Tag Archives: Crime Family

Jul 29 2025

STEVE BANNON: “They Smell Blood.” Hakeem Jeffries Texas Visit Amid Red State Redistricting Battle


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannon’s War Room on: July 28, 2025

May 14 2023

Strange “Democracy” – Govt of Turkey Demands Twitter Remove Political Opposition, Elon Musk Agrees


Posted originally on the CTH on May 13, 2023 | Sundance 

The authoritarian government of Turkish President Recep Erdogan, a man of notoriously manipulative and unstable disposition intent on recreating the Ottoman empire, demanded that in advance of their elections Twitter remove the voice of the opposition party.  Elon Musk complied:

This decision is interesting because it shows that despite his questions about the need to defend democracy and free speech, Twitter owner Elon Musk is willing to support the removal of opposition political parties during elections.

Musk justifies this decision by saying the choice was between shutting down a political viewpoint or shutting down all of Turkish Twitter access.  Musk chose to simply eliminate one set of voices in opposition to the existing government in Turkey.

When Rumble was faced with a similar threat from France, Rumble stood with the principle of freedom and refused to block content the administration of Emmanuel Macron did not like.  Rumble left France rather than comply with authoritarian censorship demands.  Twitter remains operational in Turkey, willing to support the authoritarian censorship demands.  An interesting contrast.

I have fielded many calls in the past few days about this seemingly 180° reversal from Elon Musk in his ‘speech’ positions.  The hiring of Linda Yaccarino was one massive datapoint that seemed to indicate the priorities of Musk had changed.  The acquiescent to Turkish government requests less than 24 hours later is another datapoint.

The general questions all fall in the spectrum of ‘what has changed’?

I will answer here, what I have answered privately.

When I published my thesis on the background of Twitter called Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, the essential outline contained two basic cornerstones.

First, the United States government was operating to control the information on the Twitter platform with direct access to the content.  Second, the USG was subsidizing it.

Two years ago, people thought I was nuts about government control over content.  However, in the last several months the information from within Twitter, specifically the Twitter Files outlining the DHS influence and control, has verified exactly the issue CTH noted in the very first outline of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop.

However, it is the second aspect behind the platform that people have yet to recognize.  When the fulsome story is told in hindsight, you will see that I am correct.

The second aspect is that Twitter cannot financially exist as a viable communication platform without government subsidy.

As it is currently structured, including the AWS cloud-based services for data processing, the costs associated with handling 30 million active simultaneous users (24/7) exceeds the business model for self-sufficiency.  It simply costs too much without ownership of the metal.

Amazon Web Services (AWS), and other cloud-based services (Microsoft etc), are efficient for platforms who do not then need to employ as many engineers to keep the data processing operational; but they are very costly.

Data processing for 30 million simultaneously active users engaging with the platform is extremely expensive.  Every engagement feature makes this issue worse. It is simply an issue of scale.  Unfortunately, unlike traditional business models, the per user costs do not decrease as the number of simultaneous users increase.

There is no viable business model for a ‘free’ or low-cost user-based platform that requires data processing for this scale of simultaneous users without a massive amount of money to create the actual servers (metal-based operations).  A cloud service (AWS) is expensive, and Musk is on the hook for every penny in data processing cost.

There have also been many reports that AWS is technically an endpoint U.S. government operation. Meaning the actual data processing is done by systems attached to U.S. government operations.  While staying away from the granular tech on this issue, it remains most likely that government subsidy underpins the ability of Twitter to exist and function as a platform.

The motive behind the public-private partnership is symbiotic and long precedes Musk purchasing the platform.

The evolution of Twitter from a private to a quasi-public institution under the control of DHS took place over a decade.  Essentially from 2012 (Arab Spring), and the first requests of the U.S. government for assistance, to the present day.  As the public-private partnership relationship grew, Twitter was viewed as beneficial to the interests of the U.S. government as a controlled communication platform, and the financial subsidy to retain the viability of the platform was predictable as an outcome.

As with all things connected to the deep state IC, over time controlling content on the platform became increasingly obvious.  The Twitter files reveal the scale of this issue as it was available to understand via internal communication correspondence. However, as admitted by the journalists requesting the searches of the Twitter database, they really don’t know the full scale and scope of the government involvement in Twitter.  My personal suspicions of govt scale greatly exceed those journalistic reviews, driven in part by my experience as a target of the background actors.

Which brings me back to the question that everyone asks me about the motive for Musk’s ideological reversal.   Surprise, it’s the money!

There is only one force more powerful than the firmly committed and espoused ideology of an altruistic mind, ECONOMICS.

The economics of the thing always supersedes and overpowers the other issues related to the thing.   If the U.S. government wanted to shift the full scale of cost to operate Twitter onto the shoulders of Musk, the platform would not survive.

Tap Musk on the shoulder, or allow Musk to discover this financial dependency organically, and suddenly the reality of the thing changes. Nothing changes espoused opinion faster than money, just ask Steve Cortes.

It is a simple truth in everything: if you see a person change opinion quickly and radically, look at the money behind them.

There are two vectors for economics to change things.  First, the gain of money as an enticement. Ex. you do this, you get paid. The second vector is more powerful, the removal of money as an enticement. Ex. you do this, or the existing payment stops.

If you look at the financial background of an abrupt change, almost every time you will find the answer to the motive that puzzles you.

May 14 2023

Big Picture – Elon Musk Confirms Hiring DEI Advocate Linda Yaccarino as Twitter CEO


Posted originally of the CTH on May 13, 2023 | Sundance 

Twitter platform owner Elon Musk has confirmed the hiring of Linda Yaccarino as CEO of Twitter. Many reactions are happening, but CTH analysis generally likes to stay ahead of the reactions and more into the future of what each datapoint means.  That said, here’s some context.

The general or more common logic, completely understandable, is to look at the hiring of Yaccarino as binary.  Either Musk was previously lying about everything he believed in, or the revenue situation is at a critical mass. Otherwise, it really doesn’t make sense to bring in Linda Yaccarino.

Before going deeper, it is critical to know just how ideological Linda Yaccarino is.  The former head of NBCUniversal is the apex voice in the system of promoting Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) from an advertising perspective.   I’m not talking about a little bit ideological, I mean the full dna-level, metastatic, this is the core essence of what makes Yaccarino believe she has purpose in life.

Changing social culture by leveraging commercial enterprise is Yaccarino’s life work.

Literally Linda Yaccarino believes that advertisers should determine the product being sold. This is not a spoof, exaggeration, hyperbole or a spin on her outlook. Yaccarino believes marketing and advertising executives should be able to control the physical content, the actual stuff, created by the publisher they pay to advertise their product.

A traditional example might be Ford Motor Company telling Motor Trend magazine what positions to place ads for competitors in the auto industry as a contingency for their ad spend.  A modern example might be Disney telling Fox News what content may be discussed by Tucker Carlson.  This is the origin of DEI ideology controlling platform content.

To understand how this mindset applies to Twitter and Elon Musk, watch a few minutes of this previous interview between Yaccarino and Musk at a convention of advertisers. This is an example of how the NBCUniversal executive thinks.  WATCH (prompted):

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ypZNWjPpOuI%3Fstart%3D1386%26feature%3Doembed

You can see in the back and forth, how Musk tries to stick to his core principles about “free speech” while Yaccarino uses terms like “partnership”, “collaboration”, and “mutual benefits” to leverage her advertising team’s agenda.

It is important to understand the views expressed by Musk and Yaccarino are mutually exclusive.  There is no free speech when the advertisers are permitted to determine the content of that speech.  Musk tries to negotiate a nuance, but the core of the dynamic is in conflict.

Any good, stable and even-tempered corporate executive will tell you the marketing team is consistently the least valuable mindset at the corporate table.

Factually, most of the people who fail out of business schools fail down into the humanities dept.  However, sometimes those emotionally driven ideologues simply move into the marketing and advertising fields within the business majors.  The outcome of this truism is Alissa Heinersheid and her destruction of the Bud Light brand through marketing.

Linda Yaccarino is the apex voice in the system that has allowed advertisers to determine content.  She would be the ideal candidate within an organization like Google, but she is oil in the water of Twitter.  So, what gives?

Why would Elon Musk hire Linda Yaccarino as the CEO of Twitter?  We return to the binary issue…. Either Musk really doesn’t believe in what he previously advocated, or Musk has hit a wall of acceptance and generating revenue is now more important than the platform itself?   For the latter, essentially the economics of the thing is determining the outcome of the thing.

There is a third alternative; a less familiar dynamic that has surfaced in the past and does provide a reference.  This is what I call the “ino” hiring process within large institutions and organizations; “ino” stands for In Name Only.

An executive is hired to represent the division/organization, in name only.  They have no actual control, influence or power.  They are simply figureheads installed to create the optics needed for the institution to continue operations.

The ino practice is also visible with ‘diversity hires’.  A person is hired not to drive the mission of the organization, but to deflect opposition away from the achievement of the organizational mission.  However, all ‘in name only’ (ino) hires always end up in the exact same conversation within the organization.

When the ino realizes they are essentially irrelevant to the function of the organization, that means their opinions and recommendations are never part of the organizational outcome, there is always a conversation with the following words: “then why did you hire me?”  This conversation always happens, it is the one constant in an ever-changing business world.

So, there’s three basic dynamics:

Elon Musk was not as committed to ‘Free Speech’ as he originally defined it.

Priorities have changed and now Revenue is more vital than Free Speech.

Musk is still committed but needs to create the illusion of DEI acceptance.

In considering the last element, Mrs. Yaccarino does not present herself as an ino-person who will accept a position and then not deliver on the intent of her mission.

So, what does this tell us about the future of Twitter content?

I think we all know the answer….

~ This just happened today ~

WHY?

Because the now-restricted Twitter Account created THIS:

The CNN Town Hall Massacre

Posted in 1st Amendment, Big Tech, Cultural Marxism, Culture, Deep State, Joe Biden, Uncategorized

Share

May 13 2023

Anheuser-Busch Tells Beer Distributors Not to Worry, This Too Shall Pass


May 12, 2023 | Sundance 

Last week it was reported that Anheuser-Busch CEO Michel Doukeris told investors during a conference call that Budweiser product sales drops in the U.S. and North America were no big deal when contrast against the global sales of the brand. “The Bud Light volume decline in the US over the first three weeks of April, as publicly reported, would represent around 1% of our overall global volumes for that period,” Doukeris said on the call. He focused attention on the company’s global reach, saying that Bud Light is just one beer within its portfolio and it’s not changing the company’s full-year outlook. {link}

Apparently, USA beer drinkers, specifically those who do not want to be identified as transgender men, are an insignificant bunch amid the world of beer drinking consumers.  However, Doukeris might start paying a little more attention as the decline in total A-B products in North America is starting to become more significant. {Source}

It’s interesting that Coors Light and Miller Lite have sales increases surpassing the sales decline of Bud Light.   This would seem to indicate hard brand switches, but Anheuser-Busch in North America held the corporate line and yesterday {source} told their distributors not to worry.

ST. LOUIS – Anheuser-Busch’s distributors from around the country met in St. Louis on Thursday. They heard firsthand about changes being made regarding the Bud Light transgender controversy.

Anheuser-Busch invited the distributors to the downtown Hyatt hotel for a yearly meeting on summer marketing plans. It was the first such meeting since transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney’s viral social media posts with Bud Light in early April. She received a special edition can with her picture on it. 

Market analysts report Bud Light sales are still down more than 20% for the past month. Bud Light boycotts appear to be driving down sales of fellow Anheuser-Busch brands like Budweiser and Michelob Ultra, which are down but not as sharply. 

[…] They appeared to adopt a “deflect and downplay” strategy, which almost never works. […] An Anheuser-Busch spokesperson confirms the company informed distributors of major changes in marketing structure, issuing the following statement: 

“We regularly bring our wholesaler partners and leadership together to share upcoming brand and business plans. Hosting our May meeting in St. Louis is something we started last year and is an opportunity to bring our partners together in our hometown. 

We have communicated some next steps with our internal teams and wholesaler partners. First, we made it clear that the safety and welfare of our employees and our partners is our top priority. Second, Todd Allen was appointed Vice President of Bud Light reporting directly to Benoit Garbe, U.S. Chief Marketing Officer. Third, we made some adjustments to streamline the structure of our marketing function to reduce layers so that our most senior marketers are more closely connected to every aspect of our brands activities. These steps will help us maintain focus on the things we do best: brewing great beer for all consumers, while always making a positive impact in our communities and on our country.”

Anheuser-Busch and its distributors have also sent letters to bars and other retailers explaining the situation, pointing out that a single marketing official engaged with Mulvaney. (read more)  

As you can tell so far, despite the significant North American impacts to the products, the Diversity Equity and Inclusion outlook of the Anheuser-Busch global company is still strongly entrenched in the branding.  It does not appear the company is going to modify anything as the very vocal Alphabet ideologues have them captive.

As noted by Dustin Smith, a business professor at Webster University who teaches college students how to manage the woke transition in corporate life, “the brewer has been supporting “Pride” events for years with no backlash. Smith predicted its brands would recover and most of its core customers would return.” {link}

Comrades, the global command and control authorities have spoken.  The tranny fluid will continue to be supported until such time as those NASCAR watching, line dancing rednecks capitulate and start drinking it again.   Look for significant ad buys on Twitter soon.

Keep watching.

Jul 18 2022

Precursor, The Larger Motive of the J6 Committee


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 17, 2022 | Sundance

The January 6th Committee in Washington DC has a much bigger bipartisan motive than most Americans understand.  The elimination of Donald John Trump from the political landscape is an exercise in protecting a surveillance state from the threat that Trump represents.

That said, I’m not sure that even Donald Trump himself realizes and/or appreciates the scale of threat he is considered to a system created in the aftermath of 9/11/01.  However, consider this a precursor to the next post on this website that will hopefully show exactly what the scale of the problem is.

Wyoming congressional representative Liz Cheney gets a lot of attention for her opposition to Trump; but what most people do not yet fully grasp is the direct and consequential nature of her opposition.  Liz Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, has a vested interest in removing the threat of Trump because the real issue comes back to what her father created in the aftermath of 9/11, the domestic political surveillance state.

There are two defensive operations currently underway in Washington DC to protect the biggest issue that few people talk about.  The first is the objective of Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, the former Obama White House senior national security advisor and legal liaison from the executive branch.  The second objective is the J6 committee trying to stop Donald Trump from ever holding political office again.

Lisa Monaco is in place to protect the former Obama White House from legal and/or political responsibility in their weaponizing of domestic law enforcement operations inside the U.S. Dept of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation.  Monaco’s undiscussed job is to target any entity who might reveal what Obama did, and what systems currently exist.

When you understand what Monaco is responsible for doing, you also understand why the National School Boards Association wrote a letter to the DOJ asking Attorney General Merrick Garland to use his influence and control over the FBI to target parents who attended School Board meetings in opposition to the agenda of the progressive left.

Alot has been written about that requested targeting operation, yet few people have wondered what mechanisms are known to the NSBA that would facilitate their request to the Dept of Justice.  In the bigger picture, the request from the NSBA was a request to deploy tools that only exist thanks to the bipartisan work of Dick Cheney and Barack Obama.

There is a currently ongoing national surveillance system that monitors you, me and everyone else that Washington DC might consider a threat.  It is within this system that you find the real issue and motive for why Democrats and Republicans would be united in their effort to remove Donald Trump as a perceived threat.

Many people have written about the political goals of the January 6th committee, yet few people really grasp what DC is trying to hide and protect from the American people.

It is only when you fully understand their motives that you can fully appreciate the scale of what they will do to keep the system in place.  A national surveillance system that was created by Dick Cheney and then later refined by Barack Obama.

.

Nov 1 2021

Sunday Talks, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg Says West Coast Port Backlog Unlikely to Be Resolved Until Every American is Vaccinated


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 31, 2021 | Sundance | 292 Comments

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg appeared on the DC narrative shaping program hosted by swamp gatekeeper Chris Wallace.  Within the interview Buttigieg was questioned about why West Coast port backups are worse now than before the White House announced their solution to operate ports 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Buttigieg proclaimed the ports are being impacted by the pandemic, and ships stuck in China are the reason why ships are sitting off the coast of California.   Yeah, try to square that circular logic.  LOL.  The scale of incompetence, even in common sense politispeak, is off the charts.  The illogical statements by this guy are legendary; however, he outdid himself today.

Eventually Pete weaves his way through fourteen nonsensical catch phrases to get to a point where he proclaims nothing in the supply chain will start being more efficient until everyone is vaccinated.  And yes, it appears that he is so stuck in pretzel-speak, Buttigieg actually believes that.

All of that said, I wouldn’t post this for review if it wasn’t for the ‘hard-hitting‘ segment from Wallace that comes right after.  You just gotta watch (prompted):

The southern border is in crisis, food inflation is skyrocketing, transportation and logistical supply chains are a mess because of emissions and regulation, store shelves are empty, gasoline is ridiculously expensive, the blue-collar working class is getting crushed, the vaccination mandate is wreaking havoc on jobs, airlines and employment for first responders, overall national anxiety is at a high point, the economy is in a free-fall and two-thirds of all Americans now say the administration is incompetent.  Along comes Chris Wallace with the hard-hitting question about what Pete and his husband are doing with their twins for Halloween.

Lets Go Brandon !

As noted, and as previously outlined, the issues with the backlog of the California ports have absolutely nothing to do with rapid unloading of ships and container vessels.  The issue is the inability of California truckers to move those containers.  The problem is a shortage of CA emission compliant internal transportation trucks to move the containers out of the port and into the U.S. mainland.

As a result… the politically expedient goal to get rid of the optical problem (the ships) by offloading containers into a California port system, that is already overwhelmed with tens-of-thousands of containers, is only making the original issue exponentially worse.  More people are now starting to understand the internal issue that has been created by recent California laws, rules and regulations.

Daniel Greenfield at Front Page Magazine has a solid outline of the emission compliance issues and the problem of independent truckers not being able to work in California:

Front Page Magazine – […] Over the summer, the California Trucking Association actually went to the Supreme Court to fight AB5 and allow owners and operators to use independent contractors. The CTA listed 70,000 owner operators. In the years since AB5, Ubers have become scarcer and more expensive, which is what the law was actually designed to do, but the consequences to the trucking industry have been far worse albeit invisible to most people until now. While truckers are still protected from AB5, many in the industry are not willing to bet their future on SCOTUS.

AB5 was not only the assault on the trucking industry by California Democrats who were aggressively trying to unionize the industry and to impose environmental regulations on it.

Last year, the California Air Resources Board issued a press release boasting that it had taken a “bold step to reduce truck pollution”. The bold step required switching to electric trucks.

“We are showing the world that we can move goods, grow our economy and finally dump dirty diesel,” Jared Blumenfeld, California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection, sneered.

[…] Last year, California’s DMV began refusing to register thousands of trucks with an estimated 100,000 trucks under threat. With “green” trucks costing $70,000 more, this was a non-starter for already troubled independent owner-operators and even larger companies.

[…] Biden called for ports to operate around the clock, but that’s not going to magically bring back thousands of trucks or truckers. California Democrats still haven’t changed their regulations and without that, there’s no incentive or even legal structure that would allow trucks to operate. (read more)