Marco Rubio Expands on Purposeful Speech to Munich Security Conference


Posted originally on CTH on February 15, 2026 | Sundance

Marco Rubio appears for an interview with John Micklethwait of Bloomberg News. The interview was pre-scheduled as a follow up to the rather historic speech in Munich at the security conference. Within the interview {video and transcript below} Rubio expands on the baseline of the speech, the ‘why‘ is the U.S-EU alliance important.

Beginning with the end in mind, Rubio reminds the interviewer that an alliance must first accept the purpose of the assembly. There are common values and common social components to the relationship that sit at the core of the decision to be allies.

We have a shared civilization based on shared values, and within that central component the Trump administration is staring at the Europeans and saying they have lost focus on these values. Europe is diminishing itself; it is fracturing its culture and has lost its sovereign identity. The United States wants to stay partnered with Europe, but we are not going to be a partner anchored to a collective mindset that has lost its identity.

This culturally Marxist status, a gathering of nations infected with political correctness, pontificating wokeness and apologetic self-flagellation, is the core problem the Europeans are not willing to face. President Trump and Marco Rubio are essentially telling the EU to shake it off, quit being woke, get proud of your heritage, institute political systems that give benefit to the population and regain pride in themselves and their identity.

The process begins with national security, but that is not just about military spending.  Their energy industry needs to support economic independence; they cannot outsource component manufacturing; they need to reestablish economic baselines that are not dependent on Russia, China, India or any other risk vector that could be used to manipulate.

QUESTION:  Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, thank you for talking to Bloomberg.  You’ve just made this rather remarkable speech where you talked about the destiny of Europe and America always being intertwined.  You talked about the alliance which has stretched all the way, culturally, from Michelangelo to the Rolling Stones – a first, I suspect, for a secretary of state – but a culture that has bled and died together.  But the very common theme of your speech was the need to share the burden, the need for Europe and America to do things together, which was slightly different from the Vice President last year.  Were you kind of offering a carrot where perhaps he was offering a stick?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  I think it’s the same message.  I think what the Vice President said last year very clearly was that Europe had made a series of decisions internally that were threatening to the alliance and ultimately to themselves, not because we hate Europe or we don’t like Europeans but because – what is it that we fight for, what is it that binds us together?  And ultimately, it’s the fact that we are both heirs to the same civilization.  And it’s a great civilization and it’s one we should be proud of.  It’s one that’s contributed extraordinarily to the world and it’s one, frankly, upon which America is built, from our language to our system of government to our laws to the food we eat to the name of our cities and towns – all of it deeply linked to this Western civilization and culture that we should be proud of, and it’s worth defending.

And ultimately, that’s the point.  The point is that people – people don’t fight and die for abstract ideas.  They are willing to fight and defend who they are and what matters and is important to them.  And that was the foundation he laid last year in his speech – and we add on into this year – to explain to people that when we come off as urgent or even critical about decisions that Europe has failed to make or made, it is because we care.  It is because we understand that ultimately, our own fate will be intertwined with what happens with Europe.  We want Europe to survive, we want Europe to prosper, because we’re interconnected in so many different ways and because our alliance is so critical.  But it has to be an alliance of allies that are capable and willing to fight for who they are and what’s important.

QUESTION:  You see a parallel – you seem to see a parallel between the Cold War, which I think I would argue that the – America beat the Soviet Union because it had a common idea and it had allies on its side.  You’re now in a struggle with China.  As people say, you’ve often been a hawk on that subject.  You’re in a struggle with China.  Do you think you absolutely need Europe to be able to win that?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Yeah.  I would say two things.  First, the mentions of the Cold War are to remind people of everything we’ve achieved together in the past in times when there was doubt.  I mean, it’s hard to imagine today, but there were those who believed, in the 60s and 70s, even, that at a minimum, we had reached a stalemate, and worse, that perhaps Soviet expansion was inevitable and that we needed to come to accept it.  There were voices that actually argued this.

And so it’s reminding people of what we’ve done together in the past.  But it’s also a reminder that at the end of that era, when we won the Cold War, there was this euphoria that led us to make some terrible decisions that have now left us vulnerable – it deindustrialized the West; it left us increasingly dependent on others, including China, for our critical supplies.  And that needs to be reversed in order to safeguard us.

And so I do think, yes, it would be ideal to have a Western supply chain that is free from extortion from anyone – leave aside China – anybody else.  We should never have to – we should never be in a situation where our alliance and our respective countries are vulnerable to extortion or blackmail because someone controls 99 percent of something that’s critical to national life.  So I think we do have a vested interest in that regard.

Today is different than yesterday, but it has parallels, not in that China’s the new Soviet Union but that in our future, collectively we’ll be stronger if we work on these things together.

QUESTION:  Do you worry from that perspective the fact that, especially in the recent period, various sort of allies – Mark Carney has just been to Beijing, Starmer has just been to Beijing, Merz is about to go there – do you worry that they’re beginning to drift off too much in that direction?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  No.  I think nation-states need to interact with one another.  Just because you’ve – I mean, remember, I serve under a President that’s willing to meet with anybody.

QUESTION:  Yes.

SECRETARY RUBIO:  I mean, to be frank, I’m pretty confident in saying that if the ayatollah said tomorrow he wanted to meet with President Trump, the President would meet him, not because he agrees with the ayatollah but because he thinks that’s the way you solve problems in the world, and he doesn’t view meeting someone as a concession.  Likewise, the President intends to travel to Beijing and has already met once with President Xi.  And in this very forum yesterday, I met with my counterpart, the foreign minister of China.

So we expect nation-states to interact with one another.  In the end, we expect nation-states to act in their national interest.  I don’t think that is – that in no way runs counter to our desire to work together on things that we share in common or threats we face in common.  But I don’t think visiting Beijing or meeting with the Chinese is – on the contrary, I think it would be irresponsible for great powers not to have relationships and talk through things and, to the extent possible, avoid unnecessary conflict.

But there will be areas we’ll never agree on, and those are the areas that I hope we can work together on.

QUESTION:  So you think the Russia that many people have spoken about is illusory, that hasn’t happened yet?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, there’s no – I mean, even as I speak to you now, there are U.S. troops deployed here on this continent on behalf of NATO.  There are still all kinds of cooperation that go on at every level; from intelligence to commercial and economic, the links remain.  I think there is a readjustment that’s happening, because I think we have to understand that we want to reinvigorate – this alliance has to look different because the world looks different.  This alliance has to be about different things than it’s been in the past because the challenges of the 21st century are different than the challenges of the 20th.  The world has changed and the alliance has to change.

But the fundamental thing that has to change is we have to remind ourselves of why it is we have an alliance in the first place.  This is not just a military arrangement.  This is not just some commercial arrangement.  It is what holds us together in the first place as an alliance is our shared civilizational values, the fact that we are all heirs to a common civilization and one we should be very proud of.  And only after we recognize that and make that the core of why it is we’re allies in the first place can we then build out all the mechanics of that alliance.  And then everything else we do together makes more sense.

QUESTION: The place where that’s being most obviously tested at the moment is Ukraine  You see all these numbers from the front where the Ukrainians do seem to be doing better in terms of what’s happening with the Russians.  Do you think Ukraine – or do you think Russia is still winning that war, or where you do you – where do you place it militarily?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  I think that’s a difficult war to say anyone is winning.  The Russians are losing seven to eight thousand soldiers a week – a week.

QUESTION:  Yes —

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Not wounded – dead.  Ukraine has suffered extraordinary damage, including overnight, and again, to its energy infrastructure.  And it will take billions of dollars and years and years to rebuild that country.  So I don’t think anyone can claim to be winning it.  I think that both sides are suffering tremendous damage, and we’d like to see the war come to an end.  It’s a senseless war in our view.  The President believes that very deeply.  He believes the war would have never happened had he been president at the time.

So we’re doing two things.  Obviously we continue – look, we don’t provide arms to Russia; we provide arms to Ukraine.  We don’t sanction Ukraine; we sanction Russia.  But at the same time, we find ourselves in the unique position of serving as probably the only nation on Earth that can bring the two sides to discuss the potential for ending this war on negotiated terms.  And it’s an obligation we haven’t – we won’t walk away from because we think it’s a very unique one to have.

It may not come to fruition, unfortunately.  I hope it does, and I think there are days when I feel more optimistic about it than others.  But we’re going to keep trying because that is – in the end, this war will not be solved militarily.  It will be – in the end, it will come to a negotiated settlement.  We’d like to see that happen as soon as possible.

QUESTION:  Are you worried that if Ukraine loses the war it’s going to be a disaster for the transatlantic relationship?  Because the Americans will say the Europeans didn’t provide enough arms, and Europeans will look and remember the meeting in the White House and Zelenskyy and Trump, and they will blame (inaudible).

SECRETARY RUBIO:  No, but that – that would ignore reality.  Look, Ukraine – first of all, they deserve a lot of credit.  They have fought very bravely.  They have received an extraordinary amount of support from the United States to the tune of billions of dollars that preexist the war.  In fact, Ukraine probably wouldn’t have survived the early days of the war had it not been for American aid that came to them even before the war had started with the Javelin missile that disabled the tank (inaudible).

QUESTION:  I wasn’t saying it was fair.  I was just saying there’s a – you have to deal with perceptions.

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, I mean people are saying – no, but I’m not worried about that because I can tell you that I think history will understand it.  But I don’t think the war is going to end in a traditional loss in the way people think.  I don’t think it’s possible for Russia to even achieve whatever initial objectives they had at the beginning of this war.  I think now it’s largely narrowed down to their desire to take 20 percent of Donetsk that they don’t currently possess.

And that’s hard.  It’s a hard concession for Ukraine to make for obvious reasons, both from a tactical standpoint and also from a political one.  And so that’s kind of where this thing has narrowed, and we’ll continue to search for ways to see if there is a solution to that unique problem that’s acceptable to Ukraine and that Russia will also accept.  And it may not work out, but we are going to do everything we can to see if we can find a deal.

Like I said, there are days like last week where you felt we had made some pretty substantial progress.  But ultimately, we have to see a final resolution to this to feel that it’s been worth the work, but we’re going to keep trying.  And our negotiator, Steve Witkoff – now Jared Kushner’s involved – have dedicated a tremendous amount of time to this, and they’ll have meetings again on Tuesday in regards to this.

QUESTION:  What about a country with which you’ve had a long interest: Cuba?  You mentioned it obliquely in the speech talking about the Cuban Missile Crisis.  How long do you think the regime can last without oil?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Yeah, I think the regime in Cuba is – look, the revolution in Cuba ended a long time ago and – Cuba’s fundamental problem is that it has no economy and its economic model is one that has never been tried and has never worked anywhere else in the world, okay?  It just – it doesn’t have a real economic policy.  It doesn’t have a real economy.

Now, forget – put aside for a moment the fact that it has no freedom of expression, no democracy, no respect for human rights.  The fundamental problem Cuba has it is has no economy, and the people who are in charge of that country, in control of that country, they don’t know how to improve the everyday life of their people without giving up power over sectors that they control.  They want to control everything.  They don’t want the people of Cuba to control anything.

So they don’t know how to get themselves out of this.  And to the extent that they have been offered opportunities to do it, they don’t seem to be able to comprehend it or accept it in any ways.  They would much rather be in charge of the country than allow it to prosper.

QUESTION:  Is there any kind of off-ramp for the regime?  I mean, previous ones – when you negotiated with Venezuela, you said if they agreed with various things it would be possible to continue.

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Sure.  I mean, there is.  I mean, look, I think you have to —

QUESTION:  What could – what could the Cuban regime do to —

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, I’m not going to tell you or announce this in an interview here because obviously these things require space and time to do in the right way.  But I will say this, that that is that it is important for the people of Cuba to have more freedom, not just political freedom but economic freedom.  The people of Cuba – and that’s what this regime has not been willing to give them because they’re afraid that if the people of Cuba can provide for themselves, they lose control over them, they lose power over them.

So I think there has to be that opening and it has to happen, and I think now Cuba is faced with such a dire situation.  Remember this is a regime that has survived almost entirely on subsidies – first from the Soviet Union, then from Hugo Chavez, and how for the first time it has no subsidies coming in from anyone, and the model has been laid bare.

And it’s not just – look, multiple countries have gone in and helped, but the problem is that you lose money in Cuba.  They never pay their bills.  They never end up paying.  It never ends up working out.  There were European countries that went to Cuba and made what they thought were investments in certain sectors, only to have them – the contracts canceled and get themselves kicked out because the Cuban regime has no fundamental understanding of what business and industry looks like, and the people are suffering as a result of it.

So I think certainly their willingness to begin to make openings in this regard is one potential way forward.  I would also say – and this has not been really talked about a lot, but the United States has been providing humanitarian assistance directly to the Cuban people via the Catholic Church.  We did it after the hurricane.  We actually just recently announced an increase in the amount we’re willing to give.  And that’s something we’re willing to continue to explore, but obviously that’s not a long-term solution to the problems on the island.

QUESTION:  One last thing: Iran.  You’ve just sent a carrier – a second carrier – there.  Is that – and President Trump has talked about a month to give people time.  Are you running out of patience there?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, I’d say twofold.  Number one is I think it’s pretty clear that Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon, that that poses a threat not just to the United States, to Europe, to world security, and to the region.  There’s no doubt about it.

The second is we obviously want to have forces in the region because Iran has shown the willingness and the capability to lash and strike out at the United States presence in the region.  We have bases because of our alliances in the region, and Iran has shown in the past that they are willing to attack us and/or threaten our bases.  So we have to have sufficient firepower in the region to ensure that they don’t make a mistake and come after us and trigger something larger.

Beyond that, the President has said that his preference is to reach a deal with Iran.  That’s very hard to do, but he’s going to try.  And that’s what we’re trying to do right now, and Steve Witkoff and Jared have some meetings lined up fairly soon.  We’ll see if we can make any progress.

The President would always prefer to end problems with a deal.  He would always prefer that, so we’re going to give it a chance here again and see if it works.

QUESTION:  Secretary Marco Rubio, thank you very much for talking to Bloomberg.

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Thank you.  Thank you.

[End Transcript]

Thomas Massie Accuses Four Random, Innocent Men of Being Pedophiles and Sex Traffickers, Because Their Names Appeared in Epstein Files


Posted originally on CTH on February 14, 2026 | Sundance

Political operatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna have never mentioned the name Katheryn Ruemmler despite her name appearing thousands of times in emails within the Epstein files.   Yet both Massie and Khanna went out of their way to publicly claim they forced the DOJ to release the names of four men they accused of being sex traffickers and pedophiles.

Massie was very proud of his efforts to discover the names and force the DOJ to unredact them.  As Massie proclaimed, continuously: if President Trump and the DOJ did not publicly unredact the names, it would be proof that President Trump and the DOJ were protecting pedophiles and sex traffickers.

After holding their joint press conference, Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna then went to the House of Representatives to proclaim (1) Salvatore Nuara, (2) Zurab Mikeladze, (3) Leonid Leonov and (4) Nicola Caputo were sexual deviants, pedophiles and much worse. They were horrible men who had abused underage girls.

…. Except, there was a problem. A BIG PROBLEM.

Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonid Leonov and Nicola Caputo had absolutely nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein or anything even remotely associated with Jeffrey Epstein. [SEE HERE]

The names Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonid Leonov and Nicola Caputo were in the Epstein files because they were random pictures of men, random passport pictures, used in a photo lineup during questioning of one of Epstein’s victims.

Thanks to the ‘HE’S A WITCH” hunting efforts of Massie and Khanna, four random guys who never new anything about the DOJ or the FBI, or Jeffrey Epstein or anything else even remotely in that orbit, were labeled as sex criminals and horrific people.

Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonid Leonov, and Nicola Caputo did not know they were in the Epstein files and did not know their pictures were ever used by the FBI.  Their random passport photographs were used in an FBI lineup to question witnesses, that’s it. But thanks to Ro Khanna and the political efforts of Thomas Massie, they were wrongly labeled.

Khanna and Massie now claim it’s not their fault.  If the DOJ had just redacted the names of the innocent men, there never would have been a problem.  Except, that’s the problem… They were innocent and their names were redacted because they were innocent; but that wasn’t good enough for Massie and Khanna who used the redactions as evidence of a cover-up, and when the redactions were forcibly removed, Massie and Khanna now claim the names should have been redacted.

Inquisitor Massie: We should dunk her, if she floats, she is a witch, if she drowns, she is innocent!

Thomas Massie’s objective with his lead position on the Epstein stuff, is to defeat MAGA and return control of the Republican party to the professional Republican elites (GOPe/Bush clan).

This is the same Sea Island agenda. They are actively working to best position their preferred and controlled leader, Ron DeSantis. If the GOPe get DeSantis moved into position, they will regain control. The problem is MAGA.

The useful Republicans are exploiting the Epstein stuff to accomplish this objective. Simultaneously, they are promoting as much division as possible (Israel vs Qatar) in order to fracture the MAGA assemblies. It’s structurally easy to see it, when you understand the goal.

Ask yourself this basic, commonsense question: If you tear down President Donald Trump, who benefits?

There’s your answer to that sense; to that sensibility trying to reconcile questions; to the intuition you have.

BLS Report – January Inflation from Tariffs Non-Existent, Core Inflation Lowest Since 2021


Posted originally on CTH on February 13, 2026 | Sundance

The pundits, economists and financial media are shocked, perplexed, befuddled and flummoxed.  The Bureau of Labor and Statistics has released the January inflation data [SEE HERE] and the results are much better than they expected.

Overall inflation is 2.4% year-over-year, and there are zero indications that tariffs are having any impact on consumer prices [See Apparel].

[DATA LINK]

CORE inflation, which removes food and energy, comes in at 2.5% year-over-year, the lowest number since March 2021. This is like reliving 2018 all over again, when the pundits proclaimed with absolute certainty that Trump’s tariff approach was going to cause inflation; it never happened.

VIA ABC – Inflation cooled in January, dropping price increases to their lowest level in nine months, new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed. The lower-than-expected reading defied fears of a tariff-induced hike in overall costs.

Prices rose 2.4% in January compared to a year earlier, according to the Consumer Price Index.

The data arrived days after fresh hiring figures showed stronger-than-expected job growth in January, even though an updated estimate released at the same time indicated a near-paralysis of the labor market last year. (read more)

While it is likely prices will never reset to the 2021 levels, at least right now we have wages growing faster than inflation, which essentially nulls the inflationary impact within the economy.

The Subject was Kushner – More Details Surface About Subject of Intel Gossip Underneath Ridiculous Whistleblower Claim Against DNI


Posted originally on CTH on February 13, 2026 | Sundance

It’s a strange time within the Intelligence Community. You can tell it’s all in flux when you see the New York Times giving a version of the story that is positive toward DNI Tulsi Gabbard, and the Wall Street Journal continuing with debunked/fake information still trying to get DNI Tulsi Gabbard removed.

The New York Times version appears to be the most truthful, factual and cited. It also makes the most sense.

In essence, two foreign nationals were having a phone call about Iran and discussing Jared Kushner’s role and influence in the policy of Trump toward Iran. The phone call was intercepted by a foreign intelligence agency, who then relayed their interpretation of the discussion to the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

NEW YORK TIMES – […] It was a discussion last year between two foreign nationals about Iran, not an unusual topic for American spies to study. But an intercept of that communication, collected by a foreign spy service and given to the United States.

[…] Mr. Kushner’s name was redacted in the original report from the National Security Agency, but people reading it, including the whistle-blower, were able to determine that the reference was to him.

[…] The foreign nationals, they said, were commenting on Mr. Kushner’s influence with the Trump administration. At a time last year when Mr. Kushner’s role in Middle East peace talks was less public than it is now, the foreign officials were recorded saying that he was the person to speak to in order to influence the talks.

[…] The intercept also included what officials described as “gossip” or speculation about Mr. Kushner that was not supported by other intelligence.

[…] The whistle-blower report was based on a telephone intercept provided to the N.S.A. from a foreign intelligence service. Intercepts are notoriously difficult to interpret. 

[…] The whistle-blower, an intelligence official whose identity has not been publicly disclosed, said Ms. Gabbard’s actions improperly limited who could see the report.

[…] Some administration critics, who have reviewed the report and have considered the underlying intelligence to be significant, also agreed that Ms. Gabbard did not act improperly by restricting distribution of the report. (more)

Democrats (administration critics) agreed that DNI Gabbard did not act improperly.

If it was possible to tell the identity of the U.S. person (aka Kushner) simply by reading the intel report, and this report is simply gossip by two other people talking about a U.S. person, then yes, duh – the report should be secured and not spread.

This story becomes more of a nothingburger each time new information is leaked.

President Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin Announce Reversal of Green Energy Climate Mandates


Posted originally on CTH on February 12, 2026 | Sundance 

The Obama-Biden administration couldn’t get the votes needed in Congress to amend the Clean Air Act and regulate “greenhouse gases.” So, they both decided to ignore the law and create trillions in regulatory costs on the American people.

As noted by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, “The Trump Admin is proudly following the law, saving $1.3 TRILLION for the American people, lowering new car costs by over $2,400 per vehicle, and getting rid of the climate participation trophy for manufacturers to install Obama Switches that shut vehicles off at red lights and stop signs.” WATCH:

.

Media questions begin at 19:31.

Ellison Scalp? DOJ Antitrust Head Departs, Possibly Fired


Posted originally on CTH on February 12, 2026 | Sundance

Asst Attorney General Gail Slater was the head of the Antitrust Division of the Dept of Justice.  Today she announces she has “left her role.”  CNN is reporting that AAG Slater was fired.

Gail Slater was in charge of the antitrust division and a hawk on the mergers and acquisitions of Big Tech and Big Corporate media.  As head of the DOJ Antitrust Division, Slater’s view on competition was against the interests of the major Big Tech billionaires and corporate media conglomerates who intersect with them.

Slater was in a position to influence the Warner Brothers-Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount (David Ellison) is trying to stop.

If you have followed the influence of Larry Ellison (Oracle, TikTok) and his son David Ellison (Paramount, CBS) in/around the Trump administration as it relates to Elon Musk (a beneficiary of Ellison), then the timing of Gail Slater’s removal doesn’t look good at all.

Gail Slater came into the administration as a part of the JD Vance network (Peter Thiel, Palantir, etc.), and it looks like that same Vance network stood aside and watched Larry Ellison leverage his position to see her removed.

Slater was a solid MAGA voice in a critical Antitrust position against the interests of Big Tech and Big Corp.  However, I said on Christmas Day 2024 – we were likely to be very disappointed by the influence of Big Tech/Big Corp in the White House {SEE HERE}.

[SOURCE]

Via CNN[…] Slater said in her Thursday post on X: “It is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as AAG for Antitrust today. It was indeed the honor of a lifetime to serve in this role.”

The anti-trust division is expected to play a critical role in assessing Netflix’s Warner Brothers Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount is trying to stop by appealing straight to shareholders with its own bid. (CNN is owned by Warner Brothers Discovery.)

In an NBC interview last week, Trump said, “I’ve decided I shouldn’t be involved. The Justice Department will handle it.” But Paramount CEO David Ellison returned to the White House last week to meet privately with Trump, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN. (read more)

There may be something else in the background that we do not understand.  However, when former lobbyists and political consultants become key administration officials (Wiles, Bondi) these types of outcomes are possible.

Texas Judges Strategizing Ways to Block DHS From Enforcing Immigration Laws


Posted originally on CTH on February 11, 2026 | Sundance

This is one step further than simple Lawfare, this story is about lower court judges openly strategizing ways to stop the enforcement of laws they are supposed to uphold.

Last week the Fifth Circuit Cout of Appeals ruled that detaining illegal aliens during the deportation proceedings is entirely following current immigration law [SEE HERE]. Now, according to Politico, federal judges in Texas are openly strategizing ways to work around that higher court ruling and keep giving bond releases to illegal aliens under the guise of “liberty interest.”

POLITICO – […] two federal district court judges in Texas, who are bound by the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit’s ruling, said the 2-1 decision left an opening for them to continue granting immigrants’ release on other grounds, primarily constitutional arguments against detaining people who have established roots in the U.S. without due process. Those roots amount, in legal parlance, to a “liberty interest” that the Constitution says cannot be taken away without at least a hearing before a neutral judge.

“This conclusion is not changed by the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision,” Judge Kathleen Cardone, an El Paso based appointee of George W. Bush, ruled late Monday in at least five cases, concluding that the circuit’s decision “has no bearing on this Court’s determination of whether [the petitioner] is being detained in violation of his constitutional right to procedural due process.”

Judge David Briones, an El Paso-based Clinton appointee, reached a similar conclusion.

“The Court reiterates its original holding that noncitizens who have ‘established connections’ in the United States by virtue of living in the country for a substantial period acquire a liberty interest in being free from government detention without due process of law,” Briones wrote.

The decisions from the Texas-based judges are notable in part because the administration has often rushed detainees there after their arrests in other states such as Minnesota.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Justice Department official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said the rulings were in keeping with the view that there are rogue judges who continue to make results-oriented decisions to suit their personal policy preferences.

The 5th Circuit’s ruling has yet to percolate through federal courts across Texas and Louisiana, where detained immigrants have been filing so-called “habeas” petitions in extraordinary numbers to seek freedom from what they say is illegal detention without the opportunity for bond. The losing parties in Friday’s ruling may still appeal the decision to the full bench of the 5th Circuit or the Supreme Court. (more)

Lower courts trying to circumvent higher court rulings, even before any plaintiff brings them a case or argument.

This is judicial activism in the extremes.

Thirty Years Later Thomas Massie Discovers Victoria’s Secret Founder Les Wexner Was Business Associate of Jeffrey Epstein


Posted originally on CTH on February 11, 2026 | Sundance

I said Monday on Twitter: “Seriously. Correct me if I’m wrong. For more than a decade we have known that billionaire Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the originating money man behind Jeffrey Epstein.

This should not be some kind of revelation, as it was widely discussed by those who researched Epstein over a decade ago. Wexner’s money was the originating capital for what would later become Epstein’s influence empire.

Additionally, and again, stop me if this old news is incorrect, well over a decade ago it became openly known that the “PINK” brand of Victoria’s Secret was specifically created due to the sexuality of young girls becoming part of the marketing influence of Epstein.

Wexner created the original VS girls, and the influence of Epstein (underage sexual perversions) then led to the adding of the VS “PINK” sub-brand.

Are we supposed to understand this is all new information? Honest question. No snark. I’m just confused by this sudden newness of it. We been knew.”

The above VH1 segment was from 2007; however, even ten years prior to that it was commonly known that Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the source of most of Jeffrey Epstein’s start-up finances. The resulting social network was fraught with sexual weirdos, and the VS brand alignment just fit with the club.

Suddenly, Representative Thomas Massie, a Sea Island asset if ever there was one, is proclaiming the Epstein file information outlining the relationship with Wexner is new information, stunning in scope and worthy of extraordinary time to explore.  It’s all weird.

VIA NBC – […] The newly released version of the 2019 document shows eight people are listed as co-conspirators, including four whose names are not redacted: Wexner, the former CEO of Victoria’s Secret, Lesley Groff, Epstein’s longtime secretary, the late modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, and Ghislaine Maxwell, the only person who was charged in connection with Epstein. She was convicted of sex trafficking charges and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

Four other names on the document are still redacted. It’s unclear who those people are but prosecutors have said that Epstein used women he preyed on as recruiters. A separate document dated August 2019 indicated that some of the others were victims as well, and had been cooperating with investigators.

A Wexner legal representative said in a statement to NBC News Tuesday that “The Assistant U.S. Attorney told Mr. Wexner’s legal counsel in 2019 that Mr. Wexner was neither a co-conspirator nor target in any respect. Mr. Wexner cooperated fully by providing background information on Epstein and was never contacted again.”

Wexner had a long relationship with Epstein that dated back to the 1980s, and hired him to manage his personal finances. He’s said he cut ties to Epstein after he was accused of sexually abusing minors in Florida. It was after that Wexner said he “discovered that he had misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family.”

Wexner’s name was also mentioned in a July 2019 FBI email about possible co-conspirators that was made public as part of the DOJ release. Another August 2019 FBI email said there was “limited evidence regarding his involvement.”

He is scheduled to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee next week. (more)

The first time I heard the information about Wexner and Epstein was sometime in the mid 1990’s.  It was well known.

There is a lot of horrible, creepy and perverted stuff in the Epstein file releases that is factually new information.  However, the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Les Wexner is not new. Perverse, yes -as it was even then; but not new.  There were even documentaries about it, one of them I think was called “Angels and Demons“.

.

Maybe it wasn’t as widely known as I thought?

School Shooting in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia Leaves 10 Killed, Including Shooter – The “Gender” of Shooter Creating Angst


A horrific school shooting in Canada has resulted in the death of 10 people. Seven people at the school, two people in a residence nearby and the shooter. The details are starting to come out, but for some reason there is a concerning aspect to the “gender” of the shooter.

The Associated Press describes the situationVANCOUVER, British Columbia (AP) — A shooting at a school in British Columbia left eight dead including a woman whom police believe to be the shooter, while two more people were found dead at a nearby home, Canadian authorities said Tuesday.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police said more than 25 people are injured, including two who were airlifted to hospital with life-threatening injuries, after the shooting at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School.” (more)

BBC SUMMARIZESPolice say an attacker killed nine people before taking their own life on Tuesday. – Six victims were found dead inside Tumbler Ridge Secondary school, while a seventh person died on the way to hospital. The body of the attacker was also found at the school. – Two more people were found dead inside a residence nearby. – Police described the suspect as a “female in a dress with brown hair” in an active shooter alert sent to the community. – At least two other people were taken to hospital with serious or life-threatening injuries following the attack, and as many as 25 people were being treated for non-life-threatening injuries, police said. – Canada’s Prime Minister, Mark Carney, said he is “devastated” by the shooting and that his government “stands with all British Columbians as they confront this horrible tragedy.” – The PM cancelled his upcoming trip to the Munich Security Conference in response to the shooting. (link)

If this information is correct and the shooter was a trans, I can only imagine the level of political correctness that will follow from Canada about the shooting.

Canada is the global woke central. February 11, 2026 | Sundance

FBI Release Images of Suspect in Disappearance of Nancy Guthrie


Posted originally on CTH on February 10, 2026 | Sundance February 10, 2026 | Sundance

Nancy Guthrie disappeared in the middle of night from her Tucson, Arizona, home and was last seen on 31 January. Authorities believe she was taken against her will.

NBC narrative engineer Savannah Guthrie said on Monday that her family believes their mother is still alive and issued a new appeal to anyone with information.

The FBI have released images of a masked person in the hunt for news anchor Savannah Guthrie’s mother. Officials are seeking to identify the individual, who they say was armed, shortly before 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie disappeared from her home.

“The FBI is offering a reward of up to $50,000 for information leading to the recovery of Nancy Guthrie and/or the arrest and conviction of anyone involved in her disappearance. New images released today show an armed individual appearing to have tampered with the camera at Nancy Guthrie’s front door the morning of her disappearance. The FBI seeks information that will lead to the identity of this individual” [FBI RELEASE]

FBI Director Kash Patel: “Over the last eight days, the FBI and Pima County Sheriff’s Department have been working closely with our private sector partners to continue to recover any images or video footage from Nancy Guthrie’s home that may have been lost, corrupted, or inaccessible due to a variety of factors – including the removal of recording devices. The video was recovered from residual data located in backend systems.

Working with our partners – as of this morning, law enforcement has uncovered these previously inaccessible new images showing an armed individual appearing to have tampered with the camera at Nancy Guthrie’s front door the morning of her disappearance.

Anyone with information, please contact 1-800-CALL-FBI

[SOURCE]