Jul 3 2025

MEDICAID BACKDOOR SCAM: Rep. Roy And How Illegal Aliens Are Receiving Free Medical Coverage


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannon’s War Room on: July 2, 2025, at 1:00 pm EST

Jul 3 2025

A New Era Of American Greatness: Monica Crowley On 250th U.S. Anniversary In Iowa


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannon’s War Room on: July 2, 2025, at 1:00 pm EST

Jul 3 2025

Bannon: “Elon Musk Screwed This Admin And Our President Worse Than Anyone Could Imagine.”


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannon’s War Room on: July 2, 2025, at 1:00 pm EST

Jul 3 2025

The Economic Confidence Model v the 80-Year Cyclical Theory


Posted originally on Jul 3, 2025 by Martin Armstrong 

SixthWaveDetailed

The concept of cycles is becoming accepted in Western culture. Recently, people have been focusing on what they deem the 80-year cyclical theory, which marks a significant shift in humanity. While this may be true, as it takes a few generations to change society, they are not incorporating the additional nuisances associated with the true Economic Confidence Model.

The 80-year theory, also known as the Strauss–Howe generational theory, posits that there are four 20-year cycles or turnings that culminate in a cataclysmic event. For example, some are using 2024 as the starting point, which brings us back to 1944 when America was at the cusp of World War II. Going back an additional 80 years would bring us to 1864, the year of the US Civil War. Taking it back even further, we arrive at 1784 when the Revolutionary War ended.

Now, absolutely everything is connected, and garnering the most accurate forecasts requires peering out at society and the global economy. The problem with the 80-year theory is that it was developed from a solely American viewpoint, as it was designed to explain the history and future of the United States.

26 309.6 Wave 1727.65 2037.25AD

The Economic Confidence Model, at a basic level, sees waves of 8.6 years building in intensity, amounting to six waves to construct a major long wave of 51.6 years. What you get at the end of these 51.6-year waves is very profound. After the 1774.95 peak, we end up with a revolution against the monarchy. The next wave peak in 1826.55 produced the Russo-Persian War, 1826-1828, Greek War of Independence, Battle of Monte Santiago between Brazil and Argentina, Mexican Constitution is formed, the Maryland Democratic Party begins creating the confrontation between the Democrats and Republicans (South v North) which sets the stage for the American Civil War in 1861, and even Thomas Jefferson and John Adams both died on the 4th of July 1826 (1826.50) marking the end of the generation of Enlightenment whereas the peak of the wave was July 19th. The next wave, 1878, saw the Long Depression, which was called the “Great Depression” until 1929-1932. The next wave peak of 1929,75 produced the takeover of the West by socialists. Then the next wave was 1981.35, which marked the peak in interest rates even to the day.

Each of these events shifted society as a whole. Capital concentration shifted profoundly, altering nations. Nothing exists in isolation. The major wave is expected to be in 2032, and this will be followed by a shift in economic power from the West to the 

Jul 3 2025

New Report Finds Miscarriage and Pregnancy Loss Among COVID Vaccinated Mothers


Posted originally on Jul 3, 2025 by Martin Armstrong

Pregnant

The biological warfare unleashed on the global population should not be a forgotten war. A new study observed miscarriages and pregnancy losses among mothers-to-be who received the COVID-19 vaccination during gestational weeks 8-13 and 14-27, respectively. Researchers also noted the impact on unborn babies of mothers injected with the influenza vaccination as a comparison.

The Israeli study analyzed 226,395 pregnancies and found that 1.1% of women lost their babies when given the COVID-19 vaccination after week 24 of pregnancy. An alarming 2.7% of women who received a COVID-19 vaccination in the early weeks of pregnancy suffered the loss of a pregnancy. The study also factored in expected losses due to natural events. Those who received dose 1 during 8-13 weeks experienced a higher-than-expected number of fetal losses of approximately 18 vs. 9 for every 100 exposed pregnancies.

Most pregnancy losses occurred after gestational week 20, with half of deaths happened after week 25. Mothers who received dose three of the vaccine during weeks 8 to 13 exhibited a higher-than-expected number of fetal deaths with nearly 1.9 (95% CI: 0.39-3.42]) additional fetal losses above expected per 100 pregnancies.

How does this compare to the typical influenza vaccination? Women vaccinated during weeks 8 to 27 of pregnancy exhibited a lower-than-expected number of fetal losses. Those who received the flu vaccine in weeks 8 to 13 had fewer losses of around 5 per 100 women vaccinated. The study also attributed this to health vaccine bias as those who received the influenzas vaccine were likely to be healthy to begin with and cleared by their doctor rather than forced by their government.

Israel has one of the highest global rates of vaccination, and although they did not issue a blanket mandate, the government provided the vaccinated with a “green pass” while shunning the others from accessing public venues. The Israeli Ministry of Health, along with every other health agency, urged pregnant women to receive the COVID-19 vaccination and explicitly advised all pregnant women in their second and third trimester to take the mRNA vaccine. The government found that women were most likely to take the untested vaccine if their physician recommended doing so. Every tactic to coerce the population into willingly accepting the vaccine was unleashed.

The Israeli Ministry of Health continues to recommend that pregnant women accept the vaccination, and if their babies survive, they can begin to take the COVID-19 vaccinations at 6 months of age. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the HHS in the United States changed their recommendations in recent months and no longer encourage healthy pregnant women to take the vaccine, likely solely due to Robert F. Kennedy Jr becoming the HHS Secretary.

“As of today, the COVID vaccine for healthy children and healthy pregnant women has been removed from the CDC recommended immunization schedule,” Kennedy said in May 2025. “Last year, the Biden administration urged healthy children to get yet another COVID shot despite the lack of any clinical data to support the repeat booster strategy in children.”

The COVID-19 vaccination was never a medical necessity. There were no tests or studies conducted. Global governments aligned to attack the global population with an experimental vaccine that they insisted was safe and effective.

Jul 3 2025

Another Sanctuary City Watches Budget Implode


Posted originally on Jul 3, 2025 by Martin Armstrong 

Denver sanctuary city AP 1182020

Yet another blue city is experiencing a substantial deficit due to government overspending. Denver Mayor Mike Johnston declared in May that the city was facing a $50 million budget deficit for the current fiscal year that is expected to explode to $200 million by 2026.

The city’s general fund reserves have declined from $391 million in 2022 to $299 million in 2024. The city plans to cut the general fund spending by 12%, a steeper cut than what was experienced during the COVID pandemic. The city has already implemented a hiring freeze for public workers and layoffs are expected. “We will have to look at layoffs,” Johnston said. “We do not envision a scenario where it’s possible to right-size this budget without that impact on personnel.”

Money Down Toilet

Denver spent $356 million on migrants, and the mayor plans to continue fighting deportation efforts. All of these sanctuary cities are experiencing steep deficits, and they act perplexed as to why. Roughly 45,000 migrants have made their way to Denver since 2022, according to the Common Sense Institute (CSI). The local healthcare system cannot accommodate the large influx, but the city has spent $49 million on migrant healthcare after 8,000 migrants recorded around 20,000 visits to Denver Health alone last year. Doctors are calling the strain on the system a “humanitarian crisis” that has pushed the state hospital system to a breaking point. The hospital was forced to remove 15 beds in 2023 after finishing FY2022 $22 million above budget.

In February 2024, Denver voted to cut public services by $5 million to redistribute costs to migrants. The city acknowledged that taxpayers were on the hook for a $180 million bill in 2024 to host illegal aliens. The city spent, on a low estimate, $40 million on migrants in 2023. These politicians have absolutely no scope of the true cost of paying for unemployed migrants who do not contribute to society. They refuse to address the core problem because that would unmask the true motive behind the deliberate and calculated invasion.

Another blue city favorite is misappropriating funds to combat the homelessness epidemic. They continue to throw money at the problem without resolution. In 2024 alone, Denver spend $242 million on assisting the homeless population, with $30 million going toward rental assistance.

Denver allocated $4 BILLION for its basic income project that provides unconditional cash payments to the homeless with no strings attached. By the end of 2024, the city will have paid out over $10.8 billion to people who are unable to contribute to society. The city is robbing the working class to pay for those who prefer to rely on government assistance.

We will see more cities slash their budgets as they realize they simply cannot afford to bankroll tens of thousands of migrants. These city leaders are refusing to cooperate with ICE due to their hatred of Trump and are willing to allow their deficits to sink into the ground before acknowledging the main culprit of their financial burdens. This will lead to increased civil unrest as Americans watch their quality of life decline due to their taxes being misused for political purposes. The asinine amount of money American citizens pay in taxes should not be spent on people from foreign nations, be it on wars or migrants.

Jul 3 2025

Ask the Right Questions…


Posted originally on CTH on July 2, 2025 | Sundance

… Put yourself in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s shoes against the backdrop of 35 previously exiled Russian officials from the United States as a result of the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment and Joint Analysis Report {BACKGROUND}.

QUESTION: What exactly would Vladimir Putin think about this admission from the CIA?

[Source]

CIA Director John Ratcliffe admits the former CIA and FBI fabricated the intelligence that led to the expulsion of Russian officials under the false premise of Russia “hacking” the 2016 election.  Why now?

How would Putin interpret this very public message?

Then, consider the sequence….

.

These last three bullet points follow on the heels of India saying they have no intent to participate in another global trade currency other than the U.S. Dollar.  India is the “I” in BRICS.   With that in mind, what exactly was the intention of BRICS?

QUESTION: How would Russian President Vladimir Putin be viewing all of these events?

Let’s get the BBB passed.

Warmest regards.

Jul 3 2025

Quick Update from Speaker Mike Johnson – “Trying to Get to Yes”


Posted originally on CTH on July 2, 2025 | Sundance

House Speaker Mike Johnson asked about what the White House is doing to support the passage of the Big Beautiful Bill.  Speaker Johnson notes the administration officials are working through the resistance.  WATCH:

.

Jul 3 2025

CIA Director John Ratcliffe Declassifies Review of 2016 Intelligence Weaponization and Post-Election Intelligence Community Assessment


Posted originally on CTH on July 2, 2025 | Sundance 

Earlier today CIA Director John Ratcliffe announced he was declassifying an “Internal Tradecraft Review of 2016 Election ICA to Promote Analytic Objectivity and Transparency.” Obviously the CIA saying they are releasing something for the sake of “transparency” is a little funny.

The CIA review triggered by Director Ratcliffe was for the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that was conducted in the aftermath of the 2016 election. The ICA was also known as the “17 agency report” relied upon by those who pushed the Trump-Russia narrative.

Ever since the sketchy “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” was originally released late December 2016 we identified both constructs, the ICA and JAR as a mostly political intelligence documents, created to justify a Russian narrative.

The Dec ’16 ICA was also the predicate intelligence report that preceded the December 29, 2016, Joint Analysis Report that claimed “Russian cyber hacking” in the election. Cumulatively the ICA and JAR formed the background for Barack Obama to expel 35 Russian diplomats.

None of this is new. CTH outlined these two corrupt Intelligence Community constructs in real time when they were released. {SEE HERE}. As time went on, and as the Clinton-Steele dossier was revealed, the 17 agency Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) grew even weaker.

In late October 2017 former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper admitted the Clinton-Steele dossier was part of the Joint Analysis Report.   Eventually, our research indicated the dossier and the intelligence report were likely the underlying evidence behind the FISA Title-1 application (and subsequent renewals) for surveillance on Carter Page and by extension the Trump campaign.  All of that was proven to be accurate.

Now CIA Director John Ratcliffe provides an independent CIA review of their organizational action at the time the Trump-Russia narrative was created.  CIA Press Statement:

“Earlier this year, CIA Director John Ratcliffe tasked Agency career professionals with decades of experience to conduct a lessons-learned review of the procedures and analytic tradecraft employed in the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) conducted shortly after the 2016 election. Today, Director Ratcliffe declassified the results of this review.

The tradecraft review identified multiple procedural anomalies in the preparation of the 2016 ICA, such as a compressed timeline, uneven access to compartmented information, marginalization of the National Intelligence Council, and excessive involvement of agency heads. The review notes that adhering to established analytic processes and rigorous tradecraft is essential to ensure credibility, objectivity, and accuracy of CIA analysis.

Director Ratcliffe declassified this review in order to promote analytic objectivity and transparency. “Agency heads at the time created a politically charged environment that triggered an atypical analytic process around an issue essential to our democracy,” said Director Ratcliffe. “Under my watch, I am committed to ensuring that our analysts have the ability to deliver unvarnished assessments that are free from political influence.” (LINK)

The bottom line is what we said all along. The Intelligence Community, CIA, FBI, DNI, etc. intentionally fabricated intelligence information to create an entirely fictitious storyline.

~ Read the CIA pdf HERE ~

.

Jul 3 2025

President Trump Announces General Terms of Trade Deal with Vietnam


Posted originally on CTH on July 2, 2025 | Sundance

The details within the trade agreement are unique.  President Donald Trump has announced a trade agreement between the USA and Vietnam.  Interestingly Vietnam will face a 20% tariff rate (baseline) and a 40% tariff rate on transnational shipping.

The 40% transnational shipping rate is an interesting approach toward the process of China shipping goods to ASEAN countries to avoid direct tariffs. A transnational shipping tariff is a practical, pragmatic and honest way for the USA and Vietnam to face each other economically without masks and pretenses.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “It is my Great Honor to announce that I have just made a Trade Deal with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam after speaking with To Lam, the Highly Respected General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam. It will be a Great Deal of Cooperation between our two Countries. The Terms are that Vietnam will pay the United States a 20% Tariff on any and all goods sent into our Territory, and a 40% Tariff on any Transshipping. In return, Vietnam will do something that they have never done before, give the United States of America TOTAL ACCESS to their Markets for Trade. In other words, they will “OPEN THEIR MARKET TO THE UNITED STATES,” meaning that, we will be able to sell our product into Vietnam at ZERO Tariff. It is my opinion that the SUV or, as it is sometimes referred to, Large Engine Vehicle, which does so well in the United States, will be a wonderful addition to the various product lines within Vietnam. Dealing with General Secretary To Lam, which I did personally, was an absolute pleasure. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

CTH was in the manufacturing base of Vietnam in January; their factories are loaded with component parts from China used to produce finished goods sent to the USA (and globally).  President Trump previously told Vietnam they need to reduce their reliance on Chinese imported component goods, but China has spent billions in advanced positioning and contracts, influencing Vietnam.

Vietnam is a very poor country, and their population cannot afford to purchase the products they manufacture.  They do not have a domestic consumption base. They are reliant on exports to more wealthy nations to keep their manufacturing base afloat.  Practically, it is easy to have sympathy for Vietnam due to their economic dependence on both China (for imported raw materials) and the USA (for exported finished goods).

Like Canada, Vietnam has the structural problem of an inability to comply with President Trump demands.  However, unlike Canada, a wealthy nation who did this entirely to themselves as they chased leftist “green” dreams, Vietnam’s inability is an outcome of the financial windfall that came from President Trump’s first term targeting of China.

During President Trump’s first term, many companies proactively moved manufacturing operations from China to other nations in Southeast Asia.  Vietnam was a big benefactor of the manufacturing shift; their manufacturing base doubled in the next two years.  It is smart for them to respond to the Trump tariffs by lowering their import tariff rate to zero and maintaining access to the U.S. market.

As an outcome of the 2018 tariffs against China, which coincided with a President Trump visit to southeast Asia, multiple companies shifted manufacturing operations from China to Vietnam.

Beijing saw the move and slowly increased their own strategic footprint.

In the subsequent years as COVID-19 took attention from all other matters, and with Trump removed from the equation in 2020, China increased the scale of their investment and the outcomes in 2025 are very visible.

The people who live in Vietnam do not have money; they are a very poor nation.  The baseline poverty level in combination with their communist regime politics essentially eliminates their consumer power to purchase western goods and makes trade agreements between the U.S and Vietnam somewhat moot.  However, as a proxy manufacturing nation Vietnam is a valuable resource for China.

Essentially what can be seen in Vietnam is how Beijing spends money there for influence.  The U.S footprint is negligible in comparison to the visible influence of China.  The Vietnamese market may be open, but their consumers are very poor.  I doubt there will be many SUV’s heading to Vietnam.

It is a very impressive move for Vietnam and the USA to admit the dynamic of the situation; for President Trump to understand Vietnam is partly in their position due to his previous demands on the ASEAN countries; and to come to a transnational shipping tariff system that will create honesty between our two nations.

A super smart approach in a very unique situation.

♦ Semi-related. Remember when I shared the story of the factories in Vietnam and Philippines loaded with Lululemon products without labels that were transshipped from China to apparel manufacturers in southeast Asia?

EXCERPT:  …In a little reported reality, in order to offset the problem, many Chinese manufacturers have actually continued the production of several branded product lines (very well-known and established brands) despite the absence of orders for the finished goods from the companies.

Several shipments of those finished goods have started to arrive at China-partnered ports. This is very interesting, because it may lead to market dumping of a higher quality product than most anticipate.

Within the apparel sector, ASEAN consumers cannot afford the fashion branded product at the prices determined by the actual brand owners. However, there is now a strong likelihood -based on what is being reported by the receivers- that the product itself will be marketed -likely dumped- without the brand label. This is actually high-quality apparel distributed for a fraction of the price of the brand.

I’ll be getting more details on this soon, however, it looks like the broad outlines are verified by multiple sources. I’ll use some fake names to explain.  China is sending finished “branded” goods to the Philippines, without labeling. The receiving company awaits instructions.

Ex. “Lululemon” products arrive finished, but missing labels – the product is identical, but the IP is now stripped. The product, a summer or fall lineup, is then rebranded “Opal” apparel (fake name example) made in Philippines, packaged in a similar high-end fashion and shipped to USA where a new -mostly online- branded and marketed store sells the items. (Source)

Well, here’s the follow-up hitting the headlines today:

VIA CBS – Lululemon is suing Costco, accusing the discount retailer of selling “confusingly similar” replicas of its jackets, sweatshirts and pants.

In a lawsuit filed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the athletic and lifestyle apparel company claims that certain Costco products imitate its own designs so closely that it constitutes “trade dress” infringement, which occurs when a product mimics another so closely that it confuses consumers. 

The apparel company claims that Costco’s “knockoff” designs, or product “dupes,” violate trademark law because “some customers incorrectly believe these infringing products are authentic Lululemon apparel.” In other cases, “customers specifically purchase the infringing products because they are difficult to distinguish from authentic Lululemon products,” the lawsuit alleges. (MORE)

Lululemon is a Canadian company who gave China all their manufacturing business.  China then makes extra product and ships it to ASEAN countries where it can be generic branded and sold at a discount.  In the example above, the Lululemon product returns to the USA market under the CostCo brand.   Go figure!