Former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, appears on Fox News to point out the obvious inconsistencies with the claims by the DOJ in their effort to protect Hunter Biden and the Biden family from investigations.
.
Representative Byron Donalds (MAGA – SWFL) brings an important point to the audience at a local townhall. The issue of institutional corruption, and the total lack of faith and confidence in the institutions of our government, are at the forefront of the electorate. Representative Donalds is challenged about the intent of the MAGA republican legislators and what must be done about the transparency of corruption we all witness and know to exist.
During his response, Donalds notes a key distinction. The MAGA coalition saw what the 2010 Tea Party conservatives went through. The MAGA coalition saw and sees what President Trump has gone through. The MAGA coalition is delivering a message to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and others, that those who stand on the principles of anti-corrupt influence are not concerned with the perks, benefits, affluence and legislative influence that DC uses to diminish their opposition.
As noted by Donalds sharing his discussions with Kevin McCarthy, the MAGA coalition is in place -in their face- to effect change and remove the corruption, not participate in the process to give the illusion of change. WATCH:
.
The Twitter platform decisions are making headlines and opening conversation, because Elon Musk is trying to retain his platform against all odds and not really working to solve his problem. Several platform changes are taking place that are being less than honestly explained. As interested CTH readers look on quizzically, perhaps it’s time for me to revisit the truth of Musk’s challenge as it has always existed so people can understand. [NBC ARTICLE HERE, that doesn’t understand]
Keep in mind, long before people realized the Dept of Homeland Security (FBI, DHS, CISA etc.) had a portal into Twitter, I was explaining how transparently obvious it was. {Go Deep – Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop} In part, the transparency of the problem is driven by CTH understanding of the costs associated with Twitter as a very unique platform in the sphere of social media. {Go Deep – Understand the Costs}
With the latest revelations we shared about the financial position of Twitter {Go Deep on FINANCIALS}, all of the moves now underway make sense. Musk was on track to hit a date in/around October of this year where Twitter would be insolvent. If you had read those previous “Go Deep” links, you will easily see the problem. However, if you have not read those backgrounds, this could be difficult to understand.
Musk is being disingenuous in his explanation here. I’m being generous in not calling him a fibber. His problem is multifaceted, and he is looking at it with two approaches.
First, by Musk’s prior admissions, he’s losing approximately $300 million/month and needs to grow revenue fast. That’s why he hired Linda Yaccarino. Second, he’s trying desperately to reduce operational costs for data processing. Twitter has a systemic platform cost issue that will not change easily – due to his very unique issue of “simultaneous users,” in combination with no proprietary content. That’s where he is being less than honest about these changes.
Twitter is a global discussion platform, essentially a global commenting system. Elon Musk is trying to address the cost and utility of his platform at the same time that a similarly constructed META alternative is about to launch. Yes, Mark Zuckerberg is JUST ABOUT to launch a Twitter version of META that will link Facebook, Instagram, and Google YouTube content into one big instant conversation and commenting system.
Zuckerberg has one key thing Musk doesn’t, proprietary content and actively engaged and solid advertising systems built into the operation.
META CEO Mark Zuckerberg has the revenue options that will cover the extreme costs of the simultaneous user interface and data processing, while simultaneously allowing content creators to cross post their content.
Zuckerberg has multifaceted advertising engagement systems that allow advertisers to target and engage with users in very creative ways on his platform(s). You can even shop directly from Instagram and Facebook with the advertiser. Setting aside the other issues with advertisers, corporate wokeism etc, Elon Musk has nothing like that – not even close.
However, Musk’s biggest issue is the cost of his platform. This is what he is trying to tackle right now, while simultaneously fending off the META infringement.
In the big picture of tech platforms, Twitter, as an operating model, is a massive high-user commenting system.
Twitter is not a platform built around a website; Twitter is a platform for comments and discussion that operates in the sphere of social media. As a consequence, the technology and data processing required to operate the platform does not have an economy of scale.
There is no business model where Twitter is financially viable to operate…. UNLESS the tech architecture under the platform was subsidized.
[NOTE: In my opinion, there is only one technological system and entity that could possibly have underwritten the cost of Twitter to operate. That entity is the United States Government. That’s where the quid pro quo in allowing DHS to have a backdoor comes in.]
Unlike websites and other social media, Twitter is unique in that it only represents a platform for user engagement and discussion. There is no content other than commentary, discussion and the sharing of information – such as linking to other information, pictures, graphics, videos url links etc.
In essence, Twitter is like the commenting system on the CTH website. It is the global commenting system for users to share information and debate. It is, in some ways, like the public square of global discussion. However, the key point is that user engagement on the platform creates a massive amount of data demand.
Within the systems of technology for public (user engagement) commenting, there is no economy of scale. Each added user represents an increased cost to the operation of the platform, because each user engagement demands database performance to respond to the simultaneous users on the platform. The term “simultaneous users” is critical to understand because that drives the cost.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Twitter has approximately 217 million registered daily users, and their goal is to expand to 315 million users by the end of 2023. Let me explain why things are not what they seem.
When people, users, operate on a tech platform using the engagement features, writing comments, hitting likes, posting images, links etc, the user is sending a data request to the platform’s servers. The servers must then respond allowing all simultaneous users to see the change triggered by the single user.
Example: when you hit the “like” button feature on an engagement system, the response (like increasing by one) must not only be visible to you, but must also be visible to those simultaneously looking at the action you took. If 100,000 simultaneous users are looking at the same thing, the database must deliver the response to 100,000 people. As a result, the number of simultaneous users on a user engagement platform drives massive performance costs. In the example above, a single action by one person requires the server to respond to 100,000 simultaneous users with the updated data.
As a consequence, when a commenting platform increases in users, the cost not only increases because of that one user, the cost increases because the servers need to respond to all the simultaneous users. Using CTH as an example, 10,000 to 15,000 simultaneous commenting system users, engaging with the servers, costs around $4,500/mo.
This is why most websites, even big media websites, do not have proprietary user engagement, i.e. commenting systems. Instead, most websites use third party providers like Disqus who run the commenting systems on their own servers. Their commenting systems are plugged in to the website; that defers the cost from the website operator, and the third party can function as a business by selling ads and controlling the user experience. [It also sucks because user privacy is non existent]
The key to understanding the Twitter dynamic is to see the difference between, (a) running a website, where it doesn’t really matter how many people come to look at the content (low server costs), and (b) running a user engagement system, where the costs to accommodate the data processing -which increase exponentially with a higher number of simultaneous users- are extremely expensive. Twitter’s entire platform is based on the latter.
There is no economy of scale in any simultaneous user engagement system. Every added user costs exponentially more in data-processing demand, because every user needs a response, and every simultaneous user (follower) requires the same simultaneous response. A Twitter user with 100 followers (simultaneously logged in) that takes an action – costs less than a Twitter user with 100,000 followers (simultaneously logged in), that takes an action.
If you understand the cost increases in the data demand for simultaneous users, you can see the business model for Twitter is non-existent.
Bottom line, more users means it costs Twitter more money to operate. The business model is backwards from traditional business. More customers = higher costs, because each customer brings more simultaneous users….. which means exponentially more data performance is needed.
User engagement features on Twitter are significant, because that’s all Twitter does. Not only can users write comments, graphics, memes, videos, but they can also like comments, retweet comments, subtweet comments, bookmark comments, and participate in DM systems. That is a massive amount of server/data performance demand, and when you consider simultaneous users, it’s almost unimaginable in scale. That cost and capacity is also the reason why Twitter does not have an edit function.
With 217 million users, you could expect 50 million simultaneous users on Twitter during peak operating times. My back of the envelope calculations, which are really just estimations based on known industry costs for data performance and functions per second (pfp), would put the data cost to operate Twitter around $200 to $300 million per month.
In 2021, Twitter generated $5.1 billion in revenue, according to the Wall Street Journal. According to the New York Times, in 2023 that revenue has dropped to around $1 billion per year.
Musk stated during public conversation that Twitter was essentially break even at $4 billion, which was the position in 2022 just prior to his taking over. [2022 costs around $4.5 billion and revenue around $4 billion +/-, per public financial statements and reporting]. Musk cut approximately $500 million in expenses from realignment and staffing reductions.
Musk has a $1.5 billion debt service on the loan he took out, per his own admission: that’s more than $100 million per month. The debt service alone is higher than his revenue. As I noted last month, Twitter is losing somewhere around $300 million per month. With $1 billion liquid in the bank, as of June (per Musk), that only gets him to September; by October, he needs another influx of cash, or else.
There is no business model, even with paying subscribers, for Twitter to exist without a major increase in revenue (Yaccarino) or a major decrease in costs. As the business grows (more users), the costs increase (more simultaneous users), and the costs to subscribers would grow. Twitter Blue subscriptions are around 180,000 users, paying $11/mo. That’s around $2 million a month- a pittance in comparison to what he needs.
Right now, meaning literally right now, Musk is trying to reduce operational costs by limiting user engagement.
.
Posted originally on the CTH on July 1, 2023 | Sundance
Unfortunately, Tucker Carlson has chosen the Twitter platform as the outlet for his monologue broadcasts. Twitter is now restricting viewers of the platform to only registered user accounts. As a result, Carlson’s message is now restricted by DHS monitors as the audience is filtered.
However, if you enjoy the Carlson discussions, several people are transferring the content onto shareable platforms that do not have Homeland Security restrictive oversight and direct FBI and Intelligence Community control mechanisms. {Direct Rumble Link}
[NOTE: Disclaimer – CTH remains inside the DHS system to throw sand into the machinery, because “NUTS”!]
People are trying to figure out exactly what the DeSantis campaign were thinking when they created what appears to be an attack ad against Donald Trump, gay people and a host of others. [published on twitter] It’s really quite a wild story.
Following on the heels of Ron DeSantis saying he intends to start shooting Mexicans at the southern border, a policy position -I might add- that reveals the uniparty agenda because the media completely ignore it, the DeSantis team now release a video highlighting their anger and hatred toward gays, lesbians and Donald Trump.
The video [see below] highlights how President Trump defended the LGBTQ community against targeting by identified Muslim hate groups. The video is supposed to present Trump’s policy about gay people as a negative against Donald Trump. The video then evolves into a weird production of Ron DeSantis as the destroyer of gay people.
The ad is even more bizarre when you think about all the time and energy Ron DeSantis put into denying the Florida law against sexualizing children was really a “don’t say gay law.”
This might have sounded good in the echo-chamber of a toxic media network organized by Christina Pushaw, but the end result is something that only makes the campaign look more ridiculous. See Tweet Video below:
The details are starting to surface, but something is still sketchy. According to required state financial disclosure filings, Ron DeSantis is reporting an additional $1.25 million in income from Rupert Murdoch’s publishing house Harper Collins.
However, given the fact that Megyn Kelly was paid $10 million by Rupert Murdoch for her 2016 effort to remove Donald Trump, the $1.25 million being reported by Ron DeSantis doesn’t fit. [Unless there are going to be a series of payments.] Additionally, according to the Florida financial disclosure rules, this income report is for last year, 2022. “the financial disclosure is due July 1 of each year for the preceding calendar year.” (link)
(Via Politico) – Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis took home $1.25 million from his publisher for writing a book he released in February, according to a state financial disclosure filed Friday.
The book money is the first additional stream of income beyond his government salary that DeSantis has reported since he won election to lead Florida in 2018. (read more)
By now everyone is well aware how books are used as laundering and payment mechanisms for politicians, media influencers and people in positions of power. The entire book deal dynamic in politics is just another way to skirt campaign finance and laws on limits for contributions.
Given the nature of the stakes at play in combination with the scale of money being thrown around by billionaires, Wall Street and multinational corporations, I highly doubt that Ron DeSantis was only paid $1.25 million for his book. It just doesn’t pass the commonsense sniff test.
We will not know until July 1, 2024, how much income Ron DeSantis received in 2023.
All the suspicious cats remain, well, suspicious….
During a recent interview, Robert F. Kennedy was criticized for claiming that the presidential election was rigged. The interviewer became silent when Kennedy corrected him by saying he never commented on the 2020 US Presidential Election. Instead, Kennedy had been vocal about George W Bush stealing the 2004 election.
It does not matter if someone is a Republican or Democrat. The neocons will win the vote. Republican candidate George W. Bush defeated Democratic candidate John Kerry and secured re-election in 2004. Foreign policy was the hot topic as the US invaded Iraq in 2003 amid the War on Terrorism. More Americas came out to vote in that election than ever before. George W. Bush and no doubt his VP Dick Cheney were hardliners, whereas Kerry was skeptical about the war in general.
As a senator, John Kerry was faced with the decision of whether to permit the president to use force in Iraq. Kerry later stated that voting “yes” was the worst mistake of his life. Former counsel to Kerry, Jonathan Winer, said that Kerry had no choice:
“The Bush administration wanted something more than that. They wanted something without any strings attached, so they could just go to war. John was [not] comfortable with it. Democrats were not comfortable with that, because they didn’t want Bush just going to war unilaterally. They felt that was risky. John definitely was unhappy with that, and expressed it.
He’d been boxed. The Bush administration had chosen to box him and all the other Senate Democrats. “You either vote with us, in which case, you’re responsible for it, too — and we’re going to do whatever the heck we please — or you vote against us, and allow Saddam Hussein to be not held accountable.”
The neocons needed Bush in office. Per usual, no sitting president had ever lost his office during a time of war. “Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted — enough to have put John Kerry in the White House,” RFK wrote in his Rolling Stone article. As with the 2020 election, anyone who questioned the results were considered conspiracy theorists, with the Republicans accusing the Democrats instead.
Kennedy continued:
“Nearly half of the 6 million American voters living abroad(3) never received their ballots — or received them too late to vote(4) — after the pentagon unaccountably shut down a state-of-the-art web site used to file overseas registrations.(5) a consulting firm called sproul & associates, which was hired by the republican national committee to register voters in six battleground states,(6) was discovered shredding democratic registrations.(7) in new Mexico, which was decided by 5,988 votes,(8) malfunctioning machines mysteriously failed to properly register a presidential vote on more than 20,000 ballots.(9) nationwide, according to the federal commission charged with implementing election reforms, as many as 1 million ballots were spoiled by faulty voting equipment — roughly one for every 100 cast.(10)”
Countless irregularities point to fraud. The neocons ALWAYS win. The party affiliation does not matter as they are two wings on the same bird. This is why people want anti-establishment candidates like Trump and Kennedy who are not bought and paid for by lobbying interest groups or engaged with neocons. The neocons have managed to usurp more power than the people, and they decide the fate of our elections.
The people demand to see a debate between Robert F. Kennedy and Joe Biden. Why should we reappoint someone to the highest political office without hearing their views? Biden is not in any mental state to debate a brick wall. Still, a Trafalgar Group survey shows that 77.5% of all voters want to see Kennedy and Biden faceoff.
Only 29.3% of Democrats believe Biden, who would be 86 by the end of his second term, is too old to run for president in comparison to 92.3% of Republicans. The president must travel the world and maintain an active schedule. He’s already unable to fulfill this responsibility.
As for debating RFK, over half (57.5%) of Democrats want to see Biden discuss policies with Kennedy, while 92.8% of Republicans feel the same way. I have not heard anyone admit that they strongly support the Biden Administration, and even if they did, why wouldn’t they want to hear his thoughts on ruling over the financial capital of the world? Biden’s minions say that his opponents have not earned the right to debate him. But what about the people? We the people demand a debate.
Trump, a former Democrat himself, would like to debate RFK. Kennedy has criticized Trump’s handling of the pandemic and claims he sold out to Big Pharma. Yet, the two men seem to respect one another. “President Trump has shown himself to be the most devastating debater, probably, since Abraham Lincoln,” Kennedy commented in May. Trump said he respects RFK and “he has a lot of important points to be made.” Trump believes, however, that the Democrats would not allow Biden to “debate a child.” Will we see a Trump v Kennedy debate? They are both the anti-establishment candidates. I think most Americans would be eager to see that one. If Biden fails to debate for this campaign, it is further proof that he was INSTALLED and not elected.
President Trump famously threatened Mexican President AMLO with 25 to 50% immediate border tariffs within a week if Mexico didn’t help secure the southern U.S. border. The result was 18,000 activated Mexican National Guards to enforce the “Remain in Mexico” policy, while the border wall was under construction.
The southern border crisis has created an opportunity for a desperate Ron DeSantis to skip the seven-minute-ab border security competition and go straight to the six-minute-ab pitch, whereby a President DeSantis will start shooting Mexicans who attempt to smuggle across the border. Appearing in a heavily coordinated and scripted interview with Rupert Murdoch’s debate moderator, Martha MacCallum, DeSantis announced his “use of deadly force” policy just before traveling to the Yale Club in New York for fundraising.
A gleeful Martha MacCallum was more than willing to support the 6-minute-ab pitch, narrating an introduction of “the governor“, yes, she used that exact descriptive for the guy who is on the monitor. The transparent construct of the interview was made even funnier by the desperate transparency of it. WATCH:
.
The larger story behind this recent Intercept Article is the headline you just read. Let’s talk….
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a representative organization in the United States that lobbies Congress.
The CoC represent the interests of the multinational corporations who use K-Street and J-Street in DC to write rules, regulations, policies and laws as part of their corporate control over U.S. wealth. That’s what the CoC does. That’s the entire purpose of the Chamber of Commerce.
The CoC has long been in the background of our political discussions. During the Obama administration, the Dept of Commerce literally permitted the Chamber of Commerce to write U.S. trade language – physically write the words that go into U.S. trade deals with other countries. This was the era of maximum value for the CoC that saw their coffers swell, as multi-billion-dollar multinational corporations realized the CoC was in the business of literally controlling the U.S. capitalist economy.
The arch nemesis of the CoC was President Donald Trump, who threw the CoC out of the room when decisions were being made about trade and economic policy. This was the era of minimum value for the CoC, when corporations were no longer getting to influence the policy. The CoC then turned to their purchased politicians in Congress, specifically to their #1 ally Mitch McConnell, to ask for help in overcoming the problem that Trump and his America First agenda represented.
As the MAGA America First economic and trade influence in Congress increased, the CoC had trouble because Trump would target any of the Republican CoC beneficiaries, and that could result in a career ending primary challenge. The Republican wing of the UniParty had a tough time supporting Tom Donohue who was CoC president at the time.
The result was an angered CoC turning instead to the Democrat wing of the UniParty with an offer of an open checkbook. The Democrats then became the lifeline for the CoC to remain in control of the economic outcomes from policy, regulation and law. In essence, the mechanism of CoC influence flipped from purchased Republicans to purchased Democrats. At the time of this paradigm shift, it was noted by media but not understood at its root cause. I just explained the correct context and reason for it.
Now, we enter a phase where an entity larger that Congress is now in control. The three branches of government have been superseded by an omnipotent Fourth Branch that controls the other three. The intelligence apparatus is now larger and more influential than the executive, legislative or judicial branches beneath it. While people understand how the 4th branch can influence the legislative and executive outcomes, people struggle to understand how the 4th branch can influence the judicial branch.
A clear example of the 4th branch controlling the judicial branch is clear in the Trump Mar-a-Lago documents case, where the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the DOJ being allowed to make arbitrary determinations and definitions of what constitutes “national security.” SEE BELOW:
The intelligence apparatus (4th branch) determines the “classification status”, and the intelligence apparatus (4th branch) determines the secrecy or lack thereof of the item defined as “national security.”
As soon as the judicial branch, in this example the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, defer the definitions and determinations of what constitutes “national security”, they are essentially becoming subservient to the Fourth Branch of government. See how that works now?
As a result, we have all three branches of government now subservient to the control of the Fourth (unelected and bureaucratic) Branch! This is also how the mechanism of the Lawfare operation against Donald Trump is being organized.
Back to the headline….
Understanding that corporations are now needing to work closely with the legislative and executive branches, the lobbyists who control that influence need to organize a new angle of their influence operation to include the Fourth Branch, the intelligence branch.
This is the context for the next story:
Intercept – THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE hosted Michael Morell, former acting director of the CIA, at a major gathering for corporate executives on Monday, according to a copy of the agenda obtained by The Intercept. The invitation to Morell — who spoke at the Association Committee of 100 in conversation with a top Chamber executive — is another sign of the increasingly warm ties between the Chamber of Commerce and the network of Democratic-aligned opponents of Donald Trump that the former president maligns as the “deep state.”
[…] The rift between the Trump wing of the party and the Chamber began during the 2016 campaign, during which the pro-business lobby did not get behind Trump soon enough, Trump later let the Chamber know. Trump and his allies felt further betrayed after Republicans moved through Congress a multitrillion-dollar tax cut, only to see the Chamber increasingly endorse Democrats in close House races. Senate Republicans such as Ted Cruz and John Cornyn of Texas rarely miss an opportunity to lambaste the Chamber; House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., have made their refusal to meet with the organization conspicuous.
“The priorities of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have not aligned with the priorities of House Republicans or the interests of their own members, and they should not expect a meeting with Speaker McCarthy as long as that’s the case,” Mark Bednar, a spokesperson for McCarthy, told CNBC.
But Morell’s appearance also signals that big business has interests that go beyond Trump’s many grievances related to the 2020 election. Morell’s talk, according to a source, focused on the geopolitics of the U.S.’s ongoing confrontations with Russia and China — pocketbook concerns for the Chamber’s Association Committee of 100, which is made up of top corporate executives. (read more)
Hopefully, you can see how the alignment of the Chamber of Commerce fits in to the Sea Island Billionaire group backing Ron DeSantis. This is the core of the “trillions at stake” understanding. This control issue inside the battle for the soul of the Republican Party also plays out in the voice of DeSantis #1 financier, Ken Griffin:
Politico – […] While he’s supporting one of this cycle’s biggest culture warriors in DeSantis, Griffin said most hot-button issues — abortion rights, battles over sex education and LGBTQ rights — don’t define his interests. He wants to improve the diversity of the GOP and blunt the vein of populism that has complicated the party’s relationship with the corporate world — two things he’s consulted with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy about. (link)
Traditional Fascism was defined as an authoritarian government working hand-in-glove with corporations to achieve totalitarian objectives. A centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, using severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
That governmental system didn’t work in the long-term because the underlying principles driving free people rejected government authoritarianism. Fascist governments collapsed, and the corporate beneficiaries were nulled and scorned. Then along came a new approach to achieve the same objective.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) was created to use the same fundamental associations of government and corporations. Only this time the corporations organized to tell the governments what to do. The WEF was organized for multinational corporations to assemble and tell the various governments how to cooperate to achieve control.
Fascism is still the underlying premise, the WEF just flipped the internal dynamic.
The assembly of the massive multinational corporations, banks and finance offices now summon the government leaders to come to their assembly and receive their instructions. Some have called this corporatism. However, the relationship between government and multinationals is just fascism essentially reversed with the government doing what the corporations tell them to do.
One brutally obvious example: Big Pharma telling governments to promote the vaccine and figure out the control details later.
Now consider:
…A massive multinational corporate conglomerate telling a centralized autocratic government leader what to do, and using severe economic and social regimentation as a control mechanism, combined with forcible suppression of opposition by both the corporations and government.
Doesn’t that define our current reality?
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 