Tag Archives: JD Vance

Dec 17 2025

JD Vance Gives Strong Defense of Susie Wiles


Posted originally on CTH on December 16, 2025 | Sundance

Vice President JD Vance was questioned about White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles calling Vance a conspiracy theorist.

Vance embraces the conspiracy label, defines how accurate it is, then delivers a strong set of remarks in defense of Susie Wiles.  WATCH: 

The overall remarks themselves are not terribly toxic to the White House, but the question of why a chief of staff would sit down for eleven interviews over 11 months with Vanity Fair remains rather curious.

What exactly did Susie Wiles expect was going to happen with all those recorded interviews?

Dec 16 2025

JD Vance Points Out the Consequence of the Senate “Blue Slip” Veto of Judicial Nominees


Posted originally on CTH on December 15, 2025 | Sundance 

The blue slip process has been a part of the Senate’s judicial nomination procedure since at least 1917. When a President nominates an individual for a U.S. circuit or district court judgeship, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee sends a blue slip —a form colored blue— to the two Senators representing the nominee’s home state. This form allows the Senators to express their opinions about the nominee.

Positive Response: If a home-state Senator has no objections, they return the blue slip with a positive response, indicating support for the nominee. Negative Response or Withholding: If a Senator objects, they may either return the slip with a negative response or choose not to return it at all. In both cases, this is treated as a lack of support for the nominee, which halts the nomination process.

JD Vance notes this process is being used to manipulate the appointments of Judges in leftist states.  This creates a dual justice system; one of the core issues within our extremely divided nation.

[SOURCE]

JD Vance is not wrong.  However, as with all things corrupted within the state of our Republic, if the blue slip process is removed the next leftist President can corrupt the judiciary within Republican states.

Of course, all of this is an outcome of the 17th Amendment, which stopped the state legislatures from having control over their senators.  Under the original constitutional framework, the Senate was designed to represent the interests of the state, as the Senators were appointed by state legislature, not popular votes.  The Sea Island assembly destroyed this cornerstone when they triggered the 17th Amendment.

Repeal the 17th Amendment, and just about everything in federal government changes.

Machiavelli said, “It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”  A prescient and oft repeated quote that is pertinent to the situation.

When our founders created the system of government for our constitutional republic, they built in layers of protection from federal control over the lives of people in the states.  Over time, those protections have been eroded as the federal bureaucracy has seized power.  One of the biggest changes that led to the creation of the permanent political class was the 17th Amendment.

Our founders created a system where Senators were appointed by the state legislatures.  In this original system, the Senate was bound by obligation to look out for the best interests of their specific states.  Under the ‘advise and consent‘ rules of Senate confirmation for executive branch appointments, the intent was to ensure the presidential appointee -who would now carry out regulatory activity- would not undermine the independent position of the states.

The nucleus of corruption amid every element of the federal institutions of government is the United States Senate.   The U.S. Senate, also known as the “upper chamber,” is the single most powerful elected element in modern federal government.

The Intelligence Branch is the most powerful branch of government.  However, the U.S. Senate is the most powerful assembly of federally elected officials.  We pretend the IC branch doesn’t exist; that’s part of our problem.  At least we admit the Senate exists.

All other elected federal corruption is dependent on a corrupt and ineffective Senate.  If we correct the problems with the Senate, and reconnect the representation within the chamber to the state-level legislative bodies, we will then see immediate change.  However, there would be ZERO institutional allies in this effort.

When the 17th Amendment (direct voting for Senators) took the place of state appointments, the perspective of ‘advise and consent’ changed.  The Senate was now in the position of ensuring the presidential appointee did not undermine the power of the permanent bureaucracy, which is the root of power for the upper-chamber.

Senate committees, Homeland Security, Judiciary, Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Relations, etc. now consists of members who carry an imbalanced level of power within government.  The Senate now controls who will be in charge of executive branch agencies like the DOJ, DHS, FBI, CIA, ODNI, DoD, State Dept and NSA, from the position of their own power and control in Washington DC.

In essence, the 17th Amendment flipped the intent of the constitution from protecting the individual states to protecting the federal government.

Almost every source of federal issue: ex. spending, intervention and foreign assistance, conflict with the states, burdensome regulation, surveillance and spying on American citizens, the two-tiered justice system and the erosion of liberty & individual rights (see COVID examples), can be sourced back to the problem created by the 17th Amendment.

Because of the scale of their power, the Senate will not give up control easily; and every institution of society and government will actively work to block/stop We The People from taking back control of the upper chamber.  Every entity from Wall Street to multinational corporations, big tech, banks, foreign governments and world organizations would align against us.   When you truly understand the epicenter of the corruption, then you are able to see the tentacles extending from it.

It would be easy to say “repeal the 17th Amendment;“ it is ‘another kettle of fish’ entirely to walk through the process to make that happen.  Yes, ultimately, we do need a full repeal of the 17th Amendment and return the selection of the senators from each state with a nomination and appointment process within the state legislature.  [Common Explainer Here]

Seventeenth Amendment- “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.” (link)

Prior to the 17th Amendment, there was significant state level corruption as business interests, and Senate candidates worked in power groups with party officials to attain the position.  Politicians seeking Senate seats began campaigning for state legislative candidates in order to assemble support.

The state legislative races then became a process of influence amid powerful interests seeking to support their Senate candidate.   Get the right people in the State legislature, and you can get the Senator appointed.

Those state-level entities, bankers, wealthy people of influence, later became the permanent K-Street lobbying groups once the 17th Amendment was ratified. In essence, they just shifted the location of their influence operation from the state to an office in Washington DC.   [Those same power groups, albeit much larger, now write the physical legislation we see in congress.]  Additionally, prior to the 17th Amendment, there were issues of vacancies in federal senate seats as state legislatures could not agree on an individual Senator.

The biggest issue following the passage of the 17th Amendment became Senators who were no longer representing the interests of their state.  Instead, they were representing the interests of the power elite groups who were helping them fund the mechanisms of their re-election efforts.

A Senator only needs to run for re-election every six years.  The 17th Amendment is the only amendment that changed the structure of the Congress, as it was written by the founders.

Over time, the Senate chamber itself began using their advice and consent authority to control the executive and judicial branch.  The origination of a nomination now holds the question: “Can this person pass the Senate confirmation process?”

The Senate now abuses this power to ensure no one challenges them.  Additionally, the Senate began using their oversight capacity to control elements within the executive branch and judicial branch.   The full scope of that issue in modern form is OUTLINED HERE – which is the cornerstone of the Intelligence Branch of Government.

If we could repeal the 17th Amendment and return the selection to the state legislature, you can see where the background work of Tactical Civics and Extreme Federalism begin to take on importance.   [NOTE: Within the repeal effort, we would need to include a recall process for states to reach out and yank back their Senator if they go astray; the ability to recall was missing in the original construct of the framers; it would need to be added.]

◊ PATH ONE is the primary platform of the presidential candidate…. a visible and emphasized mandate that includes: “vote me into office and you are voting to repeal the 17th Amendment “.  This specific election issue would need to be the #1 priority of the candidate and spoken at every event.

This approach gives a presidential candidate the mandate to demand congress to act if he won the 2024 election.  We need a warrior of epic strength, resolve and fortitude.

◊ PATH TWO is the parallel path built along with the election platform path and put into place in the event that Congress refused to accept the mandate.

Obviously, this would be an ugly battle.   The second path is a convention of states. 

The ‘convention of states‘ would need to be detailed, strategically planned, and the future schedule determined during the GOP convention preceding the November election (assuming the right candidate wins).   That way, if Congress refuses to act on their own, within say the first 100 days of the new administration, the state legislatures will then assemble a convention for the singular and limited purpose of one action item: “repeal the 17th Amendment “.  That’s it. Full Stop.  Nothing more. Nothing else entertained.

There is a lot more to this, and a lot more to cover in discussion of this.  However, this is the path that can resolve most of the issues we face with an out-of-control federal government.   The shift in power would kneecap the Intelligence Branch of Government by re-instituting genuine oversight and control. A repeal of the 17th Amendment stops Senators from campaigning, needing to raise money and puts them directly into the accountability position as a steward for the interests of their state.

The people within each state would then have a mechanism to address any negative federal action by contacting their state legislative representative.  In a worst-case scenario, a rogue Senator could be removed within days if they support any federal legislative activity that is not in alignment with the state interest.  This approach also wipes out most of the power amid the Senate Majority Leader, as he/she could also be recalled by the state and would be less likely to work against the interests of the majority in the chamber.

The House of Representatives was created to be the voice of the people, ie, “The Peoples’ House.”  However, the U.S. Senate was structurally created to be the place where state government had representation in the federal government decision-making.  The 17th Amendment completely removed state representation, and we have been in an escalating battle over state’s rights ever since.

Overlay that DC structural issue with the fact that almost all of the bureaucracy created by this skewed DC system is now in place to defend itself from any outside effort to change it, and you get this UniParty problem that Donald Trump fully exposed.

Repeal the 17th Amendment, and we would see the most significant restoration of freedom, liberty and social balance in our lifetime.

Dec 12 2025

A Contrast in American vs British National Security Priorities


Posted originally on CTH on December 11, 2025 | Sundance

Lyndon LaRouche (1922-2019) was a rather eclectic fellow in the world of American politics for several generations. Some of his perspectives were sound and nationalistic, and some of his perspectives slipped into the realm of geopolitical conspiracy theory finding British Imperialism under every rock and blaming Queen Elizabeth II for assassination attempts against him.

Susan Kokinda and Barbara Boyd of Promethean Action continue the LaRouche tradition while smoothing out some of the more outlandish elements the originating political movement was known for. Barbara Boyd is the spokesperson and treasurer of the LaRouche Youth Movement. Boyd’s partner, Susan Kokinda, maintains a belief that eliminating British Imperialism is the objective of President Trump’s America-First policy agenda.  This is where I disagree.

While the outcome of President Trump’s policy does factually lead to the result LaRouche advocated, I strongly doubt “eliminating British imperialism” is the prism through which Donald Trump’s thought process flows.  That said, in the overall picture of American politics, the Kokinda and Boyd analysis of Trump’s opposition is generally accurate.

In their most recent update, Susan Kokinda discusses how President Trump’s recent national security strategy marks a significant departure from over a century of British-influenced American foreign policy.  Their review delves into the geopolitical friction between the U.S. and the UK, particularly regarding their strategies toward Russia and Ukraine.

Mrs. Kokinda underscores the broader clash of worldviews between America-First sovereignty and British-led internationalism, highlighting the latest developments including reactions from Russia and European elites. The episode also examines the opposition Trump faces from both within the U.S. political establishment and British geopolitical strategists and emphasizes the importance of maintaining political support to ensure the success of Trump’s transformative policies.  WATCH:

The divergence between the worldview of the European Union and President Trump is accurately presented as above.  The Ukraine/Russia war serves as a case study in how the two worldviews conflict.  The core of U.K policy and national security strategy continues to view Russia as the biggest threat; the national security outlook by President Trump does not.

On the domestic side of the issue, there are several American elements in direct opposition to the geopolitical trade structure of President Trump.

The Koch PAC seems to have abandoned their use of former South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem since she became President Trump’s Secretary of DHS (Dept of Homeland Security).  Instead, the Koch network is funding Thomas Massie (House) and Rand Paul (Senate) to represent their interests.  MTG is likely to be a beneficiary, and other more traditional GOPe types will also likely benefit from Koch/CoC financing.

Just as the Biden/Obama agenda included the targeting of President Trump for removal (Transition Integrity Project – originating group) in early January 2017, so too did another UniParty stop Trump operation begin in January 2025.  We saw the latest iteration surface in the odd (at the time), narrative surrounding Qatar -vs- Israel.

The ideologically similar GOPe elements within the Sea Island network, tech and traditional Republican party, are all aligned due to opposition to Trump policy. They continue their efforts to divide elements from the larger MAGA network.

The use of the Qatar vs Israel wedge is clear within the billionaire tech/political group, and essentially distillates to 2028 positioning, JD Vance -vs- Ron DeSantis.

As noted by Mrs Kokinda, ultimately the issue boils down to “trillions at stake.”

Dec 10 2025

President Trump Gives Extensive Comments on State of Ukraine-Russia Conflict


Posted originally on CTH on December 9, 2025 | Sundance 

President Trump sat down for an extensive interview with Dasha Burns of Politico.  Despite the ideological outlook of Politico, the interview itself was remarkably absent of combative antagonism. The result is a good review of the current positions of President Trump as they relate to the rest of the world.

The Ukraine-Russia conflict is the immediate issue that is discussed within the interview.  President Trump answers some direct questions about who is currently most responsible for continuing the conflict and is asked his opinion directly on Ukraine not holding elections.

President Trump notes Russian President Vladimir Putin is in the strongest position within the conflict and carries the strongest leverage into any ceasefire negotiations.  Trump also frames the need for the bloodshed to end with a much greater sense of urgency than any of the EU leaders or Zelenskyy.  Additionally sharing the opinion that Ukraine needs to have an election to showcase the will of the Ukrainian people in the leadership of Volodymyr Zelenskyy.  WATCH:

.

Dec 9 2025

Volodymyr Zelensky


Zelenskyy Met with Starmer, Merz and Macron – Now Heading to Brussels

Posted originally on CTH on December 9, 2025 | Sundance | 19 Comments

Yesterday, Ukraine President Volodymr Zelenskyy traveled to London to meet with British PM Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron.

As expected, part of the Zelenskyy meeting with the “coalition of the willing” included a briefing by Ukraine negotiator Rustem Umerov, the secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, who held detailed consultations for three days last week in Miami with Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.

President Zelenskyy then departed London traveling with his media entourage to Brussels for the next round of discussions with the European Union stakeholders, financiers and politicians. During the trip Zelenskyy told his media stenographers, “Under our laws, under international law — and under moral law — we have no right to give anything away. That is what we are fighting for.”

The U.K, France and Germany support Zelenskyy’s position that he is not going to concede any territory to the Russian Federation, specifically the 30% of the Donbas area in Eastern Ukraine currently at the heart of the physical conflict.

The 30% issue surrounds the Donetsk region in Ukraine, which includes the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. Russia is currently pushing deep into fortified Ukraine resistance in this region with a population of around 100,000. Zelenskyy claims losing this area would allow Putin to invade the Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv regions.

Historically, this Donbas area was part of a brutal long-term Ukraine civil war between the pro-Russia eastern Ukrainian citizens and the pro-EU western aligned Ukrainian army. Russia’s current position is for Ukraine to cede the entire Donbas to Russia as part of the ceasefire agreement, or Russia will continue forward conflict military operations until successful.

Seeing things through the pragmatic prism of inevitability, President Trump’s view appears to be that this Donbas area will be lost to Russia one way or the other. So, the best scenario to stop the killing is for Ukraine to give up this territory as part of the ceasefire terms. Zelenskyy, with support of the EU, France, Germany and U.K says a firm “no.”

Politico reports that Zelenskyy said in August of this year “it would take Russia four-years to fully occupy the Donbas,” subsequently a lot of killing would take place during this process.  President Trump is trying to stop the brutal “killing” part of that dynamic by getting the negotiation to the point of concession, but the EU team view any land area concession as positive affirmation for Russia to continue threatening Europe.

♦ On the ‘Security Guarantee‘ issue, this is where a quagmire is presented by European leaders.

From a pragmatic standpoint a European demilitarized zone, stood up and supported by EU military forces would appear to be the best solution.  However, the “coalition of the willing” say they are willing to put security troops into Ukraine, but only if the USA will defend them if attacked by Russia.  In essence, quasi-NATO forces on a non-NATO country, that if attacked would draw the entirety of NATO into the conflict, including the United States.

The U.K, France, Germany and EU Commission want a security structure similar to NATO for Ukraine that legally binds the United States to defend their interests if the ceasefire does not hold.  President Trump has rejected this construct as yet another way for Europe to pull the U.S into a conflict zone that is not in our vital national security interests.

The ceasefire proposal structured by Trump, Witkoff and Kushner – seemingly supported by Russia, does not permit Ukraine to join NATO; however, EU membership is entirely up to the EU and people of Ukraine to decide.  If Ukraine joins the EU, then EU forces alone should provide the security guarantee, not NATO which includes the U.S. and Canada.

(Washington Post) […] Zelensky said Ukraine will not surrender its territory in the eastern Donbas region — not to hasten peace talks, not to satisfy Washington’s push for compromise and not under pressure from Moscow’s continuing military onslaught.

Ukraine and Europe have insisted that a ceasefire be declared along current battle lines, but Russia has refused. Putin has claimed, illegally, to have annexed four entire regions of Ukraine (in addition to Crimea, which Russia seized in 2014) — far more territory than his military forces have been able to occupy.

Some Ukrainian officials held out hope that the negotiations could still bear fruit.

The proposal “is closer to be doable for Ukraine, but not easy and not finished,” said a senior Ukrainian official familiar with recent discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. (read more)

President Zelenskyy, whose term in office has long expired, departed London with his EU media entourage heading to Brussels.  The collective group is trying to figure out how to keep America tied to their stakeholder interests in Ukraine.

The European leaders are manufacturing a construct that is not supported by the vast majority of the citizens within the EU, even within Ukraine itself.  Meanwhile back in the USA, congress (House and Senate majorities) supports the position of Ukraine and the EU against the interests of President Trump and the voting majority.

There are trillions at stake.

The ruling class is supporting Zelenskyy, while the killing of the non-ruling class continues on the fields of Ukraine.

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 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

President Trump Participates in Swearing-In Ceremony for Ambassador Sergio Gor – Media Q&A


Posted originally on CTH on November 10, 2025 | Sundance 

Earlier today President Donald Trump participated in an oval office swearing in ceremony for US Ambassador to India, Sergio Gor.  Ambassador Gor was sworn in by Vice-President JD Vance (prompted) and then President Trump took questions from the assembled press pool (13:41).  WATCH: 

.

Nov 10 2025

Vice President JD Vance Celebrates at the Marine Corps Ball


Posted originally on CTH on November 9, 2025 | Sundance

Vice President JD Vance, the first vice president from the Marine Corps, delivers a 250th anniversary celebratory speech at the Marin Corps Ball.

Vice President Vance recognizes some remarkable members of the audience and shares insight from his time with them and from his time serving in the Marine Corps.  This is a speech filled with massive patriotism and enthusiasm for the spirit of the U.S. military and the Marine forces within it.  WATCH (prompted):

.

 

Nov 2 2025

Vice President JD Vance Discusses the Challenges with the Ukraine-Russia Conflict


Posted originally on CTH on November 1, 2025 | Sundance

Vice President JD Vance appears for a lengthy interview with Miranda Devine to discuss a variety of current issues that have presented themselves to the Trump administration. [Full Video Here]

In the segment below, Vice President Vance talks about the Ukraine-Russia conflict, and the significant challenges dealing with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.  As noted, Zelenskyy was used to getting everything he demanded from the former Biden administration; however, no end to the conflict was present in the prior policy.

President Trump is seeking to end the conflict, and has aligned policy toward that end.  Both President Putin and President Zelenskyy must be willing to engage with each other diplomatically to resolve the issues.  There is no current intention between both of the leaders toward a negotiated settlement.

President Trump has no intention to push U.S. policy into the middle of the conflict between Zelenskyy and Putin. WATCH:

.