Posted originally on CTH on February 14, 2026 | Sundance
Political operatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna have never mentioned the name Katheryn Ruemmler despite her name appearing thousands of times in emails within the Epstein files. Yet both Massie and Khanna went out of their way to publicly claim they forced the DOJ to release the names of four men they accused of being sex traffickers and pedophiles.
Massie was very proud of his efforts to discover the names and force the DOJ to unredact them. As Massie proclaimed, continuously: if President Trump and the DOJ did not publicly unredact the names, it would be proof that President Trump and the DOJ were protecting pedophiles and sex traffickers.
Thomas Massie: "We found six men whose names have been redacted who are implicated in the way the files are presented."
After holding their joint press conference, Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna then went to the House of Representatives to proclaim (1) Salvatore Nuara, (2) Zurab Mikeladze, (3) Leonid Leonov and (4) Nicola Caputo were sexual deviants, pedophiles and much worse. They were horrible men who had abused underage girls.
…. Except, there was a problem. A BIG PROBLEM.
Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonid Leonov and Nicola Caputo had absolutely nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein or anything even remotely associated with Jeffrey Epstein. [SEE HERE]
The names Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonid Leonov and Nicola Caputo were in the Epstein files because they were random pictures of men, random passport pictures, used in a photo lineup during questioning of one of Epstein’s victims.
Ro Khanna read the names of six people on the House floor and described them as "wealthy, powerful men" involved in Epstein's crimes.
Thanks to the ‘HE’S A WITCH” hunting efforts of Massie and Khanna, four random guys who never new anything about the DOJ or the FBI, or Jeffrey Epstein or anything else even remotely in that orbit, were labeled as sex criminals and horrific people.
Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonid Leonov, and Nicola Caputo did not know they were in the Epstein files and did not know their pictures were ever used by the FBI. Their random passport photographs were used in an FBI lineup to question witnesses, that’s it. But thanks to Ro Khanna and the political efforts of Thomas Massie, they were wrongly labeled.
Khanna and Massie now claim it’s not their fault. If the DOJ had just redacted the names of the innocent men, there never would have been a problem. Except, that’s the problem… They were innocent and their names were redacted because they were innocent; but that wasn’t good enough for Massie and Khanna who used the redactions as evidence of a cover-up, and when the redactions were forcibly removed, Massie and Khanna now claim the names should have been redacted.
Inquisitor Massie: We should dunk her, if she floats, she is a witch, if she drowns, she is innocent!
Thomas Massie’s objective with his lead position on the Epstein stuff, is to defeat MAGA and return control of the Republican party to the professional Republican elites (GOPe/Bush clan).
This is the same Sea Island agenda. They are actively working to best position their preferred and controlled leader, Ron DeSantis. If the GOPe get DeSantis moved into position, they will regain control. The problem is MAGA.
The useful Republicans are exploiting the Epstein stuff to accomplish this objective. Simultaneously, they are promoting as much division as possible (Israel vs Qatar) in order to fracture the MAGA assemblies. It’s structurally easy to see it, when you understand the goal.
Ask yourself this basic, commonsense question: If you tear down President Donald Trump, who benefits?
There’s your answer to that sense; to that sensibility trying to reconcile questions; to the intuition you have.
Posted originally on CTH on February 14, 2026 | Sundance
Overnight in the USA time zones, Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered a very important speech at the Munich Security Conference [3:00am ET]. The video is below [prompted] and a FULL transcription will soon follow.
This is a critically worded speech that is very important to listen to with great deliberation. Within his remarks Rubio is telling Europe that we want to remain allied in our interests, but we are no longer going to allow the system of “globalism” to destroy our uniquely American life.
The United States is separating from the madness; this is not up for debate. The only question is whether Europe is too far gone, or whether they will join us.
The euphoria that followed the collapse of the Berlin Wall, “led us to a dangerous delusion. That we had entered quote the end of history. That every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood. That the rules-based global order, an overused term, would now replace the national interest, and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world. This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history, and it has cost us dearly.”
The New York Times version appears to be the most truthful, factual and cited. It also makes the most sense.
In essence, two foreign nationals were having a phone call about Iran and discussing Jared Kushner’s role and influence in the policy of Trump toward Iran. The phone call was intercepted by a foreign intelligence agency, who then relayed their interpretation of the discussion to the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).
NEW YORK TIMES – […] It was a discussion last year between two foreign nationals about Iran, not an unusual topic for American spies to study. But an intercept of that communication, collected by a foreign spy service and given to the United States.
[…] Mr. Kushner’s name was redacted in the original report from the National Security Agency, but people reading it, including the whistle-blower, were able to determine that the reference was to him.
[…] The foreign nationals, they said, were commenting on Mr. Kushner’s influence with the Trump administration. At a time last year when Mr. Kushner’s role in Middle East peace talks was less public than it is now, the foreign officials were recorded saying that he was the person to speak to in order to influence the talks.
[…] The intercept also included what officials described as “gossip” or speculation about Mr. Kushner that was not supported by other intelligence.
[…] The whistle-blower report was based on a telephone intercept provided to the N.S.A. from a foreign intelligence service. Intercepts are notoriously difficult to interpret.
[…] The whistle-blower, an intelligence official whose identity has not been publicly disclosed, said Ms. Gabbard’s actions improperly limited who could see the report.
[…] Some administration critics, who have reviewed the report and have considered the underlying intelligence to be significant, also agreed that Ms. Gabbard did not act improperly by restricting distribution of the report. (more)
Democrats (administration critics) agreed that DNI Gabbard did not act improperly.
If it was possible to tell the identity of the U.S. person (aka Kushner) simply by reading the intel report, and this report is simply gossip by two other people talking about a U.S. person, then yes, duh – the report should be secured and not spread.
This story becomes more of a nothingburger each time new information is leaked.
Posted originally on CTH on February 13, 2026 | Sundance
Holding an impromptu press conference, Vice-President JD Vance gives an impromptu press conference flying back to the USA. Vance was asked about the latest revelations in the Epstein files and for his opinion about the political consequences the files represent. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on February 13, 2026 | Sundance
Former White House legal counsel/fixer to Barack Obama, and former personal lawyer/fixer of Susan Rice, Kathryn Ruemmler was Chief Legal Counsel for Goldman Sachs for the past six years.
Throughout those jobs and networked professional relationships, Kathryn Ruemmler was also a personal friend and advisor to Jeffrey Epstein.
Yesterday it was reported that Kathryn Ruemmler has resigned from Goldman Sachs.
NEW YORK – Goldman Sachs’s top lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, resigned on Thursday in the wake of the Justice Department’s release of emails and other material that revealed her extensive relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier.
Ms. Ruemmler and representatives for Goldman said for years that she had a strictly professional relationship with Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender. But emails, text messages and photographs released late last month upended that narrative, leading to Ms. Ruemmler’s sudden resignation, which surprised many inside the firm.
Before joining Goldman in 2020, Ms. Ruemmler was a counselor, confidante and friend to Mr. Epstein, the documents showed. She advised him on how to respond to tough questions about his sex crimes, discussed her dating life, advised him on how to avoid unflattering media scrutiny and addressed him as “sweetie” and “Uncle Jeffrey.”
Mr. Epstein, in turn, provided career advice on her move to Goldman, introduced her to well-known businesspeople and showered her with gifts of spa treatments, high-end travel and Hermes luxury items. In total, Ms. Ruemmler was mentioned in more than 10,000 of the documents released by the Justice Department.
Ms. Ruemmler, in addition to being Goldman’s general counsel since 2021, was a partner and vice chair of its reputational risk committee. She earlier served as White House counsel under President Obama and was a white-collar defense lawyer at Latham & Watkins. (read more)
Newly released email exchanges add fresh details to the relationship between Kathy Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein. Ruemmler is a former Obama White House counsel and now one of the highest-paid lawyers in the country as the chief legal officer at Goldman Sachs. CNN's Andrew… pic.twitter.com/niXjxlDWvd
Posted originally on CTH on February 12, 2026 | Sundance
The Obama-Biden administration couldn’t get the votes needed in Congress to amend the Clean Air Act and regulate “greenhouse gases.” So, they both decided to ignore the law and create trillions in regulatory costs on the American people.
As noted by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, “The Trump Admin is proudly following the law, saving $1.3 TRILLION for the American people, lowering new car costs by over $2,400 per vehicle, and getting rid of the climate participation trophy for manufacturers to install Obama Switches that shut vehicles off at red lights and stop signs.” WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on February 12, 2026 | Sundance
Asst Attorney General Gail Slater was the head of the Antitrust Division of the Dept of Justice. Today she announces she has “left her role.” CNN is reporting that AAG Slater was fired.
Gail Slater was in charge of the antitrust division and a hawk on the mergers and acquisitions of Big Tech and Big Corporate media. As head of the DOJ Antitrust Division, Slater’s view on competition was against the interests of the major Big Tech billionaires and corporate media conglomerates who intersect with them.
Slater was in a position to influence the Warner Brothers-Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount (David Ellison) is trying to stop.
If you have followed the influence of Larry Ellison (Oracle, TikTok) and his son David Ellison (Paramount, CBS) in/around the Trump administration as it relates to Elon Musk (a beneficiary of Ellison), then the timing of Gail Slater’s removal doesn’t look good at all.
Gail Slater came into the administration as a part of the JD Vance network (Peter Thiel, Palantir, etc.), and it looks like that same Vance network stood aside and watched Larry Ellison leverage his position to see her removed.
Slater was a solid MAGA voice in a critical Antitrust position against the interests of Big Tech and Big Corp. However, I said on Christmas Day 2024 – we were likely to be very disappointed by the influence of Big Tech/Big Corp in the White House {SEE HERE}.
Via CNN[…] Slater said in her Thursday post on X: “It is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as AAG for Antitrust today. It was indeed the honor of a lifetime to serve in this role.”
The anti-trust division is expected to play a critical role in assessing Netflix’s Warner Brothers Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount is trying to stop by appealing straight to shareholders with its own bid. (CNN is owned by Warner Brothers Discovery.)
In an NBC interview last week, Trump said, “I’ve decided I shouldn’t be involved. The Justice Department will handle it.” But Paramount CEO David Ellison returned to the White House last week to meet privately with Trump, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN. (read more)
There may be something else in the background that we do not understand. However, when former lobbyists and political consultants become key administration officials (Wiles, Bondi) these types of outcomes are possible.
Posted originally on CTH on February 10, 2026 | Sundance
Representative Ilhan Omar is one of the most sanctimonious corrupt Democrats in congress, and she’s loud and proud about it because she understands how to engage in financial fraud safely. Just do what everyone else is doing but do it bigger, that way there’s no way her peers can approach it.
Someone in DC gave House Oversight Chairman James Comer the familiar tap on the shoulder and told him they don’t investigate their own Uniparty tribe. So, Comer drops his planned review of Omar’s corruption and shifts it to the ethics team.
BREAKING: James Comer says the House Ethics Committee will take over the investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar after a massive spike in her net worth was flagged in financial disclosures:
“We’ve been informed in the last few hours that the Ethics Committee is probably going to have… pic.twitter.com/YIO1DkOr91
A game of pretending is needed in order to retain the illusion of the Potemkin Village of DC. A construct manufactured by the power structure that exists behind the puppet show, with the full intention to distract us. Pretending is what gives rise to a Florida governor on a 2022 ‘book tour’ run for a 2024 campaign that everyone denied was going to happen. Pretending is also what kicks the can of accountability away until it can be buried.
Pretending is needed in order to convince the audience Republicans will make a difference, or the black eye doesn’t hurt and look he bought me flowers. Perhaps some reminders and clarifications of the real game inside DC politics are needed. After all, while all these chaff and countermeasures are replaying their familiar tunes, CTH is actually trying to accomplish something by destroying some IC silos.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, hereafter called the House Oversight Committee or HOC, has a very specific function in DC circles that too few understand. Once again, let us be clear while trying to explain decades of false information founded upon arcane legislative outlooks.
Understanding the DC game of Chaff and Countermeasures…. A “Countermeasure” is a measure or action taken to counter or offset a preceding one.
Politically speaking, the deployment of countermeasures is a well-used tactic by professional politicians in Washington DC to counter incoming public inquiry and protect themselves from anger expressed by the electorate. The Republican leadership are very skilled in the management of “chaff” (outrage), and “countermeasures” (the distraction).
Within Washington DC, the HOC has a very specific and unique function. What Fox News is to corporate conservative punditry, so too is the HOC to the same DC system of pretending. The House Oversight Committee is the “Chaff and Countermeasures” committee.
The HOC operates for both parties with the same mission.
The House Oversight Committee was/is created by the House legislative leadership to make money for the party in control of the Chair. When the House Speaker is notified of a DC corruption issue, inside his/her office they will often be heard saying, “give it to oversight.” The intent of that instruction is to give the issue to the HOC, so they can hold hearings, create soundbites and fundraise from the issue.
Making money for the party in control of the Chair is the primary function of the House Oversight Committee. The HOC does not exist to create accountability or oversight; the HOC exists to exploit the issue for fundraising and satiate the base voters of the party in control of the Chair.
The HOC presents the illusion of accountability by constructing soundbites and member performances which are then broadcast on television for appearances to the voting audience. It is essentially theater.
The HOC is a “general oversight’ committee, not a committee of “specific jurisdiction.” Thus, the HOC is the vehicle where Democrats and Republicans publicly display their political initiatives, frame their narratives and then broadcast them on MSNBC, CNN (Democrats) or FOX NEWS (Republicans).
Depending on the issues at hand, the HOC committee members are generally those performance actors best known to the audience of both parties. This is not accidental; this is by design. Again, for emphasis, I am only talking about the HOC, a “generalized oversight” committee. Only this specific committee has this specific mission.
A hot button topic enters the committee ecosphere. Specifically trained staffers and performance artists, uniquely qualified to put on theatrical productions (both parties), are then deployed to assist the representatives in creating the soundbites that hopefully will go viral and assist them with fundraising and opportunities to say, “here’s what we are doing.” Outlining this construct is not an exhibition in cynicism; this is the reality of what the HOC is designed and created to do.
When you see the HOC performing at their best, you will see lots of soundbites created.
The Chair of the HOC is always part of the House Speaker’s close inner circle. From that association you will discover by training, by habit, and by consequence, the HOC framework is developed to sustain the process itself as an end result. The questioning is the sum total of all accountabilities. The performance is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire.
Oversight, in the HOC framework of narrative creation, has evolved into reveling in the endless process (a fundraising proposition) and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter, and never actually applies accountability toward what might be discovered. This is why you end up with high blood pressure, frustrated with the questions not asked, and throwing bricks at the screen or monitors when viewing.
The point of HOC hearings is to create what are now described as “viral moments” that can be used to generate money.
The second, and lesser objective, is to give the illusion of accountability while not actually ever holding anyone or anything accountable. See prior HOC reference points like Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, the Twitter File review or the Joe/Hunter Biden crime syndicate investigation.
If you watch the HOC through the prism of expecting some form of accountability for the violations of law, you will be frustrated and disappointed. However, if you watch the HOC through the prism of how well the members will do at raising money from their performances, then you can evaluate the effectiveness – the proverbial winning and losing.
The HOC is designed by House leadership to perform the same basic function for both Democrats and Republicans. The HOC committee assignments are selected based on the theatrical skills of each representative. This is not to say the motives of the members are sullied or impure, it is simply to point out the motive of the committee itself is to generate fundraising from the skillsets of the members on the committee.
Once you fully grasp what the intent of the House Oversight Committee is about, and once you drop the expectation that any accountability in oversight is the intent, then you can watch the performances through the entertainment prism of partisan politics and genuinely enjoy them – or hate them.
The HOC is called the “Chaff and Countermeasures” Committee, because that’s essentially what the committee does. It gives the appearance of targeting, steering the target to a controlled destination, and then distracting the audience from the outcome of accountability.
If sunlight is achieved, meaning the Mainstream Media cannot ignore the issue as presented and questioned, and if the general public become more familiar with the controversial subject matter or topic at hand, and if the party of the Chair can fundraise from the issue, then the committee has succeeded. However, if you are looking for something to change as an outcome of any HOC investigation or hearing, you will be perpetually disappointed.
There seems to be a willful blindness on the part of the American people, a chosen refusal to acknowledge the implications of the unAmerican and unConstititional behaviors, actions and outcomes we are being served on a daily basis. It can no longer be presumed to be a matter of “I can’t see what’s happening”, because a whole lot of normal Americans really are clean and articulate.
“I can’t see it” just doesn’t cut it.
NONSENSE! Most people can see it. Most are just choosing to reconcile the irreconcilable because it is more comforting to ignore the truth of it. Just be honest, for many people avoidance has become a survival mechanism.
It’s more along the lines of “I see what’s happening, but it’s scary and complicated and confusing, and if I admit that I see it, I will become responsible in a way that I am not if I keep pretending I can’t see it or hear it or maybe I don’t understand it.”
Cue the audio visual. Do you remember the Awan Brothers scandal?
The political system in Washington DC has become so massive it is now capable of protecting itself. Any attempt to reduce the influence, scope or size of the system is considered a risk. The system is, in essence, protecting itself. Deep State is self-aware. NOTE 07:43 (just hit play)
Whether it’s John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Kevin McCarthy or Mike Johnson, leadership’s Lucy has unlimited footballs.
Whether it’s the Awan Brothers, the Huma Abedin laptop, the Clinton’s private servers, the Hunter Biden laptop, the Mark Warner/James Wolfe leak of classified information, the activity of CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella in the impeachment, the many aspects to Mary McCord, or the leaking of the Dobbs decision by Sheldon Snook, all of these things are very public, very visible and very well known. Yet did you see a single satellite truck in front of their house or a microphone in their face asking questions?
Nope. DC runs this game of pretending and all the media play the game.
The fourth estate (media) has long ago collapsed.
Now, the choices are ours.
Personally, I will not pretend, and I know most of you also refuse.
If we keep assembling enough people to stop pretending, then what happens?
Posted originally on CTH on February 9, 2026 | Sundance
The General Counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) has written a letter to whistleblower attorney Andrew Bakaj, outline the absurdity of the complaint. Additionally, as noted by the ODNI counsel, “The whistleblower’s rights do not extend to the attorney himself.”
This should put to reset this insufferable IC/Lawfare targeting operation intended to generate an impeachment effort against DNI Tulsi Gabbard.
Factually, Andrew Bakaj has never seen the underlying intelligence report his client generated, nor the TSSCI material intercepted by them. Everything Bakaj has been leaking to the media is a construct of fabrications, falsehoods, smears and lies.
Both the NSA whistleblower and his attorney Andrew Bakaj were counting on the classified intelligence angle to this effort creating the illusion of something that is non-existent, a fabricated narrative that could gain traction. This is the same thing Bakaj did with former CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella in order to generate the first Trump impeachment effort. This time, against DNI Tulsi Gabbard, they are failing.
Allison Gill is an ally of the Lawfare network and recently sat down for an interview with NSA whistleblower attorney Andrew Bakaj; the same attorney used by former CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.
This interview appears to be taking place after Bakaj revised his statements to The Guardian forcing them to rewrite the central claim of the leak he provided. The Guardian rewrote their article removing the key claim within the intelligence intercept that a foreign intelligence person was in contact with a person close to President Donald Trump.
The revision now states:
[…] “The Guardian reported earlier on Saturday that the phone conversation was between a person associated with foreign intelligence and a person close to Trump, based on Bakaj’s recollection of the complaint, which he confirmed over multiple calls. However, after publication, Bakaj said he misspoke.
He clarified his understanding of the complaint in a statement: “The NSA picked up a phone call between two members of foreign intelligence involving someone close to the Trump White House,” he said. “The NSA does not monitor individuals without a reason.” {citation}
This is not a small “revision,” it is essentially a rewrite of the central component to the whistleblower complaint. As it is now clarified two foreign people were intercepted talking about a person who knows Donald Trump. This could be any two foreign people gossiping or talking about anyone who is in the orbit of Donald Trump. That explains why intelligence analysts reviewed the NSA intercept, disregarded it and said it is hearsay likely just ‘gossip” according to New York Times reporting.
However, that said, Andrew Bakaj then appears on a podcast with Allison Gill during their effort to put traction to the claims, and Bakaj repeats the false statement. See video at 7:45:
…”So, in the spring of last year there was intelligence that was gathered by an agency that captured, um, activity that was being conducted by someone close to the President.”…
This is the same lie the whistleblower’s attorney Andrew Bakaj told The Guardian; that someone close to the president was a participant in the “activity.” This is demonstrably false through all other reporting.
The complaint alleges two foreign individuals were intercepted talking to each other about a person who Bakaj defines as close to the president, on the subject of Iran.
It could simply be two Germans or Israelis talking about Iran and wondering what Devin Nunes thinks about it.
The entire predicate claim is silly. Foreign officials and foreign intelligence officials talk to each other all the time about Trump and or his people.
This complaint is a fabrication, and the fact that the NSA Whistleblower included the TSSCI material in the complaint, literally outlining who was intercepted talking, is the reason why the complaint could not be shared or circulated without careful guidance by the DNI.
The whistleblower did this on purpose. If the whistleblower wanted to share his complaint with more people, he could have just avoided including the TSSCI aspect.
This is intelligence community Lawfare in action.
Dear Chairman @SenTomCotton , please call @AndrewBakaj to appear before the Gang of Eight, preferably with his client, play this video, ask him if what he says at the prompt is true? When he says, "no" refer him to the DOJ for prosecution and dismiss the complaint. 👇
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 