Posted originally on the CTH on March 27, 2023 | Sundance
On March 3rd, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed a law “prohibiting gender care for minors” according to CNN.
On March 24th, three days ago, a biological woman who identifies as a man (trans-male) named Audrey Hale had his 28th birthday in Tennessee.
On March 27th, 28-year-old Audrey Hale, (pictured left) the biological woman who identifies as a man, opened fire in at a private Christian school in Nashville, The Covenant School, killing three adults and three children before being shot and killed by police. [LINK]
Likely because the gender identity as well as instability played a role in the motive, all of the social media and online profiles of Audrey Hale were scrubbed before she/he was identified as the shooter.
(NBC) – A heavily armed woman who gunned down three children and three staff members at a Nashville school on Monday appears to be a former student of the private Christian campus, police said.
Nashville police initially described the shooter at The Covenant School as a teenager before, minutes later, calling her a 28-year-old woman who lives in the city.
The shooter was identified as Audrey Hale, a Nashville resident, three law enforcement officials briefed on the matter told NBC News. There were no answers on Monday afternoon at multiple phone numbers listed for Hale’s mother and brother.
According to police, the shooter was armed with two “assault-style rifles and a handgun” when she was confronted by five officers. Two of those opened fire and killed her, police said. (read more)
The secretive and quasi-constitutional DOJ-CRS (Community Relations Service) will now take control and give all instructions to local, state and federal officials on what may be said from this moment forth. The DOJ-CRS is now in control.
If the scuttlebutt is correct, it appears the news media hate cycle about Tennessee’s underage sex change ban bill radicalized someone enough to shoot up a Christian school. pic.twitter.com/ZfNAbRIFCS
Posted originally on the CTH on March 26, 2023 | Sundance
Independent journalist Matt Taibbi appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the current U.S. position on social media platform TikTok and the larger issues with government censorship and control as he has outlined within the ‘Twitter Files.’
Readers and observers should note how Council on Foreign Relations member Ms. Bartiromo again introduces the TikTok narrative around the ability of the Chinese government to request user data from TikTok, while Ms. Bartiromo seemingly ignores the U.S. surveillance policy that grants DOJ/FBI officials identical access to user data from Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google, Apple, etc.
However, independent thinking Matt Taibbi does a great job with that question and reminds Ms Bartiromo the Senate Select Committee functions in the USA exactly as she is concerned about the CCP acting in China. [lolol.. Go Matt!] Bartiromo quickly dodges the point and moves on. WATCH:
.
I like Matt Taibbi, even when he was a willfully blind lefty, he was always a curious cat. Deep State gotta Deep State. The cause of the “dramatic change” Taibbi notes has a name, it’s called Donald Trump.
Posted Originally on the CTH on March 26, 2023 | Sundance
Put a fork in the opposition denials to what was increasingly obvious; it’s over.
Last summer we saw the fingerprints of the professional republican apparatus all over the construct that was creating the Ron DeSantis 2024 effort. The data was all going in one direction, all of the constructs were identical to the Karl Rove playbook with the single addition of the Republican Governor’s Association as a participant. As the months moved forward the Rovian elements became more and more clear. The DeSantis supporters tried to deny it, but the truth of the issue is just too obvious.
Now, insider republican political pundit Mark Simone admits that Team Bush and Karl Rove are the specific organizers of the DeSantis 2024 effort. Appearing on Fox Business, Larry Kudlow asks directly, “who is behind the DeSantis campaign?” Simone admits, “yeah, it’s Karl Rove – Karl Rove has been advising DeSantis, that’s why he’s been getting a little bit better every week.” WATCH:
.
Thanks to user ‘Escalated Entrophy” who cut the clip for me after I found it. Additionally, CTH has also heard from a new source that has been hired to do part of the DeSantis 2024 campaign operation. Anticipate a formal 2024 campaign announcement within the next two weeks. The RdS team goal is not for DeSantis to win, the goal is to stop Trump from winning.
Everything is exactly what I have been saying it was since last August. CTH was 100% correct.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 26, 2023 | Sundance
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Chairman Mark Warner is very concerned about the U.S. government inability to control, restrict and censor the information within the TikTok social media platform.
As outlined in this Face the Nation interview with Margaret Brennan, Chairman Warner states it is very alarming that China may permit content that is against the interests of the U.S. government to control it. Additionally, by law, the Chinese platform “has to be willing to turn over data to the Communist Party“.
Now, if you find yourself thinking, how is this different from U.S. laws that force Twitter, Facebook, Apple or Google to turn over user data to the DOJ/FBI, well, you are probably too smart for this regime narrative and should officially consider yourself a dissident American intellectual. Just sayin’.
The bottom line is very simple when you look at TikTok from the position of the U.S. surveillance state. The Dept of Homeland Security can only monitor TikTok content, they cannot do anything to modify, remove, censor or control the content, as a result TikTok exists as an existential threat. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We go now to Senator Mark Warner, the Democratic Chairman of the Intelligence Committee. He joins us from King George Virginia. Good morning to you, Senator.
SEN. MARK WARNER: Good morning Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It was a pretty intense five hours of questioning of Tiktok CEO this past week. Your bipartisan bill has White House support, and it would deal with Tiktok by giving the Commerce Department power to review and potentially ban technology flagged by US intelligence as a credible threat. Will it pass in a divided Congress?
SEN. WARNER: Well, Margaret, will – we’re now up to 22 Senators. 11 Democrats. 11 Republicans. We’ve had strong interest from the House. I think they wanted to get through their hearing. And clearly while I appreciated Mr. Chew’s testimony, he just couldn’t answer the basic question. At the end of the day, Tiktok is owned by a Chinese company Bytedance. And by Chinese law, that company has to be willing to turn over data to the Communist Party. Or one of my bigger fears, we got 150 million Americans on Tiktok average of about 90 minutes a day, and how that channel could be used for propaganda purposes –
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
SEN. WARNER: -or disinformation, advocated by the Communist Party.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But has the White House made clear to you that they want this bill to pass and do intend to ban it? Or is a forced sale more likely?
SEN. WARNER: Well, I think the White House is very in favor of this bill. And clearly this is not just a phenomenon in America. We’ve seen Canada act. We’ve seen the UK act. Matter of fact, the Dutch said, if you’re a media person, please get off TikTok, the Chinese are spying on you. India’s already banned the bill- banned it outright. We give the Secretary of Commerce the tools to ban, to force a sale, other tools. And end of the day, one of the things that may lead to a ban is the Chinese Communist Party has said they felt like the algorithm, the source code that resides in Beijing, is so important that they’d rather see a ban than give that source code up to be placed in a third country, which again, I think speaks volumes about the potential threat that this application poses.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Well, the Commerce Secretary though recently said that the politician in her thinks a ban will mean losing every voter under 35. Forever. And if you look at use of Tiktok I mean, just last week, President Biden showed up and celebrity videos on Tiktok from the White House. Plenty of lawmakers, including your Democratic colleagues, Senator Cory Booker use it. A number of House progressives use it, given how important this platform is to Democrats, can you actually get TikTok taken care of before 2024 when you might need it for political outreach?
SEN. WARNER: Margaret, I think there’s a lot of creative activity that goes on on Tiktok, but I absolutely believe that the market- if TikTok goes away, the market will provide another platform and at the end of the day, that could be an American company. It could be a Brazilian company, it could be an Indian company. All those companies–
(CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, but the Commerce Secretary is saying there’s a political cost if it goes away–
SEN. WARNER: –operate within a set of rules that–
MARGARET BRENNAN: and that’s what she fears.
SEN. WARNER: I think –
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you’re empowering her.
SEN. WARNER: Listen, I have met- I have met with Gina Raimondo on this issue. I think she will make very clear that she believes TikTok is a threat as well. And listen, if at the end of the day, you could end up with a forced sale. And that forced sale also makes sure that the core algorithm, the source code resides someplace different than China, that could be a outcome that would be successful as well. At the end of the day, you cannot have American data collected. Nor can you have the ability for the Communist Party to use TikTok as a propaganda tool.
MARGARET BRENNAN
60% of the company is owned by other investors, including US firms. So is this a policy that you really need to address with Americans to stop them from investing in companies like this?
SEN. WARNER: Well, that’s one of the reasons why I think our approach – the RESTRICT Act says – rather than dealing with Tiktok in a one off fashion, or a few years back, it was Huawei, the Chinese telecom provider or years earlier, the Russian software company Kaspersky. We need to have a set of tools, rules-based so they can stand up in court, Tiktok would still did get his day in court, even under our law that says, if there’s a foreign technology from a place like China and Russia, and it poses a national security threat, and one of the things we also require is that the intelligence community has to declassify as much of this information as possible. So it’s not simply like, hey, trust the government, we got to make the case. And I do think at the end of the day, if it ends up with a ban, there will be other platforms for the literally millions of influencers and folks who like this kind of video platform, they’ll still be able to get it.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Very quickly. They’re a number of Republican lawmakers who plan to meet with Taiwan’s president when she is here on US soil. Are any Democrats, will you?
SEN. WARNER
You know, I I’m not sure when the president of Taiwan is coming to the United States –
(CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: -they announced March 30 and again in April.
SEN. WARNER: Okay, I’m not sure. Well, if there- if there’s an invitation made to me and other Democrats, listen, I would like to have that meeting as well. I think protecting and ensuring the security of Taiwan is in America’s national interest.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you, since you sit on the Senate Banking Committee about this rolling turmoil that we are in. You are one of 16 Democrats who voted in 2018 to change those Dodd Frank banking regulations regarding the mid-size banks, which obviously has been scrutinized, because that size bank is where we have seen recent issues. I know you’ve defended the vote in recent days. Do you think there needs to be more regulation of mid-size banks, now?
SEN. WARNER: Well, Margaret, Tuesday, we’re going to start getting the facts at the Senate Banking Committee. And if it ends up that a stress test that would have been applied to these mid-size banks would have spotted this, of course, I’d add additional regulation. I think, though, what it appears to me is two things happened. One, basic banking regulation. If this has been only a $5 billion bank, not a $200 billion bank, should have spotted the fact that this management, and the regulators missed basic banking 101, the interest rate mismatch. And two: one of the things that I think we also have to look at is this was the first time we’ve had an internet-based run. There was literally $42 billion taken out of this bank in six hours. That’s the equivalent of 25 cents on the dollar. And I’d like to know why some of the venture capitalists spurred this run in the first place.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Interesting topic. I want to ask you, though, as well, about your relationship with SVB bank, and political donations. USA Today had a great big list of all of the entities SVB’s political action committee or CEO had donated to. It’s the DNC. It’s President Biden’s 2020 campaign. Senator Schumer says he’s going to give back the money he received or donate it. Representatives Maxine Waters, Ro Khanna have returned the donations. You received $21,600 from their political action committee, nearly six grand from its CEO. Do you feel any pressure to give those funds away? Is there a point to it?
SEN. WARNER: Well, first of all, Margaret, campaign contributions have never affected my policy choices. They never have, and they never will. We’re going to hear the facts on Tuesday. And if there’s malfeasance at the bank, of course, I’m gonna give the money back.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay. Senator, before I let you go, I want to just follow up on what you shared with us when we spoke back in January, when you were very frustrated that the administration wasn’t sharing more information about the classified materials improperly held by the current president when he was out of office and the former president. You’ve been briefed. Any more clarity on this? Any further information?
SEN. WARNER: We need more information about these documents. And more importantly, we need to make sure that what the intel community has done to mitigate the harm. And we’re still in conversations with the Justice Department, the administration’s position does not- does not pass the smell test. We’ve got a job not to go into the legal ramifications, but to make sure that the intelligence community has done what’s right. And we’ve got some additional tools, we can restrict some of the spending. We’re in active conversations with the Justice Department. But we’ve got to get those documents
MARGARET BRENNAN: Specific to what just happened this week in Syria, with the Iranian-aligned groups attack on U.S. presence there. Are you satisfied with the amount of information that’s being shared? What is going on? And should there be a more robust response from the Biden administration to stop these kind of attacks?
SEN. WARNER: Well, we’ve got a few thousand troops there in Syria and Iraq. I’ve been briefed by the intel community. Protecting, frankly, the Kurds who are finishing wiping out the remnants of the ISIS forces, and, frankly, helping guard some of the ISIS prisoners. It has been a dangerous area, but I think the administration’s response has been appropriate. So far.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Some of your Republican colleagues have publicly complained, though, that the attack that was fatal Thursday morning wasn’t briefed to Congress until Thursday night. Does that concern you? I mean, Iran was a key topic being discussed on the Senate floor that day.
SEN. WARNER: We have no illusions about the malicious nature of the Iranian regime, and how they help these groups in Syria, Iraq, and frankly, across the whole region. But in this case I do think the administration briefed us in an appropriate way. And I think the response to the missile fire, or the drone attack from one of these Iranian-sponsored groups. That’s a dangerous part of the world. But our troops are doing something that’s terribly important in terms of making sure that we eliminate the final vestiges of ISIS.
MARGARET BRENNAN: All right, Senator Warner, thank you for your time today. Face the Nation will be back in a minute. Stay with us. [Transcript End]
Senator Warner is correct, an example is World War Reddit (Ukraine). Creating the background narrative for World War Reddit is more complicated if TikTok users are showcasing the theatrics of it….
I’m case you were wondering why they wanted to ban TikTok. They can’t control the false narratives pic.twitter.com/o33bDpretk
Posted originally on the CTH on March 26, 2023 | Sundance
One of many things to like about Hungary is their brutal honesty when it comes to the United States meddling in their domestic affairs. {Background}
Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó gave an interview recently where he said it is more challenging to support the NATO objective, when the United States is so committed to overthrowing the Hungarian government. He has a good point.
(Via Associated Press) – The West’s steady criticism of Hungary on democratic and cultural issues makes the small European country’s right-wing government reluctant to offer support on practical matters, specifically NATO’s buildup against Russia, Hungary’s foreign minister said.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó also said Friday that his country has not voted on whether to allow Finland and Sweden to join NATO because Hungarian lawmakers are sick of those countries’ critiques of Hungarian domestic affairs.
Lawmakers from the governing party plan to vote Monday in favor of the Finnish request but “serious concerns were raised” about Finland and Sweden in recent months “mostly because of the very disrespectful behavior of the political elites of both countries towards Hungary,” Szijjártó said.
“You know, when Finnish and Swedish politicians question the democratic nature of our political system, that’s really unacceptable,” he said.
The timing of a vote on Sweden is harder to predict, Szijjártó said.
The EU, which includes 21 NATO countries, has frozen billions in funds to Budapest and accused populist Prime Minister Viktor Orban of cracking down on media freedom and LGBTQ rights. Orban’s administration has also been accused of tolerating an entrenched culture of corruption and co-opting state institutions to serve the governing Fidesz party. (read more)
Hungary has been in the crosshairs of the Biden/Obama administration ever since Prime Minister Viktor Orban refused to align with the WEF Western Democracies in their quest for regime change in Russia. As the NATO led western alliance assembled to use Ukraine as a proxy war against Russia, Hungarian Prime Minister Orban would not join.
In early April 2022, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban was overwhelmingly reelected {LINK}, despite the massive efforts against him by the European Union, western and euro-centric multinational globalists. As a result of the victory, Brussels was furious at the Hungarian people. Associated Press – […] “Orban — a fierce critic of immigration, LGBTQ rights and “EU bureaucrats” — has garnered the admiration of right-wing nationalists across Europe and North America.” (link)
Within the statements reported from his 2022 victory speech, Prime Minister Orban warned citizens of the NATO and western allied countries about the manipulation of Ukraine and how he views the Zelenskyy regime: […] “while speaking to supporters on Sunday, Orban singled out Zelenskyy as part of the “overwhelming force” that he said his party had struggled against in the election — “the left at home, the international left, the Brussels bureaucrats, the Soros empire with all its money, the international mainstream media, and in the end, even the Ukrainian president.” (link)
This put Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban in the crosshairs of the western alliance, specifically the EU and U.S. bureaucrats who use their power, position and intelligence apparatus to manipulate foreign nations. A year later and now we see USAID Administrator Samantha Power in Hungary openly discussing her seeding of the NGO’s and political activist systems in order to generate yet another color revolution. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:
Samantha Power, the wife of Cass Sunstein, is well known as the Obama/Biden administration’s advance operative who uses her position in U.S. government to influence activism in targeted nations. Hungary is now a target.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 24, 2023 | Sundance
Joe Biden is in Canada visiting Justin Trudeau Friday and they held a joint press conference. WATCH:
[Transcript] – We’ll be taking two questions from the American delegation, two questions from the Canadian delegation. One question and one follow-up.
Mr. President, first question over to you.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: All right. I guess the first person I’m calling on is Josh. Josh Boak. Josh?
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Two questions, one for each of you.
Mr. President, you talked today about the security and economic partnership with Canada. President Xi just went to Russia and expanded China’s economic commitment with that country. Why do you think many leading countries are choosing to form competing partnerships? And what does that mean for the world?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: It —
Q Prime Minister Trudeau —
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Oh, sorry.
Q — Canada recently banned TikTok on government devices. Knowing what you know, are you comfortable with the idea of your children or family members using TikTok? Thank you.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: I respond to the question first here?
Well, first of all, look, in 10 years, Russia and — and China have had 40 meetings. Forty meetings.
And I disagree with the basic premise of your question. I have — we have, you know, significantly expanded our alliances. I haven’t seen that happen with China and/or Russia or anybody else in the world.
We’re in a situation in the United States where NATO is stronger, we’re all together — the G7, the Quad, the ASEAN, Japan and Korea.
I have — my staff pointed out to me: I have now met with 80 percent of the world leaders just since I’ve been President. We’re the ones expanding the alliances. The opposition is not.
Name for me where that’s going, and tell me what ha- — I don’t mean literally you, but rhetorically — tell me how, in fact, you see a circumstance where China has made some significant commitment to Russia. And what commitment can they make, economically? Economically.
Q Their trade has increased, sir.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Pardon me?
Q Their trade has increased, sir.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Yeah, their trade has increased compared to what?
Look — look, I don’t take China lightly. I don’t take Russia lightly. But I think we vastly exaggerate.
I would hear — I’ve been hearing now for the past three months about “China is going to provide significant weapons to Russia, and they’re going to…” — you all have been talking about that. They haven’t yet. Doesn’t mean they won’t, but they haven’t yet.
And if anything has happened, the West has coalesced significantly more.
How about the Quad? How about Japan and the United States and South Korea? How about what we’ve done in terms of AUKUS? How about what we —
I mean, so I just — I just want to put it in perspective. I don’t take it lightly what Japan — what China, excuse me, and — and Russia are doing. And it could get significantly worse.
But let’s put it in perspective: We are uniting coalitions. We. We, the United States and Canada.
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: On TikTok, we made a similar decision to the American government and others when we said that we do not feel that the security profile is safe for government-issued phones. There are concerns around privacy and security, and that means — that is why we have banned TikTok from government-issued phones.
But your question, Josh, was about what I do as a parent of teenagers and my kids on social media. And on that, I —
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Pray.
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: — (laughs) — on that, I am obviously concerned with their privacy and their security, which is why I’m glad that on their phones — that happen to be issued by the government — they no longer access TikTok. (Laughter.)
That was a big frustration for them. “Really? This applies to us too, Dad?” “Yes, I just did that.” (Laughter.)
But I think as parents, we are understanding, particularly of teenagers, just how much of our kids’ lives are lived online and how much they are impacted not just by — influenced the way their friends are and peer pressure that all of us went through as teenagers, but a degree of misinformation, disinformation, and malicious activity that is allowed for by incredible advances in technology that we are benefiting from in so many different ways.
As governments, we have to make sure we’re doing what we can to keep people safe in the public square, making sure we’re pushing back against hate speech and incitations to violence online. And we’re carefully calibrating legislation to do that.
As a parent, I spend a lot of time talking to my kids about what’s online and how they should try and, you know, go outside and play a little more sports and not get so wrapped up in their phones. And we’re going to continue to do that.
Our concerns around TikTok are around security and access to information that the Chinese government could have to government phones.
It’s just a personal side benefit that my kids can’t use TikTok anymore — that I recommend everyone to use my en- — my encouragement to try and do.
MODERATOR: (As interpreted.) We’ll now go to a Canadian question. Christian Noel.
Q (As interpreted.) Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon, Mr. Prime Minister. I’d like to ask a question about Roxham Road. The agreement has been ready for a year. Why did you wait so long?
And for the 15,000 migrants that Canada will welcome, why so few? What have we offered to the U.S. in exchange?
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: (As interpreted.) Thank you, Christian. We’ve known for a long time theoretically what modernization needed to be made to the Roxham Road, to the agreement. We couldn’t simply shut down Roxham Road and hope that everything would resolve itself, because we would have had problems. The border is very long. People would have looked for other places to cross.
And so that’s why we chose to modernize the Safe Third Country Agreement so that someone who attempts to cross between official crossings will be subject to the principle — the same principle as someone who should seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive at.
Now, for people who are coming from the U.S., that is where they should be asylum seekers, using this means of uniformly applying the agreement, which we knew theoretically would be the solution, but it takes complex processes to manage the border. It took months before we could move forward with the announcement.
But by doing so, we protected the integrity of the system. And we’re also continuing to live up to our obligations with respect to asylum seekers.
At the same time, we continue to be open to regular migrants, and we will increase the number of asylum seekers who we accept from the hemisphere — the Western Hemisphere — in order to compensate for closing these irregular crossings.
Thank you.
Q Mr. President, this question is for you.
(As interpreted.) Please feel free, Mr. Trudeau, to answer as well.
Are you disappointed that Canada is not part or hasn’t taken a bigger role in the multilateral forces in Haiti? And what would you like Canada to do more, in addition to the $100 million announced today?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, no, I’m not disappointed. Look, this is a very, very difficult circumstance, the idea of how do we deal with what’s going on in Haiti, where gangs have essentially taken the place of the government, in effect. They run — they rule the roost, as the saying goes.
And so I think that what the Prime Minister has spoken about makes a lot of sense. The biggest thing we could do, and it’s going to take time, is to increase the prospect of the police departments in Haiti having the capacity to deal with the problems that are faced. And that is going to take a little bit of time.
We also are looking at whether or not the international community, through the United Nations, could play a larger role in this event, in this — this circumstance. But there is no question that there is a real, genuine concern, because there are several million people in Haiti, and the diaspora could cause some real — how can I say it? — confusion in the Western Hemisphere.
And so — but I think that what the Prime Minister is suggesting, and we are as well going to be contributing, to see if we can both increase the efficiency and capacity of the training and the methods used by the police department, as well as seeing if we can engage other people in the hemisphere, which we’ve been talking to, and they’re prepared to do some. So it’s — it’s a work in progress.
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: (As interpreted.) For 30 years, Western countries have been involved in Haiti to try to stabilize the country, to try to help the Pearl of the Antilles. And the situation is atrocious. It’s affecting the security of the people of Haiti. We must take action.
And we must keep the Haitian people in the approach that we build for security. And that’s why the approach that we are working on with the U.S. involves strengthening the capacity of the Haitian National Police, bringing more peace and security and stability. This won’t happen tomorrow. It will, of course, be a long process, but we will be there to support the capacity of the police in Haiti, the National Police.
At the same time, part of the insecurity and instability in Haiti is because of the Haitian elite, who have for too long benefited from the misery of the Haitian people. They work for their own political gain, their own personal gain. And this has prevented the country from recovering. And that’s why we’re proceeding with sanctions. We will continue to bring pressure to bear on the elite, the political class in Haiti, to hold them accountable for the distress facing the Haitian people, but to hold them accountable for ensuring their wellbeing.
We’re going to continue to work together. We fully understand how important this task is.
MODERATOR: Mr. President, over to you.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Can I follow up with one point on Haiti? And that is that any decision about military force, which it’s often raised, we think would have to be done in consultation with the United Nations and with the Haitian government. And so that is not off the table, but that is not in play at the moment.
I’m sorry.
MODERATOR: Over to you for the question, Mr. President.
Jordan, you have a question?
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Some on Wall Street have expressed frustration that it’s unclear what more your administration is willing to do to resolve the banking crisis. The markets have remained in turmoil. So how confident are you that the problem is contained? And if it spreads, what measures, such as guaranteeing more deposits, are you willing or not willing to take?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: First of all, have you ever known Wall Street not in consternation? Number one.
Look, I think we’ve done a pretty damn good job. People’s savings are secure, and even those beyond the $250,000 the FDIC is guaranteeing them. And the American taxpayer is not going to have to pay a penny. The banks are in pretty good shape. What’s going on in Europe isn’t a direct consequence of what’s happening in the United States.
And I — what we would do is if we find that there’s more instability than appears, we’d be in a position to have the FDIC use the power it has to guarantee those — those loans above 250, like they did already.
And so I think it’s going to take a little while for things to just calm down. But I don’t see anything that’s on the horizon that’s about to explode. But I do understand there’s an unease about this. And these mid-sized banks have to be able to survive, and I think they’ll be able to do that.
Q And, Mr. Prime Minister, the U.S. has included Canada in electric vehicle subsidies, as you’ve discussed, that were included in the Inflation Reduction Act. But the IRA also raises some competitiveness concerns and challenges for Canada. You know, President Biden supports “Buy American” provisions very strongly, and that has historically led to some trade tensions.
So are you planning to announce anything in your budget to keep up, so to speak? And are you asking the U.S. government for exceptions to the “Buy American” provisions in other areas?
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: First of all, there’s nothing new about Canada having to make sure that we remain competitive with the United States as a place for investment. That’s something that we have long known as a friendly competition between us that has led to tremendous growth and benefits in both of our countries.
Right now, we’re in a time where — Joe talked about it as an inflection point; I think that’s exactly right. We can feel the global economy shifting — shifting in very real ways towards lower carbon emission technologies, cleaner tech, great jobs in the natural resource and manufacturing industries that are going to be increased on our continent after years of outsourcing and offshoring. There is a real opportunity for both of us.
And the IRA, which is bringing in massive investments and massive opportunities for American workers and companies, is also going to have strong impacts on supply chains and producers and employees in Canada.
Yes, we’re going to have to make sure we’re staying competitive and targeting the areas where we think we can best compete. And we’ll have more to say about that in our budget next week.
But let us take a moment to step back and see that North America — Canada and the United States in particular — are incredibly well positioned to be the purveyors of solutions and economic growth that the net-zero economy around the world will need over the coming decades. The innovation, the know-how, the ability of us to make big things together leave us, in a time of global uncertainty, extremely certain that we are well placed for the future.
Whether it’s investments that have seen Canada go from fifth or sixth in the world, in turn of — in terms of battery supply chains, to now second in the world in terms of battery supply chains.
Whether it’s continuing our leadership on the cleanest aluminum in the world, moving towards cleaner steel and zero emission steel.
Whether it’s moving forward on critical minerals that the world is understanding they can no longer rely on places like China or Russia for — that they can rely on Canada to be not just a purveyor of ores, but of finished materials that will be built in environmentally responsible, union or good middle-class jobs — wages, strong communities, and the kind of leadership that the world is increasingly looking for.
There’s long been a bit of a weakness, I think, to our argument that we’ve made over the past decades as Western democracies that says that our model is the best one, it leads to the most prosperity. But so much of our model — we sort of turned our back to the fact that it relied on cheap imports —
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Bingo.
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: — of goods or resources from parts of the world that didn’t share our values and weren’t responsible on the environment or on human rights or on labor standards.
And what we are doing right now is showing that we can and will build resilient supply chains between us and with friends around the world that adhere every step of the way to the values that we live by, that make sure that there are good jobs for workers in communities, urban and rural, right across our continent; there are good careers for kids long into the future, not in spite of a changing world, but because of that changing world, and how well we are positioned to see the future and meet the future.
That’s why it’s so exciting to be able to work alongside Joe in these challenging times where we know we are better positioned than just about anyone else. And those friends of ours who share our values and our democracies around the world will benefit from the strength and the relations they have with us. And those who choose to continue to turn their backs on the environment, on human rights, on the values of freedom and dignity for all, will increasingly not be able to benefit from the growth that our societies, that our communities are creating every single day. PRESIDENT BIDEN: And, by the way, we each have what the other needs. We each have what the other needs.
The idea that somehow Canada is somehow put at a disadvantage — because we’re going to probably be investing billions of dollars in their ability to package what is coming out of the semiconductor area — I don’t get it. How’s that in any way do anything other than hire and bring billions of dollars into Canada?
I also don’t understand how, when we talk about it, we — we greatly need Canada, in terms of the minerals that are needed.
Well, you guys — we don’t have the minerals to mine. You can mine them. You don’t want to produce — I mean, you know, turn them into product. We do.
I mean, it’s — I’m a little confused, at least thus far, on why this is a disadvantage for — for Canada and the United States. I think we each have what the other needs.
And let me conclude by saying: You know, when I started talking about we’re going to build our economies from the middle out and the bottom up, not the top down, I was being literal. Because what happened is, if you think about it — in Democrat and Republican administrations beginning over 30 years ago or more in the United States — corporate America decided that what they’re going to do is they’re going to export jobs and import product because it was cheaper labor.
Well, guess what? Now we are making sure they import jobs here — jobs here — and we export product. Canada is doing the same thing.
So this is a real — this is a real shift in the world economy, in terms of what we’re prepared to do. And I’ll be darned if I’m going to stick in a situation where, as long as I’m President, where we have to rely on a supply chain in the other end of the world that is affected by politics, pandemics, or anything else.
We’re not hurting — we’re not hurting anyone in terms of having access to the start of the supply chain. It’s available.
But again, I — I predict to you, you’re going to see, after we’re both out of office, both China — I mean, China out of the game, in terms of many of the — the product they’re — they’re producing, and the United States and Canada pretty solid economically situated for the future in terms of also bringing back manufacturing jobs.
MODERATOR: Merci.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Sorry. And they’re telling me I’m talking too long because we got to go to dinner. (Laughter.)
MODERATOR: Thank you.
(In French.) (As interpreted.) We’ll take one last question.
Q My first question is for the Prime Minister. But, Mr. President, feel free to weigh in before my follow-up.
Prime Minister, we know you’ve — we know that you’ve appointed a special rapporteur, but with what we’ve learned about Han Dong’s communication with the Chinese Consular General, do you believe he advocated for the delayed release of the two Michaels?
PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU: First of all, Han gave a strong speech in the House that I recommend people listen to, and we fully accept that he is stepping away from the Liberal caucus in order to vigorously contest these allegations.
But I do want to take a step back and point out that foreign interference, interference by authoritarian governments, like China, Russia, Iran, and others, is a very real challenge to our democracies and is absolutely unacceptable.
It’s why, over the past number of years, the President and I have had many conversations about this. And indeed, we’ll continue to work together with our democratic allies around the world to keep our institutions and our democracies safe from foreign interference.
In 2018, when Canada hosted the G7 in Charlevoix, we actually created the G7 Rapid Response Mechanism to protect our democracies in cases of interference. And we will continue to work together to make sure we’re doing everything necessary to protect our democracies, which, by definition, are more open and therefore more vulnerable to foreign actors trying to weigh in in our politics, in our business, in our research institutions, and particularly impact on citizens themselves — which is why, over the past years, Canada, like our allies around the world, has given itself new rigorous tools to counter foreign interference.
And with the work that our expert rapporteur will do, with the work that our National Security Committee of Parliamentarians will be doing, and other institutions, we will continue to do everything necessary to keep Canadians safe.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: I have nothing to add. (Laughter.)
Q Thank you. And, Mr. President, when you took office, you cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline. This week, your government delayed the environmental assessment to reroute Enbridge Line 5, and at the same time, you’re approving oil drilling in Alaska.
So what’s your response to people who say it’s hypocritical to stymie Canadian energy projects while allowing your own?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: First of all, I don’t think it is, but I’ll be very brief.
The difficult decision was on what we do with the Willow Project in Alaska, and my strong inclination was to disapprove of it across the board. But the advice I got from counsel was that if that were the case, we may very well lose in court — lose that case in court to the oil company — and then not be able to do what I really want to do beyond that, and that is conserve significant amounts of Alaskan sea and land forever.
I was able to see to it that we are literally able to conserve millions of acres, not a — not a few — millions of acres of sea and land forever so it cannot be used in the future.
I am banking on — we’ll find out — that the oil company is going to say not — that’s not going to be challenged, and they’re going to go with thr- — with three sites. And the energy that is going to be produced they’re estimating wou- — would account to 1 percent — 1 percent of the total production of oil in the world.
And so I thought it was a good — a — the better gamble and a hell of a tradeoff to have the Arctic Ocean and the Bering Sea and so many other places off limits forever now.
I think we put more land in conservation than any administration since Teddy Roosevelt. I’m not positive of that, but I think that’s true.
Q So why are you delaying efforts then?
MODERATOR: Thank you all. This is what concludes today’s press conference.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Thank you.
Q Mr. President, Iran keeps targeting Americans. Does there need to be a higher cost, sir?
Posted originally on the CTH on March 24, 2023 | Sundance
The ABC article is worded to engineer the most nefarious narrative possible. However, if you read the actual story, there’s likely not only nothing to it, but it’s also a total conflation of different issues.
A white substance was found in the mailroom of a New York City building. The building houses an office that District Attorney Alvin Bragg sometimes uses. The powder was identified as coming from a letter that was addressed to “Alvin”. Inside the envelope was a letter containing the typewritten message, “Alvin: I am going to kill you,” with 13 exclamation points. The white substance was not hazardous.
(VIA ABC) – A white powder was discovered in the mailroom at 80 Centre Street, where the Manhattan District Attorney has offices and where a grand jury has been meeting to hear evidence in former President Donald Trump’s case, according to a court official. The powder was determined to be non-hazardous, officials said.
The powder came in an envelope addressed to “Alvin,” an apparent reference to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, according to police sources. Inside the envelope was a letter containing the typewritten message, “Alvin: I am going to kill you,” with 13 exclamation points, according to sources.
This envelope followed a series of unfounded threats that targeted municipal offices in New York this week. “For three days we got four emails,” Susan Stetzer, district manager at Manhattan Community Board 3, told ABC News on Friday. (read more)
The narrative has that particular FBI feeling of “energetic material that may become combustible when subjected to heat or friction.” {link} aka, powered coffee cream.
The only thing missing to complete the FBI version of the story was a noose. However, that might have been a little too telling.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 24, 2023 | Sundance
If I did not know the background of Ron DeSantis; if I did not have an exhaustive research library on the activity behind Ron DeSantis; if I was not aware of how the professional Republican establishment creates the ‘illusion of choice’; I would watch this interview with a generally good sense about Ron DeSantis.
However, unfortunately for the professionally Republican political class, we do know how they operate, and we are able to see the strings on the marionettes. So, when the selected and managed product of their three-year strategic plan says about fundraising, “I deal better with regular people,” we are able to call it as nonsense with accurate data to highlight the lie.
94% of all Ron DeSantis’ money comes from Wall Street, hedge fund managers, billionaires and multinational corporations. Only 6% comes from small donors, or what you might describe as “regular people.” {LINK} Additionally, you don’t spend 3-days with billionaire donors at Four Seasons donor retreat in Palm Beach, followed shortly by 3-days at a Club for Growth donor retreat in Miami, and then get to claim you “deal better with regular people.” This is just a lie.
There are parts of this interview that many readers here will agree with. There are also many parts of this interview that readers might take exception to. But the entirety of the hour long, mostly softball, Rupert Murdoch organized interview, is based on three years of carefully managed constructs. WATCH
Posted originally on the CTH on March 24, 2023 | Sundance
Before the next article about the next entrant into the field of the GOP for 2024, a reminder is in order. This was originally written in November of last year in preparation for the 2024 GOP nomination battle that begins now.
An inflection point is coming. In preparation for what we are about to witness, it is critical to understand that both the DNC and RNC are private corporations with no affiliation to government.
It is a difficult shift in thinking to appropriately understand, but the party system in U.S. politics revolves around two clubs that feed from the same corporate trough and position for influence and affluence within a political dynamic they control.
The priority for both clubs, Republican and Democrat, is NOT primarily ideological. In the modern era, the corporate priority first begins with a battle over who controls each corporation.
As long as there is no challenge, the clubs operate without issue. However, when there is a battle for control of the corporation, a battle that will ultimately determine the financial outcome, the internal battle becomes the priority.
2024 is going to be the election season when we see this corporate battle explode inside in the Republican group. Decades of entrenched power are at stake, and there has been four years of counter positioning and backroom discussion leading up to this moment.
As a consequence, and I know this might sound odd to many people – but winning and/or losing elections becomes a secondary issue. The RNC is not focused on winning elections. The RNC corporation is focused on retaining control.
The RNC want to give the illusion of support for MAGA conservatism because they need the base voter, and they need to maintain the illusion of choice. However, every move they make on an operational level is exactly in line with their previous outlook toward cocktail class republicanism. The MAGA base of support cannot trust this corporate group and we must not be blind or unguarded about the Machiavellian schemes they construct.
When you hear the Sea Island influence group, specifically Ken Griffin, saying the two priorities for control of the Republican Club involve, (1) eliminating populism in the ranks; and (2) realigning with multinational corporate objectives (vis a vis Wall Street), what they are publicly expressing is their RNC corporate need to get rid of the America First economic agenda; to get rid of the MAGA influence.
How has this historically surfaced?
Well, at a national level there is a unique policy priority that almost every politician, on both sides, will avoid discussing. At a national level a single policy priority determines all other national policy outlooks. That policy is the national economic policy.
The national economic policy of a presidential candidate determines all other national policies that flow from the presidential candidate. The national economic policy impacts the obvious policies like energy and trade, and also determines the lesser obvious policies like regulation and even foreign policy.
It is specifically because a candidate’s national economic outlook impacts all other issues, that most national politicians never talk about it.
It would be impossible to support Main Street USA, a popular talking point, and still support the Paris Climate Treaty, the Transpacific Trade Partnership (TPP) or the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
To avoid the contradictions, most Democrat and Republican politicians avoid discussing their national economic policy. It is an unspoken rule within the billionaire club and donor game, an economic code of omerta amid most political candidates.
President Trump broke the rule and even went so far as to campaign on an America First economic policy agenda. That core outlook forms the Make America Great Again foundation. MAGA is based on a national economic policy outlook that determines every other national policy as carried by President Trump.
While most Americans may not be able to articulate how the national economic policy impacts them, almost every American feels the consequences through gasoline prices, energy prices, employment, wage rates and the expenses within their everyday lives. To try and hide this reality, often media and economic analysts will say the U.S. President has no control over gasoline prices; however, this is unequivocally false.
Yes, it is true that oil prices are determined by the global market for the product, the supply and the demand. However, the energy policy of the president determines the domestic investment in natural resource development and extraction by oil companies. The energy policy determines domestic supply. The regulatory policy determines the expansion, or lack therein, of oil and gasoline refinery capacity. So yes, it is ultimately the U.S President who determines gasoline prices indirectly through energy and regulatory policy.
If this were not the case, then gasoline would cost nearly the same in almost every nation. It doesn’t. Right now, gasoline in Mexico is almost $1 less than gasoline in the United States, specifically because Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador is not trying to reduce oil resource investment, development and/or gasoline refinery capacity.
President Trump was the first presidential candidate who campaigned on a domestic national economic policy. He even went one step further and stated the T-word, tariffs. Yes, the commerce department holds tools to support a national economic policy.
The tariff tool is another aspect to national economics that most politicians avoid discussing because the toolbox is counter to the interests of Wall Street, multinational corporations and hedge fund managers.
For a reference point you might remember the apoplectic fits from financial and economic punditry to President Trump’s 2017 and 2018 steel and aluminum tariffs.
Economic security is determined by national economic policy. National security is also an outcome of national economic policy. Again, President Trump was also the first modern president to put that outlook to work when he said, “economic security is national security,” and then began constructing a foreign policy agenda using the cornerstone of national economic policy. The result was quite remarkable and led to what eventually became the Trump Doctrine.
It was inherently the US national economic policy that underpinned President Trump challenging NATO to meet their financial obligations. It was national economic policy that drove trade policy and created the north American USMCA trade agreement. It was national economic policy that led to countervailing duties on Chinese and European imports. Which had the remarkable effect of actually lowering prices inside the United States.
We began importing deflation through lower priced goods as the value of the dollar increased and China/EU central banks devalued their currency to avoid the impact of tariffs. Asia and the EU also subsidized their export manufacturing with incentives in order to lower costs as an offset to the tariffs, while simultaneously Asian and European companies began investing in production facilities inside the U.S. as a long-term approach to retaining access to the U.S. market. To put it succinctly, this was MAGAnomics at work.
U.S. wages increased, U.S. job growth increased, U.S. energy prices dropped with increased energy development and a massive cut in regulations, and that in turn lowered the cost of domestic goods. Suddenly we were importing goods at lower prices and generating goods internally at lower prices. More MAGAnomic outcomes, which, not coincidentally, was the exact opposite of all Wall Street claims and predictions.
Making America Great Again, was an outcome of national economic policy. At its core, MAGA is a national economic dynamic within a political movement that is represented by President Donald J Trump.
It is critical to understand, the MAGA economic policy is essentially a national policy completely, and uniquely, under the control of the office of the President. The impact to the lives of Americans is a direct outcome from national economic policy. If a president wants to lead an independently wealthy country, he/she applies a very specific economic outlook to all other policy areas including energy, regulation and foreign policy.
It is also true that opposition to President Donald Trump is uniquely connected to the America-First economic agenda.
Multimillion-dollar lobbyist firms like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable, along with dozens of economically established SuperPAC’s funded by Wall Street and multinational corporations, are vehemently opposed to the America-First economic agenda.
All of the national politicians and political candidates taking money from these aforementioned groups necessarily bind themselves to a position that stands against the America-First economic agenda.
In essence, if you take money from the multinationals you cannot deliver on MAGA economic outcomes for banking, trade, finance etc. And that’s exactly where we run into the problem.
Because MAGA national economic priorities conflict with the multinational corporations, hedge funds and the Wall Street donor class, all of the politicians who accept the influence checks from these self-interested groups cannot run on, or deliver, a MAGA national economic agenda.
At a local, county and state level you have direct impact on the political policy agenda in your community. Who you elect to the city council, school board, state house and senate as well as governor’s office has an impact on those local and state priorities. However, national economic policy, national energy and trade policy and national foreign policy are not under your control.
As a result, the same skillset, or policy outlook, that makes a governor a successful state politician doesn’t carry into a federal office, [see the example of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker]. Yes, there are some executive and administration skills that carry over; however, on the bigger issue of steering the national policy agenda, almost every candidate for office comes with the baggage of having accepted donor contributions from a class of people who are paying for economic policy influence.
MAGA cannot be purchased. It is a political outlook that seeks only to enhance the best interests of the American people, regardless of consequence for the multinationals or foreign beneficiaries of globalist U.S. economic policy. Unfortunately, as a result, all of the beneficiaries are aligned to make sure the MAGA economic policy outlook is extinguished. There are literally trillions at stake. This reality underpins the opposition to Donald Trump.
When you understand why the national economic outlook of the President is so important, you can also understand why every political candidate is told not to discuss it by the handlers and campaign managers who are essentially selling their candidate to a millionaire and billionaire donor class who do not want an America-First economic policy agenda.
There is no easy solution for this problem, and ironically this core economic issue is where you find supporters of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump in alignment.
Where the Sanders and Trump camps split is on the solution. Team Sanders wants the government to play the role of economic referee (regulation), while Team Trump wants the government to change the rules of the economic game (countervailing duties, tariffs etc).
Before Donald Trump entered politics there was no home for people voting on the issue of a national economic agenda. Both Democrat and Republican candidates had essentially the same worldview on national economic policy because they are all getting money from the same multinational corporate trough. However, President Trump changed that dynamic by presenting an alternative national economic policy called America-First.
For decades middle America was begging the McConnell’s, Ryans, Boehners, Romney’s, McCain’s, Bushes, et al, to make America First economic policies their priority. All of our shouts for help fell upon deaf political ears plugged by corporate donations and influence. Our communities were literally collapsing around us (see rust belt), and yet no national politician would do anything of consequence.
By the time Donald Trump arrived decades of frustration exploded in an eruption of massive applause because he was articulating the central economic issue that was being ignored by the professional political class. The America First agenda is the restoration agenda. From Trump’s national economic policy, the middle-class erosion stopped. Economic security, specifically U.S. employment stability and wage rates, goes hand in glove with border security and immigration controls.
MAGAnomics is the core of the great MAGA republican coalition, a working-class coalition that cuts through all other distinctions and divisions. It is not republican because of political affiliation, it is “MAGA republican” only because the republican party was the political vehicle selected by Donald Trump to install the policy.
This reality creates a problem for the DC professional political class and the corporate media. Because MAGAnomics is the fundamentally binding principle there is no way to fracture the Trump supporter coalition.
I am a “MAGA Republican” by default of my wanting a national economic agenda that looks out for the economic interests of American’s first.
Donald Trump is the irreplaceable Great MAGA King because Donald Trump is the only one who holds that same outlook. Unfortunately, the Republican corporation does not carry that priority. Thus, the Big Ugly battle for control of the Republican Party is being previewed right now, and will grow in scale and consequence very soon.
Let me emphasize the key point. The Republican Party is not positioning to win the 2024 election.
The people in control of Republican Club do not care who is in the White House, that is a secondary objective. What they care about right now is controlling the Republican corporation and stopping the hostile takeover.
Every single Republican presidential candidate for 2024, sans Trump, will be inserted into the race to help the Republican corporation in this battle. When you see them enter, instead of asking, ‘how can they win‘, ask yourself what is their mission on behalf of the Club priority?
Posted originally on the CTH on March 23, 2023 | Sundance
No one knows for sure what the current issues are around the corrupt political case that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is trying to assemble. However, given all the preparations that are known to have taken place this week, and given the overtime paid to police in order to staff security in/around the Manhattan courthouse this week, something big has shifted and delayed the entire fiasco.
On Thursday morning, CNN was first to report that Alvin Bragg had once against cancelled the grand jury review of the case he was been building against Donald Trump. The grand jury did hear other evidence in unrelated cases, but the case presumably pushing toward a Trump indictment was pushed into next week. President Trump responded to yet another delay via Truth Social:
CNN – The Manhattan grand jury investigating Trump’s alleged role in a scheme to pay hush money to an adult film star will not hear that case when it convenes today, according to two sources familiar with the matter, pushing the Manhattan’s district attorney’s probe into next week. After today, the Manhattan grand jury will next convene on Monday, when it is possible they could hear additional testimony from a witness.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is trying to determine whether to call back Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, to refute the testimony provided earlier this week by lawyer Robert Costello —or to call an additional witness to buttress their case before the grand jurors consider a vote on whether to indict the former president, the source familiar with the investigation said. (read more)
It is entirely possible that Alvin Bragg has lost the case inside the grand jury of 23 people, and there is now reluctance to continue the effort. However, when the scale of the politicization is overlaid against the issue, there doesn’t seem to be a way for DA Bragg to back down and not come under fire from the ideologues in Lawfare that have been advising him.
At this point, the only thing we know with certainty is that the case is a hot mess of nonsense.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America