Posted originally on the CTH on May 7, 2023 | Sundance 

Occam’s Razor: When faced with competing explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest is likely the correct one.

(1) An investigative silo within the federal apparatus falsely identified me as “1% Watchdog.”  (2) When confronted with the truth of the matter, and after their own independent investigation, federal investigators acknowledged that some other entity fabricated their bona fides using my identity.  (3) Admitted (by them) the most likely motive was to influence trust amid the communication group of “1% Watchdog.”

In my humble opinion, and applying Occam’s Razor, “1% Watchdog” was/is a federal agent.

What other motive would a person carry to fabricate their identity, create false bona fides, if not to influence a sense of trust in their target audience?

NOTICE the wording: […] “your administration of the “Stop the Steal J6” channel.”

This appears to outline “1% Watchdog” as the owner/administrator/controller of the communication platform.

These are not unfounded suppositions.  Simply reverse engineer the process, apply the scientific method to your review, then apply Occam’s razor.

Counselors – On behalf of your client(s) file a motion with the judge requesting a court order compelling Zello to give up the registration records of the ‘Stop the Steal J6’ channel.  This will identify the person behind “1% Watchdog”.  If federal prosecutors fight the request for the court order, well: (a) there’s your answer; and (b) take the next step of using the preexisting congressional subpoena as evidence to support your compulsion.

For MEDIA – In an effort to improve personal time management, and devote necessary time to advancing our goals, please consider this a standard form letter response to any further inquiry:

Dear Mr./Mrs. XXXXXXXX, prudence and necessarily instilled manners dictate that all correspondence deserves the full weight of a polite response.

Allow me to thank you, with the humblest and earnest of appreciation, for all you do on behalf of a simple citizenry of which I am a proud and insignificant member.

Indeed, if our paths were ever to cross in person, I hold no disposition that you, as a person of consequence, would ever afford these calloused and well-worn hands the time of day. I am, like many, comfortably invisible.

That said, and with the utmost respect for your professional endeavors, I hope you will consider this correspondence carefully.

It is not our “goal” to raise our profile through the injustice that corruption represents. It is our goal to shine light upon that corruption….

When you see that justice is measured, not by due process, but by compulsion – when you see that in order to invoke your sixth amendment right to due process, you need to obtain permission from men who rebuke the constitution – when you see that justice is determined by those who leverage, not in law, but in politics – when you see that men get power over individual liberty by graft and by scheme, and your representatives don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption holding influence and individual liberty so easily dispatched and nullified – you may well know that your freedom too is soon to perish.

You present opportunity for interview as if it is reflective of some courageous or magnanimous endeavor on your behalf. Alas, the disconnect, and innocent naivete’ of those only partially immersed in the battle to save the republic, shines through.

I’m almost certain that you hold the best of all intentions. However, in viewing a goal to be getting this type of story advanced, you miss the entire point.

My honest and respectfully intended question to you would be: What is it that makes media folks always want to “get an interview” when the information is there for the taking?

Perhaps, by training, by habit, or by unintended consequence you have developed your business model, and as a consequence yourself, to live for the process itself as an end result. Is it logical to believe that journalism is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire?

Please forgive my uneducated and poorly worded suppositions, but apparently journalism has evolved into reveling in the process and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter and never actually applies what might be discovered.

In fact, I’m led to believe that sometimes those within the media avoid the subject matter deliberately, because if they get their heads around it and nail it home, they won’t have anything to talk about anymore – because they will have exhausted their stash.

Not attempting whatsoever to lump your intention into such a fray; however, many have gotten into the habit of milking each situation for “so many leads,” “so many interviews,” “so many column inches,” and “so many angles” that problem-solving does not appeal to them at all. They oddly appear to favor the endless process.

So, when there’s an approach like what you are encountering with our significant site research, and my reluctance for self-involvement, I don’t fit – because I don’t give a flip about “the process.” And therefore, I do not fit into the rationale of the box or the PERT chart.

If you want to make these truths known, they are free for the taking; and they are by no matter or consequence dependent on my advancement.

Borrowing from Mike Vanderboegh – This is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can’t be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won’t be done. The Founders’ Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost.

But I tell you this: We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.

And when we are gone, the scattered, free survivors hiding in the ruins of our once-great republic will sing of our deeds in forbidden songs, tending the flickering flame of individual liberty until it bursts forth again, as it must, generations later. We will live forever, like the Spartans at Thermopylae, in sacred memory.

With profound appreciation for your time and attention, and the warmest of regards.

Truly,

Sundance

[Support The Conservative Treehouse Here]