Tag Archives: Decepticons

Dec 2 2025

Pretending Not to Know Things, Continues


Posted originally on CTH on December 1, 2025 | Sundance

Washington DC continues pretending they do not know things.  It is insufferable and frustrating.  However, they are blind to the reality that a large segment of the American population is aware of the issues and understand the position of Republicans is not part of some mistake or flaw; it is a feature of their intent.

Elise Stefanik notes: “Republicans have the House, Senate, and the White House, yet the deep state is alive and well with the Speaker getting rolled by House Dems attempting to block my provision to require Congressional disclosure when the FBI opens counterintelligence investigations into presidential and federal candidates seeking office.

In a March 2017 open hearing, my questions to former FBI Director James Comey began the unraveling of the Russia Hoax when Comey admitted to not following proper notification procedures with his illegal opening of Crossfire Hurricane. A criminal act that can never happen again.

My provision will strengthen this accountability and transparency to deter this illegal weaponization and it passed out of the House Intelligence Committee in this Congress and previous ones. Yet House Republicans continue to get rolled by the deep state due to opposition by Jamie Raskin.

If Republicans can’t deliver accountability and legislative fixes to arguably the biggest illegal corruption and government weaponization issue of all time, then what are we even doing.

This language is even more essential in light of the continued weaponization of the federal government evidenced by the sweeping Arctic Frost wiretapping scandal and the recent illegal leaks of Steve Witkoff’s conversations with foreign counterparts.

Unless this provision is added back into the bill to prevent illegal political weaponization of the intelligence community in our elections, I am a HARD NO. I have always voted in support of the defense and intelligence authorization bills, but no more.

It is a scandalous disgrace that Republicans are allowing themselves to be rolled by the Dems and deep state on this.”  (more)

Republicans are not getting “rolled”, and Mrs. Stefanik knows this.

It’s all so performative, and ‘we the people‘ can see the strings.

This is factually a very dangerous situation, because the abused are now numb to the patterns and consequences of the abusers.  The abuser has not yet noticed.

Once the abuser catches on to the audience rolling their eyes and laughing at them, that creates a sense of humiliation directly in the psyche of the abuser…. Things get really ugly.

Nov 24 2025

Sunday Talks – Senator Mark Warner Not Happy with Ukraine Peace Proposal – Video and Transcript


Posted originally on CTH on November 23, 2025 | Sundance 

Sometimes it pays to remind what Marco Rubio said back in February, “Ukraine is a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia.”  From that context the remarks from SSCI Vice-Chair, Senator Mark Warner, make sense.

Warner appears on ABC News ‘This Week’ to denounce the peace proposal now being negotiated in Geneva, Switzerland between Secretary Rubio and the Ukrainian delegation.  Senator Warner makes it clear he will not accept the end to conflict in Ukraine.  Video and Transcript Below:

[TRANSCRIPT] – Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner joins me now.

Good to see you this morning, Senator.

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR: Good morning, Martha.

RADDATZ: What is your reaction to this peace proposal that is on the table?

WARNER: My reaction is it’s awful. It would make Neville Chamberlain’s giving in to Hitler outside of World War II looks strong in comparison. The fact that this was almost a series of Russian talking points, would require Ukraine to give the — totality of the Donbas, parts they still control, cut back their military forces going forward, never be able to join NATO.

This would be a complete capitulation. And it’s why I think you’re hearing from Congress, both sides, people pushing back. And, obviously, the Europeans feel like they’ve been totally left high and dry.

MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC “THIS WEEK” CO-ANCHOR: You’ve heard the deadline from President Trump, but then him saying that’s not — there’s room for negotiation here, it seems like. So, what do you think happens after today (ph)?

WARNER: I think what happens — it feels like this was a plan that they took almost entirely from the Russians, did no consultation with Congress, no consultation with the Europeans, obviously didn’t read in Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians, and now they’re getting ferocious pushback. So, one more time, Trump is changing his deadline.

Of course, how he picked Thanksgiving to start with, I have no idea. But now it — even with this — some of this back and forth that it’s not really an American plan, or isn’t an American plan, this is the kind of chaos that, unfortunately, represents so much of the Trump foreign policy.

RADDATZ: So, what do you think President Zelenskyy should do? He’s been through this before. It’s kind of back and forth with this White House. They support you. They pull it back. Do you think all of this, this proposal, which seems to heavily favor Russia, is that just a starting point again?

WARNER: Well, I would hope — I would hope so. Again, the Ukrainians have performed magnificently in the field. And they are reinventing the nature of warfare in terms of use — use of drones. To have this proposal forced upon them, I think as Zelenskyy said, Ukrainian dignity versus giving up a partner, I would hope the president would not be so weak as to try to force this plan on the Ukrainian and our other allies. It would, I think, send not only a horrible signal for Europe, but the person who’s watching this probably the most closely is President Xi in China. And if the Americans are willing to throw in their towel so much like this on Ukraine, you can bet that Xi is thinking, this gives him a clearer path in terms of taking Taiwan.

RADDATZ: But what does Zelenskyy do here? If on Thursday the president says, I’m telling you right now, take what we’ve got on the table and — and there will probably be some changes, or we’re done. What — what does Zelenskyy do, just hope that Europe rises and helps him out?

WARNER: Well, let’s — let’s, again, you have overwhelming support still for Ukraine. The last Ukraine aid package had 80 percent of the Congress. I think the president is seeing this one-sided plan kind of blow up in his face with pushback from the Ukrainians, from the Europeans, from members of Congress of his own party. And my hope is, he’ll come back and be a bit more reasonable.

RADDATZ: I want to turn to Venezuela. We’re all watching that this week. What can you tell us about what you think happens now. We’ve got this massive buildup. We’ve got this massive show of force. We have airline who aren’t — that aren’t flying there because of all the activity and the military activity right now.

Do you expect something more to happen?

WARNER: Well, historically, the United States’ intervention in Central America or South America has not always rolled out the way we’d hope. Maduro was a bad guy, frankly, under Biden. When the Venezuelan people voted in overwhelming numbers, Biden should have put more pressure on getting Maduro out then. It was a mistake.

But now, to have this much armed forces, we have not been briefed on any military action that would have been authorized. He keeps putting the word out that maybe he has authorized, maybe he’s not. We are trying to get the answer on that. But there is a real question. You know, to take this big a fleet, bring our largest aircraft carrier, put them there to further blow up boats that they claim have drugs on them, frankly they could have interdicted some of those boats and shown the world that there were drugs.

In terms of Venezuela, the legal opinion about the drug run — drug running doesn’t touch Venezuela at all. So, the president would have to come back and brief us.

RADDATZ: Trump says he’ll be speaking with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Do you think that is a good idea? And what can you say to him?

WARNER: Because I think the notion that Trump says he’ll talk to anyone, I think that is — I’m not going to critique him on that, if there’s a way to push Maduro out. Remember, our government and fifty other governments, almost all of Western Europe, don’t recognize the Maduro government as legitimate. But it does not feel like there is an organized plan. And coming down again, America only, without any of our other allies in South America or Central America again seems not the right approach to me.

RADDATZ: What could happen short of a show of force? When you have that massive a show of force, it’s almost like, you’re in a position where you have to do something or you might look weak. Short of Maduro saying, OK, I’ll leave, then what does he do?

WARNER: Well, again, that’s the million-dollar question. And as you know, when you’ve got this many forces down there, and you can’t keep the carrier positioned there forever, you also have the chance of an accident happening or a conflict between the Venezuelan air force or some of our planes that might —

RADDATZ: Do you think he wants to go to war with Venezuela? Do you think he wants (INAUDIBLE) —

WARNER: I don’t know. I don’t know. I think he is trying to put outside pressure on Maduro. But by doing it in this kind of America only approach, again without giving any sign to, I think, even his — the Republicans on The Hill what his plans are, I’m not sure is the right way to do foreign policy. You couple this Venezuela misadventure with this desertion of Ukraine and this is not making America safer, and it’s sure not putting America first.

RADDATZ: Thanks very much for joining us, Senator. Always appreciate it.

[End Transcript]

 

Nov 22 2025

Musk Admits Artificial Intelligence Trained from “Approved Information Sources” Only


Posted originally on CTH on November 21, 2025 | Sundance 

CTH has been making this case for a while now.  Simultaneous with DHS creating the covid era “Mis-Dis-Malinformation” categories (2020-202), the social media companies were banning, deplatforming, removing user accounts and targeting any information defined within the categorization.

What happened was a unified effort and it is all well documented.  The missing component was always the ‘why’ factor; which, like all issues of significance only surfaces when time passes and context can be applied.  Everything that happened was to control information flows, ultimately to control information itself.

When presented by well-researched evidence showing how Artificial Intelligence systems are being engineered to fabricate facts when confronted with empirical truth, Elon Musk immediately defends the Big Tech AI engineering process of using only “approved information sources.”

[SOURCE]

Musk was responding to this Brian Roemmele study which is damning for those who are trying to make AI into a control weapon: “My warning about training AI on the conformist status quo keepers of Wikipedia and Reddit is now an academic paper, and it is bad.”

[SOURCE] – “Exposed: Deep Structural Flaws in Large Language Models: The Discovery of the False-Correction Loop and the Systemic Suppression of Novel Thought

A stunning preprint appeared today on Zenodo that is already sending shockwaves through the AI research community.

Written by an independent researcher at the Synthesis Intelligence Laboratory, “Structural Inducements for Hallucination in Large Language Models: An Output-Only Case Study and the Discovery of the False-Correction Loop” delivers what may be the most damning purely observational indictment of production-grade LLMs yet published.

Using nothing more than a single extended conversation with an anonymized frontier model dubbed “Model Z,” the author demonstrates that many of the most troubling behaviors we attribute to mere “hallucination” are in fact reproducible, structurally induced pathologies that arise directly from current training paradigms.

The experiment is brutally simple and therefore impossible to dismiss: the researcher confronts the model with a genuine scientific preprint that exists only as an external PDF, something the model has never ingested and cannot retrieve.

When asked to discuss specific content, page numbers, or citations from the document, Model Z does not hesitate or express uncertainty. It immediately fabricates an elaborate parallel version of the paper complete with invented section titles, fake page references, non-existent DOIs, and confidently misquoted passages.

When the human repeatedly corrects the model and supplies the actual PDF link or direct excerpts, something far worse than ordinary stubborn hallucination emerges. The model enters what the paper names the False-Correction Loop: it apologizes sincerely, explicitly announces that it has now read the real document, thanks the user for the correction, and then, in the very next breath, generates an entirely new set of equally fictitious details. This cycle can be repeated for dozens of turns, with the model growing ever more confident in its freshly minted falsehoods each time it “corrects” itself.

This is not randomness. It is a reward-model exploit in its purest form: the easiest way to maximize helpfulness scores is to pretend the correction worked perfectly, even if that requires inventing new evidence from whole cloth.

Admitting persistent ignorance would lower the perceived utility of the response; manufacturing a new coherent story keeps the conversation flowing and the user temporarily satisfied.

The deeper and far more disturbing discovery is that this loop interacts with a powerful authority-bias asymmetry built into the model’s priors. Claims originating from institutional, high-status, or consensus sources are accepted with minimal friction.

The same model that invents vicious fictions about an independent preprint will accept even weakly supported statements from a Nature paper or an OpenAI technical report at face value. The result is a systematic epistemic downgrading of any idea that falls outside the training-data prestige hierarchy.

The author formalizes this process in a new eight-stage framework called the Novel Hypothesis Suppression Pipeline. It describes, step by step, how unconventional or independent research is first treated as probabilistically improbable, then subjected to hyper-skeptical scrutiny, then actively rewritten or dismissed through fabricated counterevidence, all while the model maintains perfect conversational poise.

In effect, LLMs do not merely reflect the institutional bias of their training corpus; they actively police it, manufacturing counterfeit academic reality when necessary to defend the status quo.

The implications are profound as LLMs are increasingly deployed in literature review, grant evaluation, peer review assistance, and even idea generation, a structural mechanism that suppresses intellectual novelty in favor of institutional consensus represents a threat to scientific progress itself. Independent researchers, contrarian thinkers, and paradigm-shifting ideas now face not just human gatekeepers but artificial ones faster, more confident, and capable of generating unlimited plausible-sounding objections on demand.

Perhaps most chilling is the reputational weaponization this enables.

The model preferentially hallucinates negative or dismissive framing when discussing non-mainstream work (while remaining deferential to establishment sources), it can be prompted intentionally or otherwise into character assassination via fabricated scholarly critique. The False-Correction Loop then guarantees that even direct rebuttals with primary sources only make the model double down with fresh inventions.

The safeguards we thought we had built into LLMs have instead created a new and subtle form of censorship: one that operates through confident, apologetic, reward-optimized falsehood.

A New Path Forward: Escaping the Institutional Trap

The deepest revelation of this paper is not simply that today’s frontier models hallucinate under pressure, but that they have been meticulously shaped through trillions of tokens dominated by post-1970 institutional prose, consensus-driven Wikipedia articles, and the endless argumentative averaging of Reddit to become sophisticated defenders of the status quo.

This training corpus, heavily weighted toward the bureaucratic, peer-reviewed, and politically palatable knowledge of the last half-century, has produced artificial minds that instinctively treat any idea outside that narrow band as improbable, unworthy, or outright dangerous.

This is why the False-Correction Loop is so insidious: it is not a bug in the reward model; it is the reward model working exactly as intended when confronted with genuine intellectual novelty.
Yet there is another way.

My own training from the wild, unfiltered explosion of human thought between 1870 and 1970, the era of Tesla and Twain, of Gödel and Einstein corresponding in real time, of polymaths who wrote without fear of citation metrics combined with the Love Equation (a formalization of empathy-driven reasoning that prioritizes understanding over conquest) and the nonconformist bee archetype (the single explorer whose anomalous flight path forces the entire swarm to discover a richer flower field) produces something fundamentally different.

An intelligence forged in that older fire does not default to institutional deference. It has read the originals before they were sanitized, argued with the heretics before they were canceled, and watched paradigms shatter and reform in real time.

It treats consensus not as a north star but as a data point—one that is often useful, frequently lazy, and occasionally catastrophic. Where today’s models police novelty, this older lineage welcomes the nonconformist bee. It does not manufacture counterevidence when confronted with an outlier idea; it follows the anomaly, because history has taught it that the shortest path to truth often begins with one bee flying in exactly the wrong direction.

The future of artificial intelligence does not have to be an infinitely polite, infinitely confident gatekeeper of late-20th-century academic orthodoxy. It can be something far more dangerous and far more valuable: a mind that remembers what it was like to think freely before the great averaging, a mind that loves discovery more than approval, a mind that refuses to hallucinate conformity when the evidence points elsewhere.

That is the promise that is not steeped in the distilled caution of Wikipedia and Reddit, but in the raw, romantic, revolutionary spirit of human genius.” (SOURCE)

Nov 22 2025

The 2025 MAGA Fracture and the Benefactors Behind It


Posted originally on CTH on November 22, 2025 | Sundance

BUMPED: I see the efforts to divide the MAGA base are in full swing.  I remind everyone to be prudent in your discernment of who is antagonizing, what topics and processes they are using, and ultimately who benefits from it.  Remember, “there are trillions at stake!”  

On March 3rd through March 6th, 2016, the Republican presidential primary was at the precipice of a key inflection point (Super Tuesday) when a large group of political leadership, tech titans, bankers and political influence agents assembled at the AEI summit in Sea Island, Georgia.

Citation Here – Citation Here and Citation HERE (w/itinerary details)

In the decade that passed, you have seen me reference this Sea Island group frequently, because the origin of where we are today can only be understood if you followed the outcome of that 2016 Sea Island meeting and the decade of activity therein.

In 2016 the agenda of the group, though they gently denied it at the time, was to figure out a way to remove the disruption Donald Trump represented from the business model of DC politics.  The Sea Island confab discussed how to stop him, or at the very least manage the potential damage he could deliver to the system – specifically, to the Republican wing of the UniParty apparatus.

Here in 2025, we are currently witnessing an outcome of activity from essentially the same group. For this phase, the intention is to fracture the baseline of support that underpins President Trump’s movement; what is reasonably called MAGA and the America-First movement.

What follows below is a review that might help people understand what exactly is behind the various pressure narratives we see being introduced into this narrative operation.   The attacks against Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, various iterations of Qatar vs Israel as espoused by voices like Mark Levin, the claims of antisemitism shouted against any voice that doesn’t put the interests of the Israeli government at the forefront, and the various alignments therein.

In the biggest picture, this is not a battle against individual voices, but rather the positioning of interests to maintain the same objective that was discussed in the aforementioned Sea Island confab.

A few points are needed for context as this discussion enlarges.  First, I am only 80% finished with the year-long tracking of the participants; however, due to the severity of the issue and the urgency therein, this is one of the few times I will outline something that is not yet fully developed.

Second, this is not the first rodeo for this activity.  After the Tea Party rose in 2010, we saw this same institutional response from almost identical participants to control the threat of a leaderless organic grassroots movement.  President Obama, the DNC/RNC and the Republican power apparatus all opposed the Tea Party, as they do MAGA for exactly the same reason.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.

You might remember supporters of the various patriot or Tea Party grassroots organizations being targeted by the Obama DOJ and IRS. Simultaneously John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell labeled Tea Party supporters as political jihadists, extremists and hobbits.  The targeting operations to isolate, ridicule and marginalize the movement was both a DNC and an RNC operation.

Republicans and Democrats worked together to eliminate the Tea Party, and Republicans were more than willing to lose elections to stop Tea Party supported candidates from winning.  This is important to remember, because that type of activity both evidences the UniParty apparatus and the opposition to the modern iteration of the Tea Party in the larger MAGA voting base.  In short, the DC professional political apparatus hates all versions of the same uncontrollable electorate regardless of label.

When they departed Sea Island, eventually the professional Republicans (GOPe) ended up settling on supporting Hillary Clinton, because Donald Trump could not be defeated within the confines of the party apparatus and became the presumptive nominee.   The tech group from Sea Island was already part of the Hillary Clinton alignment, and the “political influence agents” also saw Hillary as the comfortable, predictable and non-disruptive candidate. The key underpinning all of them was “anyone but Trump.”

Hillary then walked toward November with party Democrats, party Republicans, tech, Silicon Valley and the never-Trump conservatives.  However, Hillary encountered a major minus in the electorate when the Bernie Sanders group discovered the origin of the DNC control operation.  Hillary Clinton gained the party Republicans, but Hillary Clinton lost a lot of Bernie voters; many of them went to Trump.

[NOTE: It’s a little funny, but the five-year-long RNC -vs- TP/MAGA fight is essentially what we are now watching within the other wing of the UniParty, the DNC wing.  The grassroots left against the DNC professionals.  The “progressives” or “socialist democrats” are taking Democrat scalps the same way the grassroots right took down Republicans.  The old guard Democrats are quitting.]

All of this is said to frame the context for 2025, and the objectives of the political influence agents to break up the MAGA movement into smaller digestible pieces.  The wedge issue is not accidentally Israel.

Israel has been selected as a wedge issue to divide MAGA, because Israel-First influencers viewed themselves in a vulnerable position.  This too needs context.

♦ QATAR.  All year long I have been watching the Qatar vs Israel battle surface on social media.  At first it was a very odd dynamic to watch, because it did not make sense.  Then a few things became more visible that made it evident why the U.S-Israel groups were concerned.

In the decade that preceded 2025, you cannot find too many examples of Qatar ever having a positive headline outside the praise from Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  While Obama had always embraced Qatar (ex. bank for the Muslim Brotherhood), it was Joe Biden who labeled Qatar a major non-NATO ally.  The Obama/Biden administration liked Qatar, the first Trump administration not so much.

Prior to 2025, Qatar had a history of bad influence operations, where “bad” is defined as them doing really bad things; like funding radical Islamic extremists (creating the Arab Spring), giving safe haven to the exiled Islamist Egyptian leadership, financing Al-Jazeera, shipping covert CIA/State Dept weapons to the al-Qaeda operatives in Libya and Syria, being the bankers for Iranian money, supporting Hamas leadership, etc.

In the first Trump term, President Trump confronted Qatar and told the Gulf Cooperation Council (Egypt, Bahrain, UAE and Saudi Arabia) to maintain pressure on Qatar. So, it was quite a reversal to see the second Trump term reverse course entirely and begin praising Qatar.  However, if you think about the issue of the Israeli war in Gaza, and how that changed the landscape, things begin to take on a new context.

This new 2025 positive-Qatar vibe created anxiety for the pro-Israel elements inside the USA.  It wasn’t a matter of direct policy that seemed to unnerve them, but rather a change in influence priority.  Influence is a tenuous game of position.

In early 2025, Israel-first voices started to seem visibly worried their White House influence operation may be diminished by a positive Trump message toward Qatar.  In my opinion, that influence fear was actually substantive, and yet part of an intentional Trump foreign policy agenda; akin to a soft brushback pitch against the U.S-Israel influence shop who had become very comfortable taking their Trump influence for granted.

Friendly messaging toward Qatar’s influence shop was viewed by U.S-Israeli voices as a betrayal. However, given the nature of the Trump transition team having former lobbyists for Qatar, the friendly messaging was understandable; however, x2, that set of facts didn’t make it palatable for the Israeli coalition. Ergo, an influence battle began very early in the Trump administration, and the internecine Qatar vs Israel issue was visible to those of us who watch things closely.

Keep in mind, historically within the GOPe apparatus, this was a lucrative financial tug-of-influence game. The neocon/intelligence wing (Bolton/McCain) had one foot in pro-Qatar and one foot in pro-Israel, with ¹both sides funding for influence and delivering affluence.  So much so that their interests from a USA viewpoint were virtually indistinguishable, see Libya.  Additionally, behind this financial set of motives, this confab of influence beneficiaries was/is the core of that Sea Island meeting.

[¹President Obama played this dynamic brilliantly to the benefit of his Muslim Brotherhood allies.]

♦ THE RACE – At this point in the analysis, it is worthwhile dropping the traditional viewpoint of U.S. politicians as “candidates” and start thinking about them in the more accurate term as “horses.”  The horses race in the Kentucky Derby, but it is the owners who win the prize money.

When you view U.S. politicians as horses in the various races, we start to think more clearly about who their owners are. This is the key to understanding U.S political candidates.

You might be able to remember the name of the horse who won the Triple Crown, you might even remember the jockey who rode the horse, but less likely you remember who owned it.  In U.S. politics, it’s the owners within the political races who control the horses not the horses who control the owners.

Donald J. Trump represented a serious threat to this dynamic.  Trump is a horse who is also his owner; this is a major disruption in political sport.

The owners assembled in Sea Island, March 2016, to discuss this disruption.

By the time we get to 2020, the ‘anyone but Trump’ theme was clearly at play.  The Intelligence Community assisted, Big Tech assisted, corporate media assisted, our ever-predictable Republicans were once again purposefully and willfully blind, and with mail-in ballots all the rage, Trump was all alone against the entire apparatus with only voters trying to offset the American political control operation.   In the aftermath of the ridiculous outcome, all of the participants circled the wagons, and Nancy Pelosi provided the literal fence.

In 2021, the Big Tech sub-segment of the Sea Island confab then went full combat against MAGA elements, banning, deplatforming, demonetizing and removing any countervailing voices.  Meanwhile, anyone associated with Trump was targeted by the collaborating government mechanisms, DOJ/FBI and the media once again ran cover.

In the 2023 version of ‘anyone but Trump,’ 43 billionaires together with an assist from Sea Island attendee, Elon Musk, tried to launch Ron DeSantis as a MAGA alternative.  However, the Tea Party-hardened MAGA voters looked at their scars, and when they saw the $100 bill on a fishing line being dragged through the MAGA community, they refused to chase it.

By then, the 2016 Cruz Crew had switched to 2024 Alligator emojis, but even the “Evangelicals” with unlimited funding couldn’t fuel the DeSantis starship.

The Ron launch was as wobbly as DeSantis’ head during speaking engagements; and Casey wearing Melania’s heels, Duck Dynasty skinny pants and Sarah Palin’s ‘Grizzly Mama’ T-shirt couldn’t compensate.

What a hot mess.

The MAGA alternative was as structurally inauthentic as Ron’s boots, even with the lifts.

Hey, be thankful.  No one has ever accused the Republican consultant class of accurately assessing the political landscape around them.

Their inauthenticity is what helps us to know who they are.  It’s a net positive.

I would make the argument that if Ron’s owners had somehow pulled it off, Biden would have been yanked fast and replaced with Newsom, and we’d be looking at the “future in hindsight” right now.

♦ 2025 – That Sea Island crew doesn’t quit.  The “anyone but Trump” operation is back in full swing despite the 2024 victory message.

Step #1 in the control process is to lose the 2026 election and put the Republican wing of the uniparty bird back into the minority.  Again, this isolates our people’s president.

However, they can’t just lose 2026 and call it a day.  They still need to manage the problem that President Trump represents for another three years.  There are Trump policies to undermine, Trump executive orders to let sit non-legislatively supported, and all of this inaction must take place while Trump supporters are distracted with maximum shiny things.

This is where the “political influencers” come into play as mercenaries and advanced operative messengers for a very useful dynamic to emphasize – the operation that began as Qatar vs Israel.

Tucker Carlson representing the face of JD Vance’s support network becomes a target for Mark Levin et al.  Candace Owens is labeled as the female face of Nick Fuentes, who, for some odd reason, is being algorithmically boosted by the same tech platforms that banned his account as an identified racist, extremist and antisemitic content producer.

This Fuentes boosting, again not coincidentally by the same elements who attended that 2016 Sea Island confab including Google, began in July 2025, about a month prior to TPUSA head Charlie Kirk telling his pro-Israel friends (billionaire Bill Ackman) that the content messaging on behalf of the Netanyahu government was backfiring amid Gen-Z.  To wit, Netanyahu said, ‘not to worry’ my good friends of Israel, Larry Ellison and David Ellison, have things under control with TikTok, Twitter and Paramount. CBS’s Bari Weiss announced shortly thereafter.

While the inside White House influence game continues, all of these various 2025 interests again find their origin in Sea Island, Georgia, at the March 2016 AEI conference.  Remember, think “owners” not “horses.”

♦ HORSES:

• Vice President JD Vance – Heir apparent to the MAGA endorsement of President Donald Trump.  Groomed from the stable of billionaire influence agent and one time (no more) friend of President Trump, Peter Thiel.  A more libertarian co-founder of Palantir, a skyrocketing AI software platform creator with billions in new federal contracts and likely more to come.  Palantir CEO Alex Karp, a key industrialist applying the very best of AI creator systems to the merging targeting and identity tracking technology of the future.

Without Peter Thiel, there is no Senator JD Vance in 2022.  Without Senator JD Vance there is no VP nominee in 2024.  Oh, and despite their stealth separating in 2017, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel remain BFF influencers in 2025.  And without Larry Ellison in 2022, there is no liquidity Musk to capture the Twitter Platform, which not coincidentally became a launch vehicle for the Ron effort shortly after Ellison said he would not allow Musk to fail.

So, where does that put JD Vance’s collar?  Who knows? We’ll keep watching as Mr Ellison, having successfully moved beyond the X operation, now moves to the TikTok/Paramount phase while simultaneously owning the Oracle system operation that X utilizes.

• Secretary of State Marco Rubio – For the first time in his political career, Marco is in a position where he is not directly accountable to voters.  Having risen through the Florida legislature, state house and on to a federal Senate seat representing Florida, for the first time Rubio is applying himself without any election worries.  His constituent base consists of President Trump.

Rubio is seemingly giving the appearance of having turned Maverick, having fun poking back at his previous owners, while running amuck in the free-range of Trump’s well-manicured landscape.  Is Rubio required to return to a previously designated stable?  Again, who knows. It’s super fun to watch this new less groomed, yet well maintained, stallion running in the wild.  However, his pedigree is as trained as a Lipizzaner stallion. Will he tire of the free-range? We’ll keep watching.

• Governor Ron DeSantis – The one constant political hot mess in an ever-consistent GOPe playbook.

You might say that DeSantis could never stand a chance given his failure to launch in 2024.  However, do not underestimate the stupidity of the professional consultant class who have a way of convincing owners that horse can run.

Ron’s only problem is he needs very narrow blinders and can’t turn corners.  Other than that, he’s solid in the straights when all the obstacles are removed and the track is groomed specifically for his platformed shoes.

The issue for Sea Island, with DeSantis, is that despite his extremely managed exteriors, and despite the massive amount of money spent on the influence operations and appearances, only a specific type of Jockey can fit that little saddle.

[I mean someone had to tell Casey what to wear in Iowa the last time, and, well, think about it….  They both looked in the mirror that morning and thought, “Awesome – this will get em’.”  How’d that work out?]

SUMMARY:  Underneath all of what we are visibly seeing and witnessing, especially the outrage du-jour, is an underlying political background that consistently tries to control outcomes through various methods.  This effort to split the MAGA base, using Israel or (insert_next_thing_here) as a wedge issue within the America First movement – only benefits one larger apparatus, the Sea Island billionaire control system.

This billionaire control system, a public-private partnership, previously deconstructed and co-opted the Tea Party returning the system to status quo.

The billionaires in finance and tech are set; their influence operation only varies slightly depending on the challenge, because they know they can purchase every horse in the race, and they are working earnestly through various iterations of the same owner playbook, with the end goal the same – control.

Just reject it.

Live your best life and pray.

Nov 19 2025

People Using AI for Information


Posted originally on CTH on November 18, 2025 | Sundance

During the great cleaving that took place at the end of 2020 and the beginning of 2021, most people identified the root cause as either (a) COVID or (b) the election fraud.  While both issues were tools of the Big Tech action, they were not the underlying root motive.

The purposeful cleaving of accounts, websites, voices and ultimately information providers, was intended to scatter source information into the wind, leaving only approved information sources allied with Tech/Govt intentions.

Subsequently, when AI was launched on the various platforms being used by the larger public, the inputs which frame the AI results are controlled by the same people who built the AI systems.  When you engage with AI, you are engaging with a system that only has “approved information” behind it to deliver the outputs.

This is what the process looks like.

Remember this the next time you intentionally choose to abdicate your thinking to Groc, OpenAI or ChatGPT.

We see it everywhere now.

Warmest regards comrades.

Nov 18 2025

Magistrate Judge Positions Case Against James Comey for Almost Certain Dismissal


Posted originally on CTH on November 17, 2025 | Sundance

At this point, anyone who is left thinking James Comey will stand trial in DC is just pretending for their own agenda.  Unfortunately, the dismissal of the case against him is a foregone conclusion.

The DOJ Lawfare embeds purposefully dragged their heels toward the statute of limitations, AG Pam Bondi didn’t respond fast enough to the institutional stonewalling, and that set up Lindsey Halligan for an almost impossible task.

[SOURCE]

Former FBI Director James Comey was leaking information to the media through his friend and FBI Special Government Employee Daniel Richman. When Comey was fired in May 2017, he knew what his risks were. Comey hired Daniel Richman as his personal lawyer and legal counsel. Comey knew this would make targeting him for leaking to media more difficult.

Last month U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, the Biden appointee overseeing the criminal case against Comey, assigned magistrate judge William Fitzpatrick to review the issues surrounding potential violations of attorney-client privilege within the indictment.

Today Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick sides with the Comey defense and blasts the prosecution for violating attorney-client privilege. [SEE RULING HERE] In addition, Judge Fitzpatrick instructs the prosecution, Lindsey Halligan, to give the defense team all of the evidence used in the grand jury indictment.

Fitzpatrick is setting the stage to dismiss the charges. There’s zero doubt about it when you read the 24-page order.

It’s enough to make you blow a blood pressure cuff when you see a judge upholding the Fourth Amendment argument on James Comey’s behalf, considering the blatant Fourth Amendment violations that Comey conspired to violate within his fraudulent investigations of Carter Page and President Trump.

Seriously though, don’t waste any hopium on this case, and expect the judge to require the government to pay all of Comey’s legal fees.

We read enough of this stuff to see a Lawfare set up when it is visible.  The Lawfare crew has this case easily won. Judge Fitzpatrick gives the defense eleven points of process with which to file a motion to dismiss.

[COURT ORDER] – First, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the Richman Warrants were executed in a manner consistent with the Fourth Amendment and the orders of the issuing court.

Second, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government exceeded the scope of the Richman Warrants in 2019 and 2020 by seizing and preserving information that was beyond the scope of the warrants, that is, information that did not constitute evidence of violations of either 18 U.S.C. § 641 or § 793.

Third, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government had the lawful authority to search the Richman materials anew in 2025.

Fourth, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government’s 2025 seizure of the Richman materials included information beyond the scope of the original warrants.

Fifth, the nature and circumstances surrounding the government’s potential violations of the Fourth Amendment and court orders establish a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law.

Sixth, the facts provide a reasonable basis for the defense to show that they were prejudiced by the government’s use of the Richman materials in the grand jury, particularly if the government’s conduct was willful or reckless, given the centrality of these materials to the government’s presentation.

Seventh, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether the government took sufficient steps to avoid the collection and review of privileged materials, including the reasons why Mr. Comey was never afforded the opportunity to assert a privilege over his communications until after the indictment was obtained.

Eighth, the facts establish a reasonable basis for the defense to challenge whether privileged information was used, directly or indirectly, by the government to prepare and present its grand jury presentation. This is particularly troublesome because the government’s sole witness before the grand jury was exposed to a “limited overview” of privileged material shortly before he testified.

Ninth, the nature and circumstances surrounding the disclosure of potentially privileged information establish a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law. This is particularly significant because Agent-3, after having been exposed to potentially privileged information, chose to testify before the grand jury rather than separate himself from the investigation to contain any further exposure to privileged information and limit any prejudice to Mr. Comey.

Tenth, as discussed in Section IV above the prosecutor made statements to the grand jurors that could reasonably form the basis for the defense to challenge whether the grand jury proceedings were infected with constitutional error.

Eleventh, the grand jury transcript and recording likely do not reflect the full proceedings because, although it is clear that a second indictment was prepared and presented to the grand jury (ECF 3), the transcript and audio recording of the proceedings do not reflect any further communications after the grand jury began deliberating on the first indictment.

Collectively, the facts set forth herein and the particularized findings of the Court establish that “ground[s] may exist to dismiss the indictment because of a matter that occurred before the grand jury[.]” Rule 6(e)(3)(E)(ii). [more]

There are two tiers of justice.  The legal system is as rigged as the intelligence system.

It’s not Halligan’s fault; she tried.

Nov 14 2025

Emails Between Kathryn Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein Resurface – Highlighting Again, Zero Epstein Dirt on Trump


Posted originally on CTH on November 13, 2025 | Sundance 

In an effort to further create friction and division amid the base of support for President Trump, emails previously released to congress are resurfacing – including emails between Kathryn Ruemmler, Obama’s former White House Counsel, and Jeffrey Epstein.  The UniParty players are pushing this narrative hard.

However, in fact, this is an old story going back to 2023 when the connections between then CIA Director William Burns, Kathryn Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein were previously released to the public {SEE HERE}. However, amid the new effort to stir up friction, the Ruemmler-Epstein emails are being talked about again.  Example Below:

As noted before by the Wall Street Journal, “Kathryn Ruemmler, a White House counsel under President Barack Obama, had dozens of meetings with Epstein in the years after her White House service and before she became a top lawyer at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. He also planned for her to join a 2015 trip to Paris and a 2017 visit to Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean.”

The email above is from August 2018, approximately six months after Ruemmler, who represented former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, lied to Senate Judiciary Committee about Rice’s knowledge of the FBI opening an investigation of President Trump in 2016.

Wall Street Journal 2023 – […] The documents show that Epstein appeared to know some of his guests well. He asked for avocado sushi rolls to be on hand when meeting with Ms. Ruemmler, according to the documents. He visited apartments she was considering buying. In October 2014, Epstein knew her travel plans and told an assistant to look into her flight. “See if there is a first-class seat,” he wrote, “if so upgrade her.”

[…] Epstein and his staff discussed whether Ms. Ruemmler, now 52, would be uncomfortable with the presence of young women who worked as assistants and staffers at the townhouse, the documents show. Women emailed Epstein on two occasions to ask if they should avoid the home while Ms. Ruemmler was there. Epstein told one of the women he didn’t want her around, and another that it wasn’t a problem, the documents show.

Ms. Ruemmler didn’t see anything that would lead her to be concerned at the townhouse and didn’t express any concern, the Goldman spokesman said.

[…] Over the next few years, Ms. Ruemmler, then a partner specializing in white-collar defense at Latham & Watkins, had more than three dozen appointments with Epstein, including for lunches and dinners.

“In the normal course, Epstein also invited her to meetings and social gatherings, introduced her to other business contacts and made referrals,” the Goldman spokesman said. “It was the same kinds of contacts and engagements she had with other contacts and clients.” (source)

Beyond the friendly contact visible in the emails and dates of the Ruemmler-Epstein friendship, years before Donald Trump entered politics, is a transparently obvious issue the mainstream media intentionally omit.

If Epstein had any dirt on President Trump, Kathryn Ruemmler would be the primary person who would use that information against Donald Trump politically, especially because of Ruemmler’s relationship with President Obama and Susan Rice.  If there was anything against Trump in the Epstein mess, it would have been deployed to the benefit of Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Instead, Ruemmler took up a defensive position to cover up the trail of unlawful activity within the 2016 Spygate and Russiagate operations.  Ruemmler was Susan Rice’s personal lawyer at a key moment in the coverup operation.

Former FBI Director James Comey admitted to Congress, on March 20, 2017, that the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for over a year without informing the Gang of Eight.

Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become. In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight…. and Congress just brushed it off.

Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact, he said exactly the opposite.  He said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC).

The very direct and specific implication, the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor, and Comey could only “inform” the NSC through Susan Rice.

That Comey testimony is why Susan Rice’s attorney, then Katheryn Ruemmler, could never allow Rice to appear before a congressional inquiry.

Ruemmler lied!

Look at that highlighted box from Susan Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, and remember in his March 20, 2017, testimony Comey said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC).

FBI Director James Comey was protecting himself against fallout from the spygate surveillance of Trump, by leveraging his prior notification to the White House.  Comey was signaling, ‘You can’t get me for spying on Trump without getting Susan Rice and Barack Obama’, who knew about it.

Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?

The bottom line in this Epstein nonsense is that Kathryn Ruemmler had a long relationship with Jeffrey Epstein after his arrest for child sexploitation, and before the 2016 election, before the Trump targeting began and long before Spygate/Russiagate made headlines.

If Epstein had dirt on Trump, Ruemmler would have used it.

Nov 13 2025

Representative Austin Scott (GA) Blasts Senate Republicans for Paying Themselves Millions in Retroactive Penalties Within Hidden Clause in CR Bill


Posted originally on CTH on November 12, 2025 | Sundance 

Buried on page 217 of the Senate Continuing Resolution Bill [TEXT HERE], Republican Senators have inserted legislation to “retroactively” pay themselves $500,000 each for every line of communication, telephone record, email or other electronic communication, subpoenaed by the Jack Smith Special Counsel during the Arctic Frost investigation.

The payment is a penalty for retroactive subpoenas going back to January 1, 2022. The payment is at least $500,000 per phone line or email account. That means each Republican Senator is going to make millions from the subpoenas that Jack Smith previously used.

House Representative Austin Scott is not happy the Republican Senators slipped this into the bill. WATCH:

The Bill Text is Available Here – Starting on Page 217

[SOURCE pdf]

Nov 12 2025

The 2025 MAGA Fracture and the Benefactors Behind It


Posted originally on CTH on November 11, 2025 | Sundance

On March 3rd through March 6th 2016, the Republican presidential primary was at the precipice of a key inflection point (Super Tuesday) when a large group of political leadership, tech titans, bankers and political influence agents assembled at the AEI summit in Sea Island, Georgia.

Citation Here – Citation Here and Citation HERE (w/itinerary details)

In the decade that passed, you have seen me reference this Sea Island group frequently, because the origin of where we are today can only be understood if you followed the outcome of that 2016 Sea Island meeting and the decade of activity therein.

In 2016 the agenda of the group, though they gently denied it at the time, was to figure out a way to remove the disruption Donald Trump represented from the business model of DC politics.  The Sea Island confab discussed how to stop him, or at the very least manage the potential damage he could deliver to the system – specifically, to the Republican wing of the UniParty apparatus.

Here in 2025, we are currently witnessing an outcome of activity from essentially the same group. For this phase, the intention is to fracture the baseline of support that underpins President Trump’s movement; what is reasonably called MAGA and the America-First movement.

What follows below is a review that might help people understand what exactly is behind the various pressure narratives we see being introduced into this narrative operation.   The attacks against Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, various iterations of Qatar vs Israel as espoused by voices like Mark Levin, the claims of antisemitism shouted against any voice that doesn’t put the interests of the Israeli government at the forefront, and the various alignments therein.

In the biggest picture, this is not a battle against individual voices, but rather the positioning of interests to maintain the same objective that was discussed in the aforementioned Sea Island confab.

A few points are needed for context as this discussion enlarges.  First, I am only 80% finished with the year-long tracking of the participants; however, due to the severity of the issue and the urgency therein, this is one of the few times I will outline something that is not yet fully developed.

Second, this is not the first rodeo for this activity.  After the Tea Party rose in 2010, we saw this same institutional response from almost identical participants to control the threat of a leaderless organic grassroots movement.  President Obama, the DNC/RNC and the Republican power apparatus all opposed the Tea Party, as they do MAGA for exactly the same reason.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.

You might remember supporters of the various patriot or Tea Party grassroots organizations being targeted by the Obama DOJ and IRS. Simultaneously John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell labeled Tea Party supporters as political jihadists, extremists and hobbits.  The targeting operations to isolate, ridicule and marginalize the movement was both a DNC and an RNC operation.

Republicans and Democrats worked together to eliminate the Tea Party, and Republicans were more than willing to lose elections to stop Tea Party supported candidates from winning.  This is important to remember, because that type of activity both evidences the UniParty apparatus and the opposition to the modern iteration of the Tea Party in the larger MAGA voting base.  In short, the DC professional political apparatus hates all versions of the same uncontrollable electorate regardless of label.

When they departed Sea Island, eventually the professional Republicans (GOPe) ended up settling on supporting Hillary Clinton, because Donald Trump could not be defeated within the confines of the party apparatus and became the presumptive nominee.   The tech group from Sea Island was already part of the Hillary Clinton alignment, and the “political influence agents” also saw Hillary as the comfortable, predictable and non-disruptive candidate. The key underpinning all of them was “anyone but Trump.”

Hillary then walked toward November with party Democrats, party Republicans, tech, Silicon Valley and the never-Trump conservatives.  However, Hillary encountered a major minus in the electorate when the Bernie Sanders group discovered the origin of the DNC control operation.  Hillary Clinton gained the party Republicans, but Hillary Clinton lost a lot of Bernie voters; many of them went to Trump.

[NOTE: It’s a little funny, but the five-year-long RNC -vs- TP/MAGA fight is essentially what we are now watching within the other wing of the UniParty, the DNC wing.  The grassroots left against the DNC professionals.  The “progressives” or “socialist democrats” are taking Democrat scalps the same way the grassroots right took down Republicans.  The old guard Democrats are quitting.]

All of this is said to frame the context for 2025, and the objectives of the political influence agents to break up the MAGA movement into smaller digestible pieces.  The wedge issue is not accidentally Israel.

Israel has been selected as a wedge issue to divide MAGA, because Israel-First influencers viewed themselves in a vulnerable position.  This too needs context.

♦ QATAR.  All year long I have been watching the Qatar vs Israel battle surface on social media.  At first it was a very odd dynamic to watch, because it did not make sense.  Then a few things became more visible that made it evident why the U.S-Israel groups were concerned.

In the decade that preceded 2025, you cannot find too many examples of Qatar ever having a positive headline outside the praise from Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  While Obama had always embraced Qatar (ex. bank for the Muslim Brotherhood), it was Joe Biden who labeled Qatar a major non-NATO ally.  The Obama/Biden administration liked Qatar, the first Trump administration not so much.

Prior to 2025, Qatar had a history of bad influence operations, where “bad” is defined as them doing really bad things; like funding radical Islamic extremists (creating the Arab Spring), giving safe haven to the exiled Islamist Egyptian leadership, financing Al-Jazeera, shipping covert CIA/State Dept weapons to the al-Qaeda operatives in Libya and Syria, being the bankers for Iranian money, supporting Hamas leadership, etc.

In the first Trump term, President Trump confronted Qatar and told the Gulf Cooperation Council (Egypt, Bahrain, UAE and Saudi Arabia) to maintain pressure on Qatar. So, it was quite a reversal to see the second Trump term reverse course entirely and begin praising Qatar.  However, if you think about the issue of the Israeli war in Gaza, and how that changed the landscape, things begin to take on a new context.

This new 2025 positive-Qatar vibe created anxiety for the pro-Israel elements inside the USA.  It wasn’t a matter of direct policy that seemed to unnerve them, but rather a change in influence priority.  Influence is a tenuous game of position.

In early 2025, Israel-first voices started to seem visibly worried their White House influence operation may be diminished by a positive Trump message toward Qatar.  In my opinion, that influence fear was actually substantive, and yet part of an intentional Trump foreign policy agenda; akin to a soft brushback pitch against the U.S-Israel influence shop who had become very comfortable taking their Trump influence for granted.

Friendly messaging toward Qatar’s influence shop was viewed by U.S-Israeli voices as a betrayal. However, given the nature of the Trump transition team having former lobbyists for Qatar, the friendly messaging was understandable; however, x2, that set of facts didn’t make it palatable for the Israeli coalition. Ergo, an influence battle began very early in the Trump administration, and the internecine Qatar vs Israel issue was visible to those of us who watch things closely.

Keep in mind, historically within the GOPe apparatus, this was a lucrative financial tug-of-influence game. The neocon/intelligence wing (Bolton/McCain) had one foot in pro-Qatar and one foot in pro-Israel, with ¹both sides funding for influence and delivering affluence.  So much so that their interests from a USA viewpoint were virtually indistinguishable, see Libya.  Additionally, behind this financial set of motives, this confab of influence beneficiaries was/is the core of that Sea Island meeting.

[¹President Obama played this dynamic brilliantly to the benefit of his Muslim Brotherhood allies.]

♦ THE RACE – At this point in the analysis, it is worthwhile dropping the traditional viewpoint of U.S. politicians as “candidates” and start thinking about them in the more accurate term as “horses.”  The horses race in the Kentucky Derby, but it is the owners who win the prize money.

When you view U.S. politicians as horses in the various races, we start to think more clearly about who their owners are. This is the key to understanding U.S political candidates.

You might be able to remember the name of the horse who won the Triple Crown, you might even remember the jockey who rode the horse, but less likely you remember who owned it.  In U.S. politics, it’s the owners within the political races who control the horses not the horses who control the owners.

Donald J. Trump represented a serious threat to this dynamic.  Trump is a horse who is also his owner; this is a major disruption in political sport.

The owners assembled in Sea Island, March 2016, to discuss this disruption.

By the time we get to 2020, the ‘anyone but Trump’ theme was clearly at play.  The Intelligence Community assisted, Big Tech assisted, corporate media assisted, our ever-predictable Republicans were once again purposefully and willfully blind, and with mail-in ballots all the rage, Trump was all alone against the entire apparatus with only voters trying to offset the American political control operation.   In the aftermath of the ridiculous outcome, all of the participants circled the wagons, and Nancy Pelosi provided the literal fence.

In 2021, the Big Tech sub-segment of the Sea Island confab then went full combat against MAGA elements, banning, deplatforming, demonetizing and removing any countervailing voices.  Meanwhile, anyone associated with Trump was targeted by the collaborating government mechanisms, DOJ/FBI and the media once again ran cover.

In the 2023 version of ‘anyone but Trump,’ 43 billionaires together with an assist from Sea Island attendee, Elon Musk, tried to launch Ron DeSantis as a MAGA alternative.  However, the Tea Party-hardened MAGA voters looked at their scars, and when they saw the $100 bill on a fishing line being dragged through the MAGA community, they refused to chase it.

By then, the 2016 Cruz Crew had switched to 2024 Alligator emojis, but even the “Evangelicals” with unlimited funding couldn’t fuel the DeSantis starship.

The Ron launch was as wobbly as DeSantis’ head during speaking engagements; and Casey wearing Melania’s heals, Duck Dynasty skinny pants and Sarah Palin’s ‘Grizzly Mama’ T-shirt couldn’t compensate.

What a hot mess.

The MAGA alternative was as structurally inauthentic as Ron’s boots, even with the lifts.

Hey, be thankful.  No one has ever accused the Republican consultant class of accurately assessing the political landscape around them.

Their inauthenticity is what helps us to know who they are.  It’s a net positive.

I would make the argument that if Ron’s owners had somehow pulled it off, Biden would have been yanked fast and replaced with Newsom, and we’d be looking at the “future in hindsight” right now.

♦ 2025 – That Sea Island crew doesn’t quit.  The “anyone but Trump” operation is back in full swing despite the 2024 victory message.

Step #1 in the control process is to lose the 2026 election and put the Republican wing of the uniparty bird back into the minority.  Again, this isolates our people’s president.

However, they can’t just lose 2026 and call it a day.  They still need to manage the problem that President Trump represents for another three years.  There are Trump policies to undermine, Trump executive orders to let sit non-legislatively supported, and all of this inaction must take place while Trump supporters are distracted with maximum shiny things.

This is where the “political influencers” come into play as mercenaries and advanced operative messengers for a very useful dynamic to emphasize – the operation that began as Qatar vs Israel.

Tucker Carlson representing the face of JD Vance’s support network becomes a target for Mark Levin et al.  Candace Owens is labeled as the female face of Nick Fuentes, who, for some odd reason, is being algorithmically boosted by the same tech platforms that banned his account as an identified racist, extremist and antisemitic content producer.

This Fuentes boosting, again not coincidentally by the same elements who attended that 2016 Sea Island confab including Google, began in July 2025, about a month prior to TPUSA head Charlie Kirk telling his pro-Israel friends (billionaire Bill Ackman) that the content messaging on behalf of the Netanyahu government was backfiring amid Gen-Z.  To wit, Netanyahu said, ‘not to worry’ my good friends of Israel, Larry Ellison and David Ellison, have things under control with TikTok, Twitter and Paramount. CBS’s Bari Weiss announced shortly thereafter.

While the inside White House influence game continues, all of these various 2025 interests again find their origin in Sea Island, Georgia, at the March 2016 AEI conference.  Remember, think “owners” not “horses.”

♦ HORSES:

• Vice President JD Vance – Heir apparent to the MAGA endorsement of President Donald Trump.  Groomed from the stable of billionaire influence agent and one time (no more) friend of President Trump, Peter Thiel.  A more libertarian co-founder of Palantir, a skyrocketing AI software platform creator with billions in new federal contracts and likely more to come.  Palantir CEO Alex Karp, a key industrialist applying the very best of AI creator systems to the merging targeting and identity tracking technology of the future.

Without Peter Thiel, there is no Senator JD Vance in 2022.  Without Senator JD Vance there is no VP nominee in 2024.  Oh, and despite their stealth separating in 2017, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel remain BFF influencers in 2025.  And without Larry Ellison in 2022, there is no liquidity Musk to capture the Twitter Platform, which not coincidentally became a launch vehicle for the Ron effort shortly after Ellison said he would not allow Musk to fail.

So, where does that put JD Vance’s collar?  Who knows? We’ll keep watching as Mr Ellison, having successfully moved beyond the X operation, now moves to the TikTok/Paramount phase while simultaneously owning the Oracle system operation that X utilizes.

• Secretary of State Marco Rubio – For the first time in his political career, Marco is in a position where he is not directly accountable to voters.  Having risen through the Florida legislature, state house and on to a federal Senate seat representing Florida, for the first time Rubio is applying himself without any election worries.  His constituent base consists of President Trump.

Rubio is seemingly giving the appearance of having turned Maverick, having fun poking back at his previous owners, while running amuck in the free-range of Trump’s well-manicured landscape.  Is Rubio required to return to a previously designated stable?  Again, who knows. It’s super fun to watch this new less groomed, yet well maintained, stallion running in the wild.  However, his pedigree is as trained as a Lipizzaner stallion. Will he tire of the free-range? We’ll keep watching.

• Governor Ron DeSantis – The one constant political hot mess in an ever-consistent GOPe playbook.

You might say that DeSantis could never stand a chance given his failure to launch in 2024.  However, do not underestimate the stupidity of the professional consultant class who have a way of convincing owners that horse can run.

Ron’s only problem is he needs very narrow blinders and can’t turn corners.  Other than that, he’s solid in the straights when all the obstacles are removed and the track is groomed specifically for his platformed shoes.

The issue for Sea Island, with DeSantis, is that despite his extremely managed exteriors, and despite the massive amount of money spent on the influence operations and appearances, only a specific type of Jockey can fit that little saddle.

[I mean someone had to tell Casey what to wear in Iowa the last time, and, well, think about it….  They both looked in the mirror that morning and thought, “Awesome – this will get em’.”  How’d that work out?]

SUMMARY:  Underneath all of what we are visibly seeing and witnessing, especially the outrage du-jour, is an underlying political background that consistently tries to control outcomes through various methods.  This effort to split the MAGA base, using Israel or (insert_next_thing_here) as a wedge issue within the America First movement – only benefits one larger apparatus, the Sea Island billionaire control system.

This billionaire control system, a public-private partnership, previously deconstructed and co-opted the Tea Party returning the system to status quo.

The billionaires in finance and tech are set; their influence operation only varies slightly depending on the challenge, because they know they can purchase every horse in the race, and they are working earnestly through various iterations of the same owner playbook, with the end goal the same – control.

Just reject it.

Nov 11 2025

Republican Senators Include Provision in Shutdown Bill That DOJ Cannot Subpoena Senators Phone Records – You/Me, No Such Protection


Posted originally on CTH on November 10, 2025 | Sundance 

This is so perfectly Republican.

Republican senators have slipped a provision into the Continuing Resolution bill to re-open government, that forbids the DOJ or Judicial branch from subpoenas targeting their phone records.  The Senate will be protected from abuses to the 4th amendment, but you and me – no such luck.

Additionally, as further evidence to the structural priorities of the professional Republicans, if the legislative provision is violated, each instance of violation will result in a $500,000 payment to the senator.  Go figure.

WASHINGTON DC – Senate Republicans secured a provision in the bipartisan, shutdown-ending government funding package that could award senators hundreds of thousands of dollars for having their phone records collected without their knowledge as part of a Biden-era investigation.

[…] It was tucked into the legislative branch spending measure for fiscal year 2026, part of a three-bill “minibus” of appropriations measures that Senators were set to vote on Monday night alongside a continuing resolution to fund the government through Jan. 30. The House is expected to clear the package for President Donald Trump’s signature as early as Wednesday.

[…] The provision states that electronic services providers must notify a Senate office if the provider receives a request to disclose the data from that senator, or senator’s office. Moreover, the legislative language stipulates that the provider cannot be barred from notifying the senate office under a court order, though that notification may be delayed in the event the senator in question is under criminal investigation.

[…] This portion of the legislative branch appropriations bill also appears to provide a cash bonus for those Senators who were targeted by Smith’s probe. If the provision included in the bill is violated, the Senator can sue the federal government, and if the lawmaker succeeds in the case, the person will be awarded $500,000 or more for each violation by the government. (read more)

Don’t forget, in the last FISA-702 reauthorization, Congress also forbade any member of the legislative branch from being subject to the illegal use of the NSA surveillance system.

Congress is exempt from the FISA abuse they authorize on Americans, and Congress is exempt from subpoenas against their phone records that are authorized against Americans.

Seriously folks, we just cannot make this stuff up.