Posted originally on the CTH on March 11, 2024 | Sundance
The House Subcommittee on Oversight released a report [SEE HERE] and overview [SEE HERE] highlighting just how political the J6 committee was. The report outlines how Nancy Pelosi structured the J6 committee for political intents, and the longer report showcases the evidence of how Liz Cheney assisted.
WASHINGTON– Today, Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk (GA-11) released his “Initial Findings Report” on the events of January 6, 2021 as well as his investigation into the politicization of the January 6th Select Committee. (more)
The last bullet point has a name. The “Select Committee staff” who met with Fani Willis was likely Mary McCord.
“For nearly two years former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s January 6th Select Committee promoted hearsay and cherry-picked information to promote its political goal – to legislatively prosecute former President Donald Trump,” said Chairman Loudermilk. “It was no surprise that the Select Committee’s final report focused primarily on former President Trump and his supporters, not the security failures and reforms needed to ensure the United States Capitol is safer today than in 2021.
“The American people deserve the entire truth about what caused the violent breach at the United States Capitol of January 6, 2021. It is unfortunate the Select Committee succumbed to their political inclinations and chased false narratives instead of providing the important work of a genuine investigation. In my committee’s investigation, it is my objective to uncover the facts about January 6, without political bias or spin. My report today is just the beginning.” (LINK)
Pay very close attention to these next two citations:
November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)
Then consider:
January 10, 2024 – Georgia prosecutors probing Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election got an early boost in the spring of 2022. It came from another set of investigators who were way ahead of them: the House Jan. 6 select committee.
Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered. (read more)
The “J6 committee staff” that led the conversations with Fani Willis is a person, and that person’s name is Mary McCord. As the lead in the J6 staff effort, there is simply no way to believe the committee staff that met with Fani Willis did not include McCord.
♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.
♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House.
♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.
♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.
♦ McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create.
♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review.
♦ McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed.
♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia.
♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 11, 2024 | Sundance
I’m not knowledgeable enough about all the candidates running for the Senate seat in Michigan, but if the most likely candidates to exit the Republican primary are Justin Amash, Pete Meijer or Mike Rogers, then the ‘hold your nose’ and choose Mike move might make sense. Other than that, Mitch McConnell is likely smiling because Senator Mike Rogers and Senator Adam Schiff will likely be two more arrows in the SSCI ‘Stop Trump’ quiver for 2025.
Former House Intel Chairman Mike Rogers has picked up the endorsement of President Trump; essentially sealing his likelihood to win the Michigan senate primary. Unfortunately, Rogers is very connected to the Deep State intelligence community apparatus. Devin Nunes replaced Rogers after the Michigan representative retired from congress in ’14.
Mike Rogers together with Democrat Rep Dutch Ruppersberger, were infamous for generating the report that defended the CIA and Deep State during the Benghazi aftermath and protecting Hillary Clinton {GO DEEP}. CTH took apart the report that was created by Rogers and Ruppersberger without the other members of the intelligence committee participating.
Annoyingly, Rogers has a long history of helping to assist and create the national security “surveillance state.” SEE HERE and SEE HERE and SEE HERE. Perhaps he has changed in the decade since he was one of the primary advocates for the Deep State and the creation of the 4th branch of government; however, I doubt it.
I also doubt that President Trump was advised about the nature of Mike Rogers and his ideological outlook toward supporting the National Security state. Rogers has a life-long history of supporting the very institutional actors who targeted President Trump, so it’s a little hard to see him supporting President Trump in the second term.
The 2014 Rogers/Ruppersberger Report was specifically designed, by wording, to provide political cover to both parties – Republicans and Democrats within the Gang of Eight particularly included and protected.
It is professional obfuscation in structure, content and wording. Here’s an example: Page #2
This is an excellent paragraph to show how the entire 37 page document is strategically worded.
…” no evidence […] wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement“
This wording intimates that none were signed. Not correct. We know nondisclosures were required. This phrasing simply says none were “wrongly forced“. Where the intelligence community/committee determines rightly and wrongly.
…”or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi“
Again, this doesn’t say that intelligence officials were not polygraphed, only that the auspices for their polygraphs was not a result of their knowledge in Benghazi. Again where the intelligence community (IC) determines the valid auspices.
…”The committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi”…
Parseltongue. The word emphasized is “unauthorized“, meaning all of the activity was known, active, and authorized. As expected, and outlined within The Brief.
…”and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria“.
BIG parseltongue. Note the absence of the word “direct” or “directly“.
Of course we sent arms to Syria, the administration admitted to sending arms to Syria, just not “directly”, which is the keen distinction within the paragraph. This aspect was also critical to include because Hillary Clinton testified to a Rand Paul question about it.
Donald Trump just endorsed the worst Deep State candidate this cycle. @MikeRogersForMI is a never Trumper, and a card carrying member of the spy state that seeks to destroy Trump.
You have to ask yourself who gives Trump this awful advice?
The entire Rogers/Ruppersberger “Panel Report”, which is not to say the report was done by the entire House Intelligence Committee – because it was not, was similarly worded.
Mike Rogers and Dutch Ruppersberger together, and alone, pulled data from all of the various committee reports and assembled their own “panel report”. This key aspect was lost in the Benghazi conversation, only Rogers and Ruppersberger authored this report.
The reason for that key aspect of authorship missing, within analytical discussion of the content therein, begins the conversation of motive.
With Senate committees in 2014 about to come under Republican leadership, Rogers and Ruppersberger had a motivation to put out a report which could be used by their party allies to avoid scrutiny.
In addition, with Rep Trey Gowdy’s Chairmanship of a Select Committee on Benghazi starting up in January 2015, and with House Intel Chair Rogers exiting from congress, the authors of the report held a motive to proactively undercut Gowdy’s investigation into missing oversight that would normally be part of Rogers/Ruppersberger’s responsibility.
For the Democrats, Hillary Clinton was given a talking point shield she utilized for her future political ambitions; and boy howdy did she use it.
In exchange, for Republicans, House and Senate leadership gained a shield of avoidance from sunlight upon their own complicit knowledge.
In addition, it was reported in 2014 that Mike Rogers had ambitions to launch a talk radio show – this report allowed him to retain credibility and avoid sunlight upon his own complicity as a member of the “Gang of Eight”, and chair of the House Intelligence Committee during the State/CIA Benghazi operation. In short: Mike Rogers hid his willful blindness.
If you read the Rogers/Ruppersberger report, we invite you to look at the factual constructs of The Full Benghazi Brief. Within the brief you will see the fully connected dots which explain the risks, liabilities and willful blindness, trying to be hidden by publication of the Rogers report. CTH predicted exactly that outcome at the end of the brief.
Boy howdy, Mitch knows how to work the system….
If Mike Rogers and Adam Schiff both succeed, you can see the framework of the SSCI taking shape against Trump in 2025 😬 https://t.co/rbCy5SyadY
Posted originally on Mar 11, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
Conservative-appearing members of the establishment are seeking new solutions now that Nikki Haley has dropped out of the 2024 US Presidential race. Haley and her neocons within the establishment refuse to support Donald Trump as he is the most anti-war candidate out there. Liz Cheney has now created The Great Task, a super pac aimed at installing a neocon in the Oval Office.
Now, they are not seeking a new candidate; rather, this new collaborative is working on re-electing JOE BIDEN. Yes, the Republicans in the establishment would prefer a senile man who they could manipulate rather than a competent candidate. Forget the countless insults and criticisms these people have hurled at Biden over the years, as he is suddenly their leading candidate since he supports endless wars. The Biden of 2009 did not support endless wars, but that man no longer exists.
“The GOP has chosen,” Cheney published on X. “They will nominate a man who attempted to overturn an election and seize power. We have eight months to save our republic and ensure Donald Trump is never anywhere near the Oval Office again. Join me in the fight for our nation’s freedom.” The Great Task is an ode to former President Lincoln, who coincidentally was also a target of the establishment and omitted from the presidential election in certain states.
As the website states:
“Speaking at Gettysburg, Lincoln described our Great Task, “that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this earth.”’
The GOP has chosen. They will nominate a man who attempted to overturn an election and seize power. We have eight months to save our republic & ensure Donald Trump is never anywhere near the Oval Office again. Join me in the fight for our nation’s freedom. https://t.co/V4otPCFdY6
Ironically, Cheney says that this organization is rooted in “reverence for the rule of law” and “respect for our Constitution.” We have surrendered more freedoms under Biden than any other president in recent history. What amendment has not come under attack during his rule?
Some are calling Cheney and her establishment cronies TransRepublicans (actual Democrats who claim to identify as Republicans). In reality, they have no loyalty to either the US party or the American people. These people are terrified of a Trump victory because they will no longer be above the law.
Cheney’s main focus is defeating Russia at any cost. The website contains countless articles on why it is essential to fund Ukraine at the expense of borrowing from future generations of Americans as our nations sinks deeper into debt. The actual issues that Americans are facing in their daily lives are NOT LISTED on her website nor will they be considered. This group is specifically for the warmongers who want to see the military establishment succeed.
Open Secrets lists those who are funding The Great Task. This proves that Nikki Haley was NEVER a Republican candidate, which is why she refuses to support Trump’s bid. The swamp has exposed itself yet again. The wolves disguising themselves as conservative leaders are nothing more than America Last politicians who will do whatever it takes to propel America into World War III.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 10, 2024 | Sundance
The non-pretending reality behind this duo is that Marco Rubio knows Mark Warner participated in an illicit and unlawful effort to target Donald Trump using the intelligence community and the national security institutions which included the DHS, ODNI, CIA, FBI, NSA and a weaponized DOJ-NSD.
There is absolutely zero possibility Rubio didn’t know what the U.S intelligence apparatus, DOJ, Mueller team and his friend across the aisle, Mark Warner, was doing. Despite the SSCI silo that surrounds him, Senator Rubio knew the motives, intents and purposes of every element within this network from 2016 through 2021. Denying this reality is pretending on a level that is insulting to the honest observer.
As a consequence of that reality, anything Rubio and Warner say about the national security status is suspect to an admission they are both selling a story that is based on an entirely false framework about the construct of the geopolitical world outside the USA. If you understand the cleaving taking place between both global zones, West and non-West, then everything Warner and Rubio say about activity outside the Western sphere becomes transparently motivated. Most of their review is complete BS, and akin to trying to obfuscate the reality of the world “out there.” WATCH:
TRANSCRIPT – MARGARET BRENNAN: Thank you for doing this–
SENATOR MARCO RUBIO (R-FL): Thank you.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –and for speaking in the bipartisan way you’re sitting down with us today. How would you both define the greatest national security threat facing our country right now?
SENATOR MARK WARNER (D-VA): Well, I would define the immediate threat of making sure we push back Putin’s aggressive behavior in Ukraine, that we try to resolve the circumstance in Gaza, where you can eliminate Hamas, but also recognize the humanitarian challenge. But frankly, over a longer term, the bigger challenge, I think, remains China. We’ve never had a nation of equivalent economic size. And they are investing in technology domain after technology domain, where they hope to not only be number one, but frankly, dominate the field. And I think Marco and I, and our committee has really been at the leading edge of trying to expose that whether it was 5G or whether it was challenged around TikTok or the the need to make sure we bring the semiconductor industry back, but that China long term threat.
SEN. RUBIO: Yeah I think in a broader sense, I would say that the world is, you know, countries around the world have determined the unipolar world is over, and they seek to challenge it. In China’s case, they want to, if not replace, at least be an alternative to an American led system that’s been in place, certainly since the end of the Cold War, and even predating back to the end of the second world war. The Russians argue that they’re a great power, who are who deserved to have buffer nations outside of their borders that they have control over. Hence, you know, they want a bunch of Belaruses. That’s what they want Ukraine to become, and other places like that. And and then Iran wants to be, they want to export the Islamic Revolution throughout the Middle East, and they already have proxies operating inside of Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. They want to threaten Jordan, Bahrain, and ultimately make Israel an unlivable place and have regional dominance in that way. And then you’ve got North Korea, which is increasingly becoming aggressive in- in the way it’s responding to South Korea in both rhetoric and actions. So all these are interrelated. It’s a challenge to the world order of and it’s led this loose coalition of countries who and sometimes work in concert to challenge not just America, but our alliances.
SEN. WARNER: And I think what Marco just said is, these authoritarian regimes are more closely aligned than they were even five years ago.
MARGARET BRENNAN: On the immediate issue of the Middle East, Ramadan begins this Sunday, there’s concerns that because of a high degree of tension in the region, a spark could really lead to an explosion. Through the U.S. national security lens, how concerned are you about the rising risk to U.S. interests in the Middle East because of the close alliance with Israel’s war in Gaza?
SEN. RUBIO: Well, I think the risk is it’s pre existing, obviously, now we have active shooting going on and people back and forth that always leads to mis- miscalculation risks, and in some cases, hostility like we’ve seen already from the Houthis out of Yemen. The goal, I think it’s a mistake to view October 7, simply through the lens of the Palestinian Israeli question. I think the reason why Hamas was armed, equipped and felt the confidence is this broader narrative, this broader objective that Iran has to drive the US out of the region. It is why they are conducting attacks in Iraq and Syria, they want a US troop presence out of the region completely. So then–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Should it stay?
SEN. RUBIO: Huh?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you believe that those 2500 troops in the region should say
SEN. RUBIO: I do and the reason why I believe that is because they are not only there on the counter ISIS mission, let’s not forget that group is still existing, and it’s still a threat. But because they sit, the reason why Iran wants us out of there is that are we are stationed at key points that tie Damascus and Baghdad and all these supply routes that Iran wants to dominate, if we were gone, these proxy groups are now be at the border of Jordan, be able to threaten Jordan and ultimately threaten Israel as a result. But I am concerned I mean, whether it’s Hezbollah and up in the north of Israel, whether it’s what’s happening in Gaza, whether it’s what’s happening with Yemen, the risk of of conflict is very real. It’s a dangerous and tenuous situation. There’s no doubt about.
SEN. WARNER: But–
MARGARET BRENNAN: President Biden’s reviewing whether to keep those troops in Iraq in the same numbers.
SEN. WARNER: And I’ll be anxious to see what he says. I do think, though–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think they should stay?
SEN. WARNER: I think in terms of current basis, yes. Because as long as we’ve got these Iranian backed militias, and others, promoting a level of violence, and I agree with Marco in terms of trying to push us out, but I also think, potentially out of this enormous tragedy, the tragedy of October 7, and now the humanitarian tragedy of 30,000, Palestinians killed. You gotta look at some level of optimism- Israel had already aligned with a number of the Sunni states in the region. I was recently in Saudi Arabia, I think they would like to find some level of peace, post the Gaza conflict with Israel, a stronger defense relationship with the United States. I do think we need to acknowledge the Shia driven efforts to not only push us out but also undermine the Sunni states in the region. And there could be an opportunity for a grander alliance, but that will mean the, the violence has to stop. And you know I think we both have a lot of respect for Bill Burns, the CIA director who has been doing yeoman work, trying to negotiate this hostage exchange, which would lead to at least that short term ceasefire.
MARGARET BRENNAN: President Biden wants to establish a port in Gaza to try to bring humanitarian aid in. It’s not exactly clear the cost, the U.S. military role. Do you think that is a good decision? And given what has happened, this tragic incident recently with a hundred civilians killed, some of them shot by Israeli soldiers according to the IDF because they were clamoring for food. Do you see any clear evidence of who is to blame for that violence that day?
SEN. WARNER: I don’t have the after action report. But I do think this, I mean, remember, United States has been the largest single donor to humanitarian efforts for years in the region. And I think it is important that we continue to show that. I mean, the airlift approach is more symbolic than it actually getting relief to most folks. But the idea and I’ve discussed this with some of the folks in administration, of using Cyprus as a staging point where the aid can be checked to make sure nothing else gets in, the potential then of having that aid moved from Cyprus, to a place where we can set up the equivalent of a field hospital that could help provide the particularly in North Gaza, the humanitarian relief, that is both the right thing to do. And I think the right thing to do in terms of, particularly as we go into Ramadan, hopefully lowering some of the tension, but also shows America’s concern for some of the humanitarian costs in the region.
SEN. RUBIO: I would just add one thing to this. And that is, it’s important understand why. Everybody’s in favor of helping innocent civilians who are caught in the crossfire of any conflict. I think it’s important to understand the reason why aid can’t get to them. And the principal reason why is Hamas has built this system of tunnels, it’s expensive. I mean, I don’t care if they got a great deal on the concrete, it’s expensive to build this extensive system of tunnels, millions of dollars, that’s money that could have gone to create an economy, to feed people, to build hospitals and, and serve civilians. They didn’t do it. And there’s real concern, and I think, very legitimate reason to believe that any aid that goes in there will be grabbed by Hamas used for their purposes, at the expense of the civilian population. Hamas has a track record of zero when it comes to caring about the lives of civilians or of society in general. They’re an entirely war footing. That’s all they do. And, and I think there’s just real concern that- real reason to believe that any additional aid would be taken- would go directly to Hamas will be controlled by them.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But you know, that the U.S. Ambassador David Satterfield, who’s handling that, has said, in written letters to Congress, that they have no evidence that Hamas is stealing the aid, certainly not defending Hamas at all. But saying that aid can continue to be pushed into Gaza without Hamas stealing it, the issue is the criminal groups–
(CROSSTALK)
SEN. RUBIO: Well, I’ll just respond personally, I don’t know what he’s talking about. Because how does Hamas get food? Hamas does not have an economy. Hamas does- Hamas- everything Hamas gets comes from abroad, from Iranians and from what they take. I think the evidence is in place that they have existed as an organization without any means of generating revenue other than what they are able to capture from others, that’s just common sense.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Sure, but in terms of now, with the aid getting in now?
(END CROSSTALK)
SEN. WARNER: I- I think the- the food and water and other relief aid I think it is- you’ve got to make sure you have a distribution system. But I think I agree with Ambassador Satterfield. But let’s also step back for a moment. And I think a lot of the arms, food, other things that have supported Hamas was the fact that they have this tunnel network, which is close to 500 kilometers. I don’t think we- any of us fully expected that. And they have been able [to] secure that. The fact that we are 140 days, roughly, into this invasion, I think most of us, even in the region, thought the Israeli Defense Fund- Defense Forces would be able to take out Hamas. 140 days in, they’ve basically taken out only about 35% of the Hamas- Hamas fighters, and literally have only penetrated less than a third of the tunnel network.
And one of the things and again, as I think Marco indicated, the extensive network, we’ve had- we brought in some of our experts (unintelligible) to say that if- if this was us trying to take out this tunnel network, could we do it quicker, more efficiently? And candidly, the answer was, maybe we could be a bit faster. But when Hamas is gruesomely holding the hostages, to prevent some of the takeout of the tunnels? This is one of the lessons, this and I think the lesson of drones and in Ukraine, are two of the things in terms of military doctrine I think that we’re gonna have to learn from both of these conflicts.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But- but just to button that up. I mean, when Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, says total victory is “within reach”, weeks away. You are not describing total victory within weeks.
SEN. WARNER: I- I have not–
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re saying the impact’s tiny.
SEN. WARNER: Meeting with- meeting with folks in Israel, in the military community, in the intelligence community, the idea that you’re going to eliminate every Hamas fighter, I don’t think is a realistic goal.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you agree with that?
SEN. RUBIO: Well, I think that it is possible to achieve a situation in which Hamas does not have the capability to do what they did on October 7. That doesn’t mean Hezbollah doesn’t step in and take over now as a result, that doesn’t mean that a new Hamas offshoot wouldn’t recreate it. This is an ongoing challenge. And at the end, the head of this entire snake is the Iranian regime. They are the ones that provide the weaponry and the funds. There’s no Hamas fighters starving to death. There’s no Hamas leaders starving to death. They’re all fed. They all have medical care. And they all have all the assistance they need to continue to do the things they do. What you don’t want is a Hamas that can continue to launch missiles, particularly against civilian sites inside of Israel, which is the goal here of Iran, and that is to make Israel an unlivable place, so they can drive every Jew out from the river to the sea, and- and- and dominate the region. Do I think it’s- do I think it’s possible to degrade Hamas for some period of time and deny them the capability to- to be able to do that to Israel? Yes. But ongoing, moving forward, there’ll be challenges, because some new group will pop up.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And- and it’s a U.S. national security risk, the longer this goes on, is it not?
Posted originally on the CTH on March 9, 2024 | Sundance
The Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Mike Turner, may be a Republican – but he is no friend of the American freedom movement who do not like the surveillance state.
Factually, Mike Turner is a part of the deep swamp and has advocated for reforms that make the unconstitutional FISA-702 exploits even worse. As a result, this meeting with the people who control the surveillance mechanism makes sense.
WASHINGTON DC – The House Intelligence Committee is slated to hear from a series of top national security officials for a public hearing Tuesday, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. That list includes:
Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines CIA Director Bill Burns FBI Director Chris Wray U.S. Cyber Command Director Gen. Timothy Haugh Defense Intelligence Agency Director Jeffrey Kruse (LINK)
The FISA-702 surveillance authority is scheduled to expire on April 19th, “Patriots Day.”
Everyone agrees the version of the House authorization by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) is the worst possible outcome; it expands 702 abuse by expanding the surveillance authority. That reality is factually accurate and correct.
If the 702-reauthorization bill that passed the HPSCI committee vote is as bad asKash Patel and everyone says it is (which it is); and if the bill completely ignores the reforms that were suggested and advocated for by Patel and Nunes (which it does); then how does Kash Patel reconcile his boss Devin Nunes supporting the bill per Mike Turner?
Mike Turner is lying about the support from John Ratcliffe and Devin Nunes for the HPSCI FISA-702 reauthorization bill. Ratcliffe and Nunes do not support the Turner construct.
But wait, if that is true (which it is), then why are Ratcliffe, Nunes, and by extension Patel, silent about Turner’s false support claims?
The answer…. Institutional preservation of the HPSCI compartment, and a desire for access therein.
Yes, that is correct. They will rage against the outcome of the institutional endeavor, but only so far as the value of the institution itself must be maintained. Ratcliffe, Nunes and yes, Kash Patel are functionaries of the system. Their sense of identity is dependent on the system.
The CIA director, NSA director, ODNI, FBI Director, etc are not in charge of the compartments they represent. They are simply functionaries -middle men- who operate in the space between where the compass points are directed, where the data originates, and oversight of that data that is ultimately filtered and delivered to the functionaries, who then brief the representatives…. who then create policy… albeit flawed policy…. based on a very specific, controlled, compartmented and skewed information flow. (more)
Posted originally on the CTH on March 8, 2024 | Sundance
Retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor delivers a surprisingly accurate response to the situation created by Joe Biden as espoused in the 2024 State of the Union address. I cannot emphasize the value of these remarks strongly enough, in part because my own independent research – and that of a global team I have been working with- is in direct alignment with this outline.
Two years ago, I accepted the reality that Western sanctions against Russia were profoundly different from all other sanctions and completely ridiculous in the bigger picture of how the global economy operates. A sanction regime is familiar and has been used against Cuba, North Korea, Iran and even Venezuela before. Few were paying attention, but for the first time the U.S sanctions against Russia were not created to target Russia and punish any violator, they were created to remove the tools which would allow violations. The actual dollar as a trade currency was being weaponized.
What followed was not a surprise. Given the nature of the relationships in the geopolitical world, it only took a few months for Russia and their allies to create new tools which would render the Western economic sanctions irrelevant. That’s exactly what happened, and the Russian economy has thrived, while their relationship with two-thirds of the global world has strengthened.
Feeling like the only person who could see through the opaque nature of a narrative that surrounded the Russian sanctions, I quietly set out on a mission to understand what this was all about. None of it made sense. More on that journey will follow. However, what Macgregor is describing is precisely the outcome that was predictable two years ago.
There is an information war against what Macgregor describes in the beginning of these remarks, and people I know personally have become targets as a result. It might surprise many to discover the nature of this information war does not originate with government or politicians. Our focus has been misplaced and our emphasis has been on the wrong syllable. WATCH:
.
The targets within this information war are not people who are criticizing politicians. The core targets within this information war are those who are talking about the entities who are controlling and directing the politicians and government. The voices who are considered a threat are not, repeat NOT, voices who are critical of government. The voices who are considered a threat are those who understand the government actors are controlled and intentionally presented as the false source of the problem.
Just as Jack Smith is not the controlling entity organizing the targeting of Donald Trump, so too is Joe Biden (and the administration) not the originating entity who organized the Western sanction regime against Russia. Jack Smith and Joe Biden are essentially actors, vessels following a design that has been created by outside government entities for the purpose of targeting Donald Trump and/or Russia respectively. The bigger motives and intents of targeting both are essentially the same. There are trillions at stake.
Outside government actors like Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann and crew are the organizers behind Jack Smith’s effort. They are the characters who coordinate with Fani Willis (GA) and Letishia James (NY). Those individuals are funded by outside government institutions. Ultimately, Jack Smith is the vessel.
Within the Western finance system, Blackrock, Vanguard, the WEF and a host of similarly aligned massive financial interests are the organizers behind the Russian sanction regime. The USA government is the vessel.
FOLLOW THE MONEY…. This is one of the reasons why the entire political establishment is behind support for Ukraine. Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street and a host of massive financial interests are the funding mechanism for U.S. politicians.
The various Western governments and politicians are the vessels, not the originating sources of these policies.
Macgregor doesn’t go deep in the weeds on this, but what he describes as the economic and financial outcome is entirely accurate.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 6, 2024 | Sundance
With teeth clinched in her familiar -albeit annoying- style of elocution, the Republican with the most support from Democrats drops out of the presidential primary.
Nikki Haley now has the option to run as presidential replacement for Volodymyr Zelensky.
Thus, the final chapter in the billionaire Sea Island donor effort to eliminate Donald Trump comes to an end. As traditional amid the character trait of the professional liars and manipulators, Haley refused to endorse Trump and indicated she never intended to adhere to the endorsement pledge of the Republican Party. Thus, the way of the DeceptiCon RATs continues.
The exit theme she read from the provided script of her departure remarks was the same as her intro theme. Haley declaring her primary qualification was her gender. The script she read was not written by her, and Haley’s delivery was as awkward as one would expect. WATCH:
WASHINGTON – […] In brief remarks, Haley declined to endorse Trump, as most of her other GOP primary rivals have already done, instead urging him to give her more moderate-minded supporters a reason to back him in November.
“It is now up to Donald Trump to earn the votes of those in our party and beyond who did not support him,” Haley said to reporters assembled at her campaign headquarters in Daniel Island, South Carolina. “And I hope he does that. At its best, politics is about bringing people into your cause, not turning them away. And our conservative cause badly needs more people. This is now his time for choosing.”
Haley’s departure follows a brutal series of losses in states across the map on Super Tuesday, where she failed to halt Trump’s momentum. And it marks the end of what remained of the GOP’s nominal attempt at soul-searching this presidential cycle, when few of the dozen candidates who signed up to run against Trump would dare to take him on directly.
Her unsuccessful run leaves her at a personal and professional crossroads — forced to decide whether she will continue her crusade against Trump and his influence on the Republican Party, or endorse him as he becomes the party’s nominee. Haley last year signed a pledge issued by the Republican National Committee to support the eventual nominee, a requirement to participate in the RNC’s primary debates. But in recent days, Haley said she no longer felt bound to the pledge — while telling POLITICO she was unsure if her Trump criticism would continue post-candidacy.
Her standing in the party has taken a hit, too. In her home state, where she had not appeared on the ballot in a decade, Haley finished 20 points behind Trump — and was already hinting her road could be coming to an end. In a sign of how dire her prospects had become, the Koch network’s Americans For Prosperity Action, a powerful conservative group supporting her run, announced after South Carolina it would no longer spend money supporting her campaign. Heading into Super Tuesday, it was only a question of when, not if, she would drop out. (read more)
Head’s up comrade Zelenskyy!…. UPS driving might be in your future
Posted originally on the CTH on March 5, 2024 | Sundance
TMI… If George Soros and Madeline Albright had a love child, it would be Victoria Nuland.
Victoria Nuland, the third-highest ranking U.S. diplomat, and one of the principal agents responsible for attempted color revolutions, (ie. Russia and Ukraine), will retire and leave her post this month, according to The State Department today.
This is a good indicator that things are not going according to the Obama/Biden agenda. GOOD!
Anthony Blinken – Victoria Nuland has let me know that she intends to step down in the coming weeks as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs – a role in which she has personified President Biden’s commitment to put diplomacy back at the center of our foreign policy and revitalize America’s global leadership at a crucial time for our nation and the world.
Toria’s tenure caps three and a half decades of remarkable public service under six Presidents and ten Secretaries of State. Starting with her very first posting as a consular officer in Guangzhou, China, Toria’s had most of the jobs in this Department. Political officer and economic officer. Spokesperson and chief of staff. Deputy Assistant Secretary and Assistant Secretary. Special Envoy and Ambassador.
These experiences have armed Toria with an encyclopedic knowledge of a wide range of issues and regions, and an unmatched capacity to wield the full toolkit of American diplomacy to advance our interests and values.
What makes Toria truly exceptional is the fierce passion she brings to fighting for what she believes in most: freedom, democracy, human rights, and America’s enduring capacity to inspire and promote those values around the world. (read more)
If you believe that last paragraph, start writing reviews on the culinary nuances of Gas Station Sushi.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 