to touch – I mean, in that sense, Donald Trump came out, and certainly Democrats, nobody wants to touch Social Security or Medicare.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all —

CHUCK TODD: So how do you separate those two out and deal with our fiscal problems?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Why would you scare the bejesus out of people that are basically going to say — in West Virginia, I’ve got 60% of my population that that’s all they have is Medicare and Social Security. You think I’m going to go down that path and put them in jeopardy? No. But there are so much other things, the basically wasteful spending, that can be corralled in without scaring the bejesus, depending on what political side you’re on.

CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you about wasteful spending, because one of the three most hypocritical words I hear are “waste, fraud and abuse.” Right. Everybody says, “Oh, waste, fraud, and abuse.”

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And it’s all there. It’s all there.

CHUCK TODD: Okay, but waste, fraud, and abuse aren’t going to balance the budget, ok? At the end of the day, there are going to have to be choices that have to be made. What is something that ought to be on, on, in the decision of, “You know, maybe we’re spending too much”?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, we know we’re spending too much because we’re not balancing our budget and —

CHUCK TODD: But on what?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — we have more debt. The bottom line is, it’s in the eyes of the beholder. That’s the problem that we have. Five-hundred-and-thirty-five people said, “Well, yeah. What you’re doing is wasteful, Chuck. I think you ought to cut that.” And you’re going to say, “Okay, Joe. How about yours?”

CHUCK TODD: But your, your spending that you think is mandatory, another person thinks is wasteful or abuse.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah. Just think, for every dollar, just get it down, break it down to the dollar. Is there any savings within that dollar you think that is wasteful or abuse that we could at least have a target to set? Is it a penny? Is it five pennies? Is it a nickel? Where is it?

CHUCK TODD: But here’s what gets lost here, is nobody will put anything on the table. Everybody says, “We’ve got to cut spending.” Well, what? And nobody wants to articulate —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the process —

CHUCK TODD:– the what.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, you hit it dead on the head. The process isn’t working. How come we’re not held accountable to have – to have the appropriation bills done at a certain time before the end of the fiscal year?

CHUCK TODD: You tell me.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, that’s what I —

CHUCK TODD: I mean –

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know –

CHUCK TODD: – what does Chuck Schumer say? What does Mitch McConnell

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know what happens? It rolls over into an omnibus bill at the end and everything’s thrown into it. “Okay. Here we got it, guys. That’s it.” It makes no sense.

CHUCK TODD: So what should – it sounds like you actually think the debt ceiling is a moment we should use to focus on —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, if you’re going to use the debt ceiling for anything except for theatrics, okay, which is what probably might happen for a while, we’re going to pass the debt ceiling. You are exactly correct.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: It has to pass. You know, we have the currency of it, you know – the good faith of the United States dollar and the currency of the world. You just can’t let it default and basically hold us in jeopardy from where we stand in the world, world order. With that being said, is how do you get to it? Do you use this moment? Do you come to a reason – responsibility? What are we paying for interest now? For ten years, it was zero. It was funny money. Were not – you know, it doesn’t put any burden. We’re just raising debt, but we’re not basically harming how we have to meet that debt through our interest payments. Now we’re talking real money on an interest basis. We’re almost, up to what our defense budget is, paying in interest.

CHUCK TODD: I guess I come back to, and I don’t think you have the answer either, which is what is the moment to force this conversation?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: This is a moment if, if Kevin McCarthy coming in – coming in new says, “Okay, this is – it’s serious,” and he takes it from the standpoint. And he knows —

CHUCK TODD: What does he need to do that you would take him seriously in this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, you know, Chuck —

CHUCK TODD: Do you know what I mean by that? Like, how do you know when he’s being serious, and how do you when he’s paying politics?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the bottom line is he has a hell of a – heck of a political hand that’s not, not very good right now. He’s not holding a lot, if you will. And he has ten or 12 that’s pretty much out there. He has to make a decision how he wants to govern and how he ought to these next two years in this 118th Congress. You know – I just – it was amazing. I just saw that the Ohio legislature, I don’t know if you paid any attention to that —

CHUCK TODD: I did. Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The Ohio legislature, which is Republican-controlled –

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – basically chose their new speaker, a Republican, with as many, if not more votes, from the Democrats because they wanted someone they can work with. That’s a coalition. Why can’t we put coalitions together here?

CHUCK TODD: Well, that’s —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The moderate, centrist Democrats coming over and working, whoever’s the majority, and saying, “You don’t have to bow and cow-tail to the extremes.”

CHUCK TODD: Yeah. You don’t have to worry about primaries. A lot of your colleagues have to worry about primaries. Isn’t that why this —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Let me tell you —

CHUCK TODD – doesn’t happen?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – one more thing. I’ve got to be honest with you, Chuck. If it’s all about the election, the next election, you know, that’s the worst thing that could happen to us.

CHUCK TODD: You just came from Davos.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: There’s a moment, I don’t know if you realized, that went viral between you and Senator Sinema. I want to show the moment here. I want to ask you about it. You guys are high-fiving. I think we’ll show it again here. It was right after she was talking about the filibuster.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: Is that what you were high-fiving about?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, that was – I think, you know, after that. I saw her hand go up and I said, “Sure” because here, the two of us are committed to protecting the filibuster, which I think protects checks and balances on the executive branch. So if you have a Democrat, Democrat, Democrat – president, House and Senate – and you have a strong president, basically leader of the party, then you don’t have a check and balance because I can guarantee you the House and Senate will roll wherever the president wants. I – and I’ve said this before. I appreciate the Republican senators and the leadership of the minority leader at that time, McConnell, majority leader at that time – with Donald Trump every day beating on him, “Get rid of the filibuster.” You’ve got 53, 54 Republicans, and he would not. And I appreciate that. And I told Harry Reid we should not have done it when we did it in 2013. But to come back now, the checks and balances aren’t there. It makes and forces them to work together. Think what we’ve accomplished in the 117th, the most divided Congress we’ve ever had, and we did more substantial bills, I think that’s going to be transformational.

CHUCK TODD: You think those first two years of Biden and this Democratic Congress is going to be historic?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I think it’s going to be transformational and historical, yes, because here you had a bipartisan infrastructure bill we haven’t done for years.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You had then on top of that the CHIPS Act, which will bring manufacturing back so we don’t have supply chains that we’re depending on that aren’t loyal and trustworthy. And then we have the Inflation Reduction Act, which is going to give us – it’s been misaligned because this administration basically said it’s environmental, environmental, environmental. That bill is designed to be energy security, Chuck. And energy security is exactly what we need.

CHUCK TODD: And you’re frustrated that the White House won’t say the phrase “energy security”?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They will not use the word, and they haven’t. I’m begging you all, please. Energy security. We have to have fossil. We do it better and cleaner than anywhere in the world. And we can be energy secured for ten years, and also be able to invest in technology of the future.

CHUCK TODD: Is this an agenda you can run for reelection on in West Virginia?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, most certainly because we’re seeing right now, I’ve got a battery plant coming in. I’ve got basically hydrogen coming in that direction. We’ve got expansion. And we’re raising our coal with carbon capture sequestration. We’ve got basically methane capturing using gas. We have people that are fighting continuously. And you have to have the pipeline to move this product. And it’s going to be needed. If not, you’re going to end up like Europe. And that’s where I didn’t want to rub it into them, but Europe took an approach that they’re going to say, “We’re going to have cap-and-trade.” And we’re going to be basically charging you a carbon tax.” I’ve said, “I’m not going to support that and vote for it because I think it doesn’t work.” So I took the approach, and basically we wrote this bill with incentives. And it was working. And that’s why they were all upset. That’s why the chancellor and that’s why presidents of other countries were very upset on this bill and concerned about it.

CHUCK TODD: If you run for office in 2024, are you going to run as a Democrat?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, I haven’t made a decision what I’m going to do in 2024. I’ve got two years ahead of me now to do the best I can for the state and for my country.

CHUCK TODD: What are – what’s on the table? Is reelection on the table?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Everything’s on the table.

[End Transcript]

2023, The Year of The Great DC UniParty Getting Exposed – Example Coming with Biden and McConnell Making Deal on Debt Ceiling


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance 

CTH has predicted the most significant political revelation in 2023 will be the exposure of the Washington DC UniParty, and one of the largest moments for this sunlight is going to come with the “debt ceiling” extension.

The background to understand this level of sunlight, comes specifically because 20 House Republicans have taken a stand with bold contrast.  Whenever there is a bold contrast situation, the UniParty is exposed because the lavender hues where red and blue overlay is not possible.  The House20 have created a situation where Speaker Kevin McCarthy cannot hide, and there are enough MAGA Republicans to expose how the conniving UniParty apparatus really works.

Within the CBS political discussion, Robert Costa puts the upcoming ‘debt ceiling’ discussion into context while revealing how the White House is approaching the issue.  Costa is a vested weasel, but what he says in this segment is accurate.  Joe Biden will work with Mitch McConnell in the Senate to subvert the House of Representatives, because the House -as structured by the MAGA coalition- is now viewed as the enemy to both the White House and Senate republicans.

OMG, guys, like how lucky are we right now?

You don’t have to guess if Costa is correct on this, because the evidence is already in place.  What Costa is describing is exactly how and why the 2023 Omnibus spending bill was put together by the White House, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer before the Republican control of the House took place.  Senate Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, are structurally aligned with Democrats against the House Republicans.

The CBS panel is essentially having a conversation saying, ‘How lucky are we’ that Mitch McConnell is a Democrat right now?   And this is the truest nature of the UniParty in action.

[Transcriptvideo at 02:21] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I’m glad you bring that up, because the other thing that the departure of the chief of staff raises questions about is this looming policy and political conversation about the debt ceiling.

Who runs point on that? Obviously, the Treasury secretary has a huge role. But in terms of talking to the Hill and the negotiations, who’s doing that if the chief of staff is leaving?

ROBERT COSTA: What I’m told from people inside the West Wing is that President Biden himself has a relationship with Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, of course, with Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader.

They are in some ways going to try to cut out Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the House Republicans. There’s not an appetite among Democrats to put spending cuts on the table at all. They would like to see a clean debt limit extension. And Jim Clyburn, one of the top Democrats in the House, recently told me he could see a scenario where centrist House Republicans band together with House Democrats for a clean debt limit extension.

[…] ROBERT COSTA: Privately, I’m told President Biden and Senator McConnell have chuckled behind the scenes with longtime friends about how at this stage in divided government, it’s these two men who have long been friends who are being counted upon to perhaps cut a deal.

I remember, when I first started covering Congress a decade ago, I would remember Vice President Biden was the one…

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.

ROBERT COSTA: … who came to the Capitol to meet with Senator McConnell to cut a deal on that so-called fiscal cliff way back then.

So, they have that history, and they were recently in Kentucky together, showing at least, not political solidarity, but in terms of a personal relationship, there’s a real rapport.”  Video Prompted:

Recipe for Perfect Pancakes


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance

Making good pancakes is one of the easiest processes; however, you need just the right ingredients.  Consider this recipe next time:

2 large eggs

1 1/4 cups whole milk

4 tablespoons melted butter

1/4 teaspoon salt

1 3/4 cups flour

2 teaspoons baking powder

1 tablespoon sugar

.

UPDATE: Here’s what I know:

♦ I know the key principals have read the outline, reached out, connected, seem to concur with the scale of the problem, and are discussing options.

♦ I know this is uncomfortbly outside the box for almost all involved.

♦ I know I have assembled an external small group ready, willing and capable to engage.

♦ I know the alliance group -outside govt- comprehend the larger outline (as below), and despite initial reservations now agree on goals and objectives.  The human resources are there, and their ability to get things going seems solid.

♦ I know everyone inside and outside wants to do the right thing, the best thing.

The basic elements are in place, and in my opinion the goal timeline would be to have all the preliminary structural and logistical work done by Easter; then blitz with intense speed on “Operation Sunlight” for the following six months.

Beyond that, all other aspects are now contingent upon what happens inside the discussion silo of the principals.

CTH password protected posts are under the password: wolverines

Communication, discussion and step-by-step outlining is a very time consuming enterprise.  If you are wondering about the light CTH posting recently, refer to the prior sentence.  I cannot say much, except to say no one is more cynical than I, and yet… We live our best life and remain pragmatically hopeful.  If they do this, we will all benefit.

As previously noted, the 118th Congress is expected to authorize a “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”   The subcommittee will fall under the jurisdiction of the House Judiciary Committee led by Chairman Jim Jordan.  Additionally, Thomas Massie (R-KY) is being reported as a representative under consideration for the chairmanship of the House Subcommittee.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and potential House Subcommittee Chair Thomas Massie should have a grasp of the scale and scope of the opposition they are about to face.  Assuming they have a fully prepared staff to support them – willing to take on a very consequential investigation; then we begin by first anticipating who will oppose their effort to investigate the “weaponization of government“.   Which is to say, everyone!

The defensive apparatus of the DC political system will likely do everything in their power, individually and with collective assistance, to ensure this committee fails.  The stakes are quite high.  As readers here can well attest, DC politics is an institutional system of purposefully created compartmentalized silos.

The compartmented information silos permit plausible deniability, and this collection of weaponized institutions contains career bureaucrats who view their opposition as the American people.

Example – The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and every Republican member therein, including SSCI Vice-Chairman Marco Rubio, will make it their willfully blind priority to obstruct any investigation that touches on how the intelligence apparatus of the United States Government is weaponized against the people.

The SSCI is the institution that facilitated the creation of the National Security State.  Any effort to investigate the outcome of that system will make the House investigators adversarial to their colleagues in the Senate.

Additionally, every executive branch intelligence institution, including the DOJ-NSD, FBI, DHS, ODNI, CIA, DoD, DIA, NSC and every sub-agency within their authorities, will do anything and everything to block a subcommittee looking into their domestic activity.

A lot of bad decisions have led to really bad things.  DC does not want those bad things discussed.

Every national security justification that exists, and some that have yet to be created by the DOJ National Security Division solely for the expressed interest of blocking this subcommittee, will be deployed.

Every member of the subcommittee and their staff will be under constant surveillance.  Phones will be tapped and tracked, electronic devices monitored, cars and offices bugged, physical surveillance deployed, and top tier officials at every subsidiary agency of the U.S. government will assign investigative groups and contract agents to monitor the activity of the subcommittee and provide weekly updates on their findings.

The White House together with the National Security Council will also backchannel to and from these agencies doing the surveillance.

The intelligence apparatus media will be deployed, and daily leaks from the various agencies to their contact lists in the New York Times, Politico, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC will be in constant two-way communication for narrative assembly and counterpropaganda efforts.

This is the context of opposition to begin thinking about before anything moves forward.

Additionally, the national security state will demand the House investigation take place on their terms.  They will demand secrecy, national security classification and require House subcommittee members to adhere to the Intelligence Community terms for review and discussion of anything.

Each agency will not voluntarily assist or participate in the investigation of any of their conduct.  Every official within every agency will do the same; and they will require legal representation that will be provided to them by Lawfare, political operatives skilled in the use of “National Security” and “classified information”, as a justification for non-compliance and non-assistance.  A protracted legal battle should be predicted.

Lastly, anticipate Special Counsel Jack Smith using his position to block the House Subcommittee from receiving evidence.  The House should anticipate that congressional representatives are already under investigation as a result of the authorities granted to Jack Smith by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco {Go Deep}.  The White House and all of the executive branch agencies will use the existing Special Counsel to block House investigation. Heck, that looks to be the primary purpose of the appointment.

As a result, expect the House Subcommittee members to be under constant threat from the DOJ, via the Special Counsel, specifically from DAG Lisa Monaco, with statements that House Subcommittee investigative efforts are “obstructing” a special counsel investigation.  The aforementioned agencies and the Senate Intel Committee will work with the DOJ to use the Jack Smith special counsel as a shield to block participation with the House Subcommittee.

With all of that in mind, what is the successful path forward?

♦ First, everything has to be done in sunlight and maximum transparency, even the planning and organization of the committee construct, purpose and goals.

The committee can have no shadow operations, unknown guiding hands or secrets that can be discovered and then weaponized against the intent.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I know DC has little concept of working like this, but you can train yourself to do it.  You have nothing to hide; however, those who are being investigated have everything to hide.  Do not provide them ammunition by retaining secrets that can be weaponized against you.

As Andrew Breitbart said, be open with your secrets.

Your second cousin Alice will be a source for the New York Times to write about the Thanksgiving dinner three years ago when she heard the “N” word or a tasteless joke about something outrageous.  Every member of the committee and staff need to prepare for a dossier completed by the FBI about them and distributed to the government allies in mainstream media.

Security clearances will be leveraged and threatened as a tool of the national security state to stop the secrecy envelope from being opened publicly.  This will happen; so just anticipate it.  When the security clearance of [insert_name_here] is threatened, go to the microphones and tell the public who is doing the threatening, and why.

♦GOALS – The goal needs to be crystal clear to anyone and everyone who would contemplate assisting.  Yes, there needs to be a legislative intent in order to legally formulate the committee; that’s a no-brainer.  However, the ultimate goal should NOT BE accountability on those who may have perpetrated or supported weaponized activity against American Citizens.  The ultimate goal SHOULD BE for maximum public information, transparency and sunlight about the weaponization as it is discovered.

Let us assume the goal is accepted.  Before moving forward, the subcommittee needs a professional communication strategy in place before the rules, terms and member outlines are structured or made public.

A thoughtful communication strategy so that information can come from the committee to the public without the filtration of a corrupt system that will bend and skew the findings as a weapon against the committee itself.

♦COMMUNICATION PORTAL – Hire a communication staff, and set up a website for the sharing of information directly from the committee to the public.  The daily activity of the committee should be shared publicly in granular detail.  The witness names as scheduled, documents requested, everything that involves the committee activity should be known to the general public. This system should be updated at least DAILY, or as information is compiled.

This communication network should also contain a separate staff assigned to solicit, accept and distribute information provided by the public to the subcommittee.  Yes, you read that correctly, the subcommittee website should be able to accept information provided by the public as it relates to the ongoing committee work.

Crowdsource We The People as research leverage against the much more effective Lawfare operations you will face in opposition.  This means a portal where the ‘open source’ information can be delivered by researchers, many of those on the spectrum, who hold deep knowledge of the information and system processes in the silos.

In the past several years, thousands of documents have been retrieved by FOIA and public records investigations.  Hundreds of experts in the granular details of the DHS, FBI, DoD and DOJ-NSD systems have knowledge that can benefit the committee; you just need a way for them to transmit the evidence/information to you.

That ‘open source’ evidence should flow into the committee portal with address sourcing that allows the committee staff to review and locate it independently.  This avoids the predictable counterargument, from the national security state, that Russia (or foreign actors) is feeding disinformation into the committee.

The documentary evidence will mostly be “open source,” extracted and then cross-referenced from within the multiple silo system the national security state uses as a shield. And the origination of the documents will be traceable and easy to duplicate, thereby providing secure provenance.   The internal staff manager for this inbound portal is critical (think former HPSCI Nunes staff).

Documents found by the committee should then be uploaded to the same communication system (website), permitting the public -especially the autists- to review and then cross reference the committee material; ultimately channeling information back into the committee if important dots connect or puzzle pieces clarify.   Think of this as a massive counter Lawfare operation with hundreds of Deep State subject matter experts assisting the committee.

Witness transcripts should be uploaded within 36 hours of testimony.  Then let the public do the research, background review and dot connecting from the testimony.  If you build it, they will come.

♦ Next, GO PUBLIC with everything.  Do not use the terms and conditions of the secretive administrative state.  Tell the public what you are finding as you are finding it.  You can share information without violating “sources and methods.”   Schedule a media appearance at the 8pm hour twice weekly with a high visibility broadcast media network to provide updates and answer questions.

These scheduled appearances should be in addition to random media press releases and press comments as pertinent information to the subcommittee arrives.   What this means is that you do not wait to produce a 2,000-page final report before releasing the information.  The final report should be an update and summary of all previous findings that have been released to the public along the way.

♦ At the outset, put no rules on media contacts with any subcommittee staff or member.  Counter the darkness that fuels the intelligence community agenda with maximum sunlight and transparency.  Use truth as a weapon against disinformation.  That means no nondisclosure agreements at any part of the process.

Yes, this is radical change in approach, but this is also a radical enemy you are facing.  Playing the secrecy game works in their favor, not yours.  Transparency is your tool, not theirs – use it.

Use truth as a weapon.

Every member of the committee can say anything they want about any of the material or witness testimony they hear during the course of the investigation.  Public hearing or closed-door sessions, it matters not.  The same rule applies.  Committee members are completely free to discuss any findings as the information is reviewed.

The goal should NOT BE accountability on those who may have perpetrated or supported weaponized activity against American Citizens.  The goal SHOULD BE for maximum public information, transparency and sunlight about the weaponization as it is discovered.  This approach makes We The People the accountability portion of the process.  As a result, the next section is again rather groundbreaking….

♦ Every witness to the committee should be granted full legal immunity provided by the House and House Speaker for anything said during the testimony or admitted as being done as part of the evidence fact-finding.  Again, the goal is transparency and openness, not prosecution and accountability.  Use sunlight as a weapon to draw out the truth, then let the American people be the judges of what that truth means when contrasted against the constitution of our nation.

Let me repeat this… There should be ZERO legal liability for any conduct that happened as a part of any witness effort to weaponize the United States government against the American people.  The immunity should cover everything *except* perjury from the witness to the committee itself (ex. Oliver North).   If the witness lies, the immunity evaporates.

Why this approach?  Because (a) it circumvents any issues that might impede testimony, removes hurdles; (b) immunity compels confession, honest sunlight and the urgency of the situation; (c) immunity makes the truth more likely; and finally, (d) you are not going to get legal convictions anyway.   The truth has no agenda.

Another reason for the immunity is because the operation of the subcommittee should be heavily focused on witness testimony, not documents.  The documents can come as part of the follow-up to the witness testimony, but it is the witness testimony needed; the publication of the transcripts then provides the public sunlight.  This is key.

90% of the committee work should be focused on witnesses and questions therein.  Only 10% of the committee work should be seeking documents.   Avoiding the documents shortens the time needed for investigative disclosures and avoids protracted legal battles therein.  If the people on the committee, those who are asking the questions, do not already know the details behind the questions and the locations of the supportive documents, then you have the wrong people on the committee.

Every response to a questioned witness should come with the following question: “How do you know this?”   That is how you will discover the nature of the documents, communications, emails etc that support the fact-finding mission.  “How do you know this” also leads to more witnesses.  Work the issue from the bottom up.   How do you know this; who told you this; why did you do this; what authority guided you; who authorized this approach? etc. etc. etc.

Use fully immunized witnesses to tell the story, then go look for the documents to corroborate the witness statements using the ‘under oath’ transcript as part of the impenetrable subpoena itself; but don’t wait, keep questioning witnesses.

DOCUMENTS – Once you identify the location of documents that would assist the sunlight objective, don’t only rely on the government side of the conversation as the targeted source for retrieval.  If the document contains communication to external parties, ie public-private partnership, then move to gain the documents from the private side, thereby avoiding the roadblocks inside government.

Regardless of the status of the document search, and regardless of whether legal battles will be needed to retrieve those documents, keep moving forward with the witness testimony.  Do not stop committee work just because internal silo opposition is being fought.  Keep working the plan and bringing immunized witnesses, both inside government and outside government, forward for questioning.  Leaders within organizations and agencies are important, but clerks, staff, and administrative aides in/around those same leaders could also provide important information.

This subcommittee approach, along with the people needed, will obviously take more time to assemble.  However, once put together everything thereafter moves at a very rapid pace, which is also part of the strategy.  Flood the information zone with maximum sunlight and keep the opposition off balance.

The goal is sunlight. Rip the Band-Aid off, call the baby ugly and start the process to fix this crap by exposing it. Restore the First and Fourth Amendments, and heal the injury.

From the Church Commission we got the secret FISA court and more tools for violations of our Fourth Amendment rights.  From the 911 Commission we got The Patriot Act, DHS, TSA, DNI and many more violations of our rights and Fourth Amendment protections.   We do not need any legislation as an outcome of the House “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”

We do not need your legislative help.  All prior legislative help only ended up making things worse.

What we need is a full, uncensored, brutally honest expose’ of how bad things have become and how that system can be dismantled.  The existing constitution is the protection, just remove the stuff that is violating it.

I know this approach is rather different from the norm.  However, if this roadmap seems reasonable, I am certain you will find support from within the silo system that is currently operating, and from people outside the government who will volunteer time and effort to assist.

Summarized: (1) Know the scale of opposition.  (2) Formulate a communication strategy around it and build a website. (3)  Communicate findings by telling the story to the American people as it is discovered. (4) Grant immunity to all witnesses. (5) Don’t wait until the end to generate another useless report that few will read. (6) Make sunlight the motive of the committee. (7) Consider success when the American people can see the problem.  (8) Dissolve any weaponized systems.  (9) Don’t create new ones.

If you tell us the truth, We The People will fix it ourselves.