Posted originally on Aug 15, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
The US Treasury Department is extremely desperate for any morsel it can find to put toward the $36.7 trillion national debt. Is Donald Trump asking Americans to Venmo or PayPal the US government cash to pay down the national debt? Not quite, as the Treasury has a long-standing program called “Gifts to Reduce the Public Debt” that asks Americans to donate their personal funds toward government spending.
Trump introduced the option to pay through online platforms such as PayPal or Venmo; however, the program began decades ago in 1996. The Pay.gov website also accepts bank transfers, debit or credit cards. You could probably offer your first-born as payment as the Treasury is indeed that desperate.
Some Americans are indeed voluntarily giving the government money. In fact, the initiative has collected $67 million since it began in 1996 and the coffers are growing a mere $120,000 per month since 2020. The rest of us are involuntarily providing the government with money through taxation without representation.
Obviously, the charitable contributions are a complete joke and could not account for even a day of interest on the national debt. Still, the options exist and those who believe that taxes deserve to rise should willingly hand over their money to the government while the rest of us attempt to navigate our finances amid the volatile conditions the government has created. They will continue to collect more taxes rather than curtail spending involuntarily, yet they will never collect enough.
Some consider donating to the lost cause that is the US government as a tax deductible charitable contribution. The US government, the largest economy on the planet, does not need charity. The US government needs to curtail its reckless spending and hold politicians responsible for their endless waste.
Posted originally on Aug 14, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
President Donald Trump has threatened Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell with a “major lawsuit.” Could the sitting president sue the head of the central bank that acts independently of the Fed? It depends on the context as there are two issues—interest rates and the Federal Reserve headquarters operation.
The Federal Open Market Committee, the voting branch of the Federal Reserve, is protected by sovereign-immunity. The only exception would be a congressional waiver which simply would never happen. The plaintiff would need to present clear statutory cause of action and a waiver of immunity. Coercing the independent branch of the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates is not cause for legal action and would be dismissed immediately.
As for the new Federal Reserve headquarters, Trump could attempt to file an injunction claim against mismanagement or fraud, and would once again need a clear cause of action and a waiver of sovereign immunity.
The Federal Reserve operates on a self-funding mechanism, allegedly, using revenue it generates from interest on government securities and other services such as payment processing. Yet, that interest is generated from public funds. However, the Federal Reserve does not need approval from Congress to finance internal costs as it manages to bypass the federal budget. Powell has documented justification for the rising cost of the project, and there is no evidence of fraud or mismanagement. Congress would never consent to a waiver of sovereign immunity. The legal system would immediately overturn the claim as there is no actionable legal violation, especially against Powell personally.
The plaintiff, Trump, could attempt to pursue a private civil case against Powell, but again, that would also be immediately dismissed as the Fed chair has not attacked Trump, defrauded the government, or manipulated rates for political reasons. The prospect of suing the chairman of the central bank is absolutely absurd and a clear overreach of federal power. The Federal Reserve MUST have the ability to act independently of political pressure.
Now, the Supreme Court once ruled that the branches of the fed are “creatures of the Federal Reserve Act,” and fall under federal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court’s Cooper v. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (1984) regarded discrimination claims against a regional branch under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) accused the bank of violating the Civil Rights Act.
The legal reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s decision in Cooper v. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond centered on the principle of res judicata (claim preclusion) and how it applies to class action lawsuits, which is different than Trump v. Powell. The Court examined whether the judgment in the prior class action suit, which found no widespread discrimination, barred individual class members who had opted out from pursuing their own separate discrimination claims. the Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the employees had the right to bring their individual claims against the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, permitting individual employees to proceed with individual lawsuits. Again, this is a separate matter that was not a direct lawsuit against the Federal Reserve for monetary policy decisions.
The majority of cases filed against the Fed involved employment issues. Vannoy v. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond in 2016 accused the same branch of violating the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The central bank granted Vannoy medical leave, but he claimed he was not properly notified of his FMLA rights and returned to work early to avoid losing his job, which actually led to his termination. The case went to a higher court and ultimately allowed Vannoy to file his claim of FMLA interference. Again, these cases are based on employment at the Fed rather than policy or against an individual member of the central bank.
There have been lawsuits over policy, such as cases against the Fed’s stress tests in 2024, and challenges to emergency lending programs during financial crises. It is rare for the court to rule against the Fed, but it has happened. In 2011, the Fed was sued for the “swipe fees” regulation (Regulation II) that capped the fees banks could charge merchants. The court ruled that the Fed did not have the authority to issue a uniform cap when Congress required issuer and transaction-specific regulations.
The challenger must show clear illegal overreach and a blatant disregard for administrative procedures. Jerome Powell has not violated the law by maintaining interest rates or overseeing the creation of the Fed headquarters. Trump’s threats hold no weight as no court would take his claims seriously.
Posted originally on CTH on August 12, 2025 | Sundance
I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is the third.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.
In 2022, the legal case brought by prosecutor John Durham against Chris Steele’s primary sub source, Igor Danchenko, was predicated on the notion that Christopher Steele’s primary source for his dossier willfully and intentionally lied to the FBI. Therefore, according to Durham’s legal theory, Danchenko was guilty of purposefully misleading FBI investigators assigned to the Trump-Russia/”Crossfire Hurricane” investigation.
Every intellectually honest person knew the FBI were not duped by Danchenko, and later records proved Danchenko told them the Steele dossier was full of fabricated nonsense. However, to keep the revelation of the dossier presented “as nonsense” hidden, the FBI then hired Danchenko as a confidential human source, technically shielding him from being questioned or exposed.
The FBI decision to hire Danchenko was to keep the fraudulent Steele Dossier useful for their Trump targeting operation. After all, the Trump surveillance warrants were dependent on it.
The pretending by Durham highlighted two things: (1) Durham was protecting the corrupt DOJ and FBI institutions by not investigating any government action; and yet, (2) Durham was simultaneously exposing corrupt FBI and DOJ action through his Danchenko court filings.
FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified in court that Hillary Clinton’s contracted opposition researcher, Christopher Steele – hired by Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Donald Trump, was offered up to $1 million by the FBI in early October 2016, if Chris Steele could prove the claims within the Trump dirt dossier he authored.
Steele was never paid the money, because he could not prove the claims within the dossier, nor would he originally give up the name of the primary source for the information, Igor Danchenko.
However, despite the FBI knowing the dossier could not be proved, validated or verified, later that same month, October 21, 2016, they used the dossier as evidence to support a Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant against former Trump campaign aide, Carter Page.
The FBI offered Chris Steele $1 million to ‘prove it.’ Chris Steele could not ‘prove it.’ The FBI used the dossier anyway to get the warrant.
The details provided by Durham proved the researched outline we delivered in 2018.
The FBI knew the Steele dossier was junk, yet they used it in lieu of the mandatory ‘Woods File’ to seek an all-inclusive secret search warrant against the Trump campaign. Carter Page was a tool for the fraudulent search warrant, the FBI knew Carter Page from previous work he had done for them as an informant. However, to get the warrant they needed to accuse Page of being an asset of a foreign government – so they did. The Steele Dossier was used as manufactured evidence to support the FISA application.
The FBI goal was to create a legal mechanism putting everyone in/around Donald Trump under surveillance. This was the “insurance policy” as described by FBI agent Peter Strzok.
The FBI had been conducting unlawful political surveillance against Donald Trump throughout the 2016 campaign, the FISA warrant was used as the legal basis to make the previous and future surveillance legal.
The FBI knew the dossier was junk, the FBI didn’t care – they needed it to create a fraudulent search warrant.
The FBI knew Carter Page was not a Russian asset, the FBI didn’t care – they needed him to get to Trump.
The FBI goal was always to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump.
(Via CNN) – Shortly before the 2016 election, the FBI offered retired British spy Christopher Steele “up to $1 million” to prove the explosive allegations in his dossier about Donald Trump, a senior FBI analyst testified Tuesday.
The cash offer was made during an October 2016 meeting between Steele and several top FBI officials who were trying to corroborate Steele’s claims that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to win the election.
FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified that Steele never got the money because he could not “prove the allegations.”
Auten also said Steele refused to provide the names of any of his sources during that meeting, and that Steele didn’t give the FBI anything during that meeting that corroborated the claims in his explosive dossier.
Auten was testifying at the criminal trial of Igor Danchenko, a primary source for Steele’s dossier, who is being prosecuted by special counsel John Durham. Danchenko has pleaded not guilty to lying to the FBI.
CNN previously reported that the FBI reimbursed some expenses for Steele, who had been an FBI informant.
Durham, a Trump-era prosecutor who is looking for misconduct in the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation, has used some of the proceedings Tuesday to criticize the FBI’s handling of some of the early steps in the Russia probe. Durham handled many of the in-court arguments on Tuesday and personally questioned Auten on the witness stand – a rare move for a special counsel and former US attorney. (read more)
Offering $1 million to a source to provide evidence is not a decision made by a supervisory special agent.
The authorization to spend up to $1 million for evidence is a decision made by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI.
October 2016: FBI Director James Comey, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe
Follow the timeline:
Steele offered $1 million to prove the dossier in early October 2016. He cannot.
FBI uses dossier in late October for a FISA warrant against Trump campaign.
Dossier source Igor Danchenko interviewed by FBI in January 2017. Tells FBI dossier is junk.
The FBI then interviews Carter Page five times, March 9, 10, 16, 30 and 31, 2017.
The FBI then hired Danchenko in March 2017, just before renewing the FISA they now know is based on junk.
April 2, 2017, the FBI renew the FISA warrant for the 2nd time.
May 2017 Robert Mueller appointed to cover up all of the DOJ/FBI corruption that existed in the Trump targeting.
June 2017 Robert Mueller interviews Danchenko, then Mueller renews the FISA.
February 2019, Bill Barr enters as Attorney General.
April 2019 Robert Mueller completes investigation.
May 2019, Bill Barr appoints Durham just to look into things. Immediately then begs Trump not to declassify any documents. Trump writes executive order giving Bill Barr ability to review and declassify documents.
October 2020, Bill Barr officially (and quietly), makes John Durham a special counsel. We don’t find out until December (after the Nov. election).
October 2020, FBI drops Igor Danchenko as paid informant.
Put it all together and you see the continuum.
(1) Donald Trump was being targeted by a corrupt DOJ and FBI. (2) Robert Mueller was installed in May 2017 to cover up the targeting. (3) When Mueller is nearing his completion, Bill Barr steps in to mitigate institutional damage from 1 and 2. (4) Barr maintains damage control and installs Durham. (5) Durham takes over the coverup operation from October 2020 (Danchenko safe to exit) through today.
Main Justice kept a bag over Danchenko until they needed a scapegoat, created by Durham, to sell a narrative that Main Justice was duped.
John Durham charged Danchenko (working outside govt) with lying to the FBI while simultaneously avoiding drawing attention to the FBI/DOJ officials (inside govt) who knew Danchenko was lying and were willfully blind to it in order to continue attacking and investigating President Donald Trump.
James Comey, Robert Mueller, Bill Barr, John Durham, the Mar-a-Lago raid… it’s all one long continuum of the same targeting and coverup operation.
Bill Barr was the Bondo application, and John Durham was the spray paint.
FBI Director Kash Patel sends John Solomon a declassified whistleblower report, showing how a prior House Intelligence Committee staffer blew the whistle on then HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff, who was giving the staff instructions to leak fabricated intelligence reports on Trump-Russia to smear President Donald Trump in 2017 and 2018.
According to the release {SEE HERE}, the FBI eventually received and investigated the whistleblower claims; then in 2023, sent the information to the Merrick Garland/Lisa Monaco DOJ, who took no action because the claim was now beyond the statute of limitations.
Read those dates carefully, because what this report from Kash Patel and John Solomon actually outlines is something we have all been very frustrated with.
As Solomon now notes, … “The alleged leaks fall outside the statute of limitations for prosecution on most legal theories, but the revelations nevertheless come at a sensitive time for Schiff“.. At the time of the Whistleblower report, the information to the FBI and DOJ would have been evidence that could have prosecuted Adam Schiff. However, now the information is limited to just providing I-told-you-so’s.
There are a couple of really frustrating aspects to this, and the pattern is transparently obvious.
The FBI and DOJ from 2017 to 2023, under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden’s administration, played the silo game of control of evidence. They did nothing with the evidence until the statute of limitations had tolled, which then provides Main Justice with the justification for doing nothing.
In 2025, understanding the public is insanely frustrated with the lack of accountability, the pretending game is now deployed by the FBI under Kash Patel, through John Solomon, to the broadcast venue of Sean Hannity. At the end of this clickbait circle-jerk is nothing. Again, no accountability, but a bunch of controlled information operatives saying, “Well, let’s see what the DOJ does with this now.”
A pox on all their houses.
There is no doubt in my mind this is a clear example of why the DC system uses special counsels (Mueller, Durham, et al) purposefully to create “ongoing investigations” as capture nets for information/evidence control.
“It’s under investigation, and we don’t speak about ongoing investigations.”
In real time, from 2019 to 2020, I was providing this type of evidence from within the silo system to John Durham and Bill Aldenberg who were designated information managers.
In my naiveté’, as I initially opened these doors, I thought some form of accountability would be possible, because the evidence was direct, irrefutable and without denial. However, once Aldenberg and Durham clearly said they could only act on evidence they ‘discovered’ themselves, and they could not act on evidence provided by “others” because that would make the “evidence political,” I quickly realized this was all going to amount to nothing.
Now, we are looking in hindsight at evidence from inside the system, provided to these investigators by participants inside the system, yet they also did nothing with it at the time it held value.
So, here’s the basic construct of how the DC game is played.
Evidence delivered from outside DC cannot be used by those who are charged with investigating corruption within DC. Evidence delivered from inside DC, goes into the system of “ongoing investigations” (special counsels) until its usefulness is exhausted by the clock-ticking. If the risk of accountability remains, the special counsels are extended until that accountability clock has expired.
Once the accountability clock has expired, if another party comes along (Kash) and releases that evidence (Solomon), the value only exists insofar as it generates clickbait income (Just News), column inches and punditry talking points (Sean Hannity) for the DC proletariat.
The Patel’s, Bondi’s, Solomon’s and Hannity’s then play this game of pretend. Packaging the corruption evidence as accountability hopium and selling it to the addicted battered conservatives.
Insert vote. Pull lever. Get hopium pellet.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Who is continuing to buy this game?
FBI Director Kash Patel sends John Solomon a declassified whistleblower report, showing how a prior House Intelligence Committee staffer blew the whistle on then HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff, who was giving the staff instructions to leak fabricated intelligence reports on Trump-Russia to smear President Donald Trump in 2017 and 2018.
According to the release {SEE HERE}, the FBI eventually received and investigated the whistleblower claims; then in 2023, sent the information to the Merrick Garland/Lisa Monaco DOJ, who took no action because the claim was now beyond the statute of limitations.
Read those dates carefully, because what this report from Kash Patel and John Solomon actually outlines is something we have all been very frustrated with.
As Solomon now notes, … “The alleged leaks fall outside the statute of limitations for prosecution on most legal theories, but the revelations nevertheless come at a sensitive time for Schiff“.. At the time of the Whistleblower report, the information to the FBI and DOJ would have been evidence that could have prosecuted Adam Schiff. However, now the information is limited to just providing I-told-you-so’s.
There are a couple of really frustrating aspects to this, and the pattern is transparently obvious.
The FBI and DOJ from 2017 to 2023, under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden’s administration, played the silo game of control of evidence. They did nothing with the evidence until the statute of limitations had tolled, which then provides Main Justice with the justification for doing nothing.
In 2025, understanding the public is insanely frustrated with the lack of accountability, the pretending game is now deployed by the FBI under Kash Patel, through John Solomon, to the broadcast venue of Sean Hannity. At the end of this clickbait circle-jerk is nothing. Again, no accountability, but a bunch of controlled information operatives saying, “Well, let’s see what the DOJ does with this now.”
A pox on all their houses.
There is no doubt in my mind this is a clear example of why the DC system uses special counsels (Mueller, Durham, et al) purposefully to create “ongoing investigations” as capture nets for information/evidence control.
“It’s under investigation, and we don’t speak about ongoing investigations.”
In real time, from 2019 to 2020, I was providing this type of evidence from within the silo system to John Durham and Bill Aldenberg who were designated information managers.
In my naiveté’, as I initially opened these doors, I thought some form of accountability would be possible, because the evidence was direct, irrefutable and without denial. However, once Aldenberg and Durham clearly said they could only act on evidence they ‘discovered’ themselves, and they could not act on evidence provided by “others” because that would make the “evidence political,” I quickly realized this was all going to amount to nothing.
Now, we are looking in hindsight at evidence from inside the system, provided to these investigators by participants inside the system, yet they also did nothing with it at the time it held value.
So, here’s the basic construct of how the DC game is played.
Evidence delivered from outside DC cannot be used by those who are charged with investigating corruption within DC. Evidence delivered from inside DC, goes into the system of “ongoing investigations” (special counsels) until its usefulness is exhausted by the clock-ticking. If the risk of accountability remains, the special counsels are extended until that accountability clock has expired.
Once the accountability clock has expired, if another party comes along (Kash) and releases that evidence (Solomon), the value only exists insofar as it generates clickbait income (Just News), column inches and punditry talking points (Sean Hannity) for the DC proletariat.
The Patel’s, Bondi’s, Solomon’s and Hannity’s then play this game of pretend. Packaging the corruption evidence as accountability hopium and selling it to the addicted battered conservatives.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 