Tag Archives: Notorious Liars

Oct 30 2025

Senators Ted Cruz and Eric Schmitt Call for the Impeachment of DC Judge James Boasberg


Posted originally on CTH on October 29, 2025 | Sundance 

Now that they personally become a target of Lawfare practices, suddenly the Senate wants to see some actionable accountability. Funny that.

After years of corrupt weaponization of his position, Judge James Boasberg is now outlined as having authorized the search warrants against the Arctic Frost targets which included nine Republican senators.  Boasberg also wrote restraining orders forbidding the cell phone carriers from informing the targets of the corrupt search warrants.

Now senators Ted Cruz and Eric Schmitt are calling for House Speaker Mike Johnson to impeach James Boasberg.  WATCH:

.

There is a long history of corruption from the bench by James Boasberg, specifically surrounding the effort to target Donald Trump in a host of DC court rulings, injunctions and affirmations from the judicial branch [SEE HERE – TAKE A SNICKERS].  However, now that it hits close to home, suddenly Congress is outraged.

Everything Senator Eric Schmitt and Ted Cruz say is accurate.  But why did they ignore the long history of Boasberg’s activity?  Schmitt statement below.

.

Judge James Boasberg signed off on the ‘Arctic Frost’ search warrants against Congress.

Boasberg issued blanket orders to the cell phone companies not to reveal the search warrants.

Boasberg is a FISA Court Judge.

Boasberg authorized one of the Carter Page title-1 surveillance warrants.

Boasberg hired Mary McCord as amicus to the court.

After appointing Mary McCord to take up a defensive position for herself and the FISA Court (cover), Judge Boasberg then becomes the presiding judge in the case against the FBI agent who falsified the FISA application, Kevin Clinesmith. Boasberg gives Clinesmith a slap on the wrist and a few months probation (more cover).

Boasberg told John Durham (Bill Barr) allowing a target to escape prosecution is part of the penalty upon the DOJ for wrongful assembly of the FISA application; a nice way to cover the issue.

https://t.co/FXXV4c89kE

This is the same Judge Boasberg who gave J6 FBI agent provocateur Ray Epps a sentence of probation.

This is the same Judge Boasberg who established a horrible precedent by forcing Vice President Mike Pence to testify before a DC grand jury about his conversations with President Trump (breaking executive privilege).

While on vacation, Boasberg attended the criminal indictment hearing of President Trump.

Judge Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking DHS, Customs and Border Patrol and ICE from deporting illegal aliens and narcotrafficking gang members belonging to Tren de Aragua (TdA), a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.

There were calls for Boasberg to be impeached.

Immediately, the same day President Trump noted Boasberg should be impeached, Chief Justice John Roberts jumped to his defense:

...”“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said Tuesday in a rare and brief statement issued just hours after Trump publicly joined demands by his supporters to remove judges he called “crooked.”

https://politico.com/news/2025/03/18/john-roberts-donald-trump-impeach-federal-judges-00235742

F**k off with this nonsense telling me Roberts is NOT protecting Boasberg.

Keep in mind, Mary McCord operates in all three branches of government: Deputy AG in charge of the DOJ-NSD (executive), on both impeachment committees by Schiff/Nadler and the J6 committee of Thompson (legislative), and as amicus to the FISA court (judicial). That’s why she is “untouchable.”

Mary McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook, worked in the office of Chief Justice Roberts. Mary McCord is partnered with Norm Eisen. Norm Eisen hosted John Roberts in Europe and travelled with Justice Roberts as friends.

There is no apple. It’s all worms.

Oct 30 2025

FBI Leadership Stakes a Position in Opposition to Expanded Authority of Director of National Intelligence


Posted originally on CTH on October 29, 2025 | Sundance 

It has often been said that a person cannot serve two masters.  Throughout years of reviewing the activity of the FBI, one larger picture is clear; the primary mission of the FBI is to protect the interests of Washington, DC – not to protect the interests of truth.

There are two recent sub-contexts for an internal conflict taking place between the Director of the FBI, Kash Patel, and the Director of the Office of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

♦ The first issue surfaces from the ODNI’s office investigating the potential for foreign intelligence to have participated in the background of the Charlie Kirk assassination.  The director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Joe Kent, has been reviewing the potential for Charlie Kirk’s assassin to have received influence or support from foreign interests, specifically foreign intelligence.

FBI Director Kash Patel is not happy that NCTC Director Joe Kent reviewed the investigative case file of Tyler Robinson as part of the NCTC review.  Presumably, Patel is worried that any investigation of potential support for the assassination may create reasonable doubt for a jury in the case against Robinson. {STORY HERE}

On one-hand the issue is somewhat territorial, with the FBI guarding their investigation in order to ensure a successful prosecution.  However, on the other hand, if the investigation is to find the truth of the issues behind the murder, then why would the FBI be concerned about the NCTC checking to see if associations in/around Tyler Robinson may have contributed to the assassination?  The truth should have no agenda.

♦ The second issue is even more concerning.  Congress is currently debating the final version of an intelligence policy bill, known as the 2026 Intelligence Authorization Act, and possible amendments to the structure of the counterintelligence systems and processes as carried out.  [Legislative Link Here] At issue is whether to put intelligence and counterintelligence operations under the purview of the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard. {STORY HERE}

Currently, the counterintelligence operations of the U.S. Intelligence Community are carried out by the sub-silo within the FBI, the FBI counterintelligence division.  However, as documented in the weaponized use of the FBI counterintelligence organization against President Donald Trump, there is a push to change the system to create oversight, insurance the FBI cannot politically weaponize this agency again.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard has said her goal is to chase down the exact origin of the FBI’s weaponized authority in the Crossfire Hurricane targeting operation and take measures to ensure such gross abuses of power do not happen again.  Many in Congress have been alarmed at how the FBI used the counterintelligence agency as an isolation silo to stop oversight, even their own leadership, from knowing what they were doing as they weaponized their authority.  Gabbard is seeking structural changes to make sure it can never happen again.  Kash Patel is against this change.

♦ Readers and online researchers who have used the CTH research library on these issues will note our continued position, proven by decades of evidence, that shows the FBI as a structural agency is compromised from top to bottom with “institutional corruption,” as confirmed by Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley.

Decades of examples of FBI political motivation, including the recently discussed “Arctic Frost” operation, simply prove the FBI is a political agency akin to the Soviet era FSB.  The FBI targets any individual, group or entity, who would represent a threat to Washington, DC.  This is their primary mission and the reason why so many domestic terror threats were unnoticed.

The FBI is primarily focused on threats to the U.S. system of government, not to threats against the citizens of the nation.  At this point in our history, with hundreds of specific examples for citation, this outlook, opinion or view is no longer arguable.

Despite FBI Director Kash Patel continuing to deny the ‘institutional corruption’ of his agency, the corruption exists.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem was also accurate in saying from her experience with the FBI tipping off drug cartels, money launderers and human trafficking operations targeted by CBP/ICE officials, the FBI is corrupt.

We are approaching an inflection point.

President Trump is demanding the institutions of Law and Order must be purged of corrupt actors and the institutions themselves must be cleaned up.  DNI Tulsi Gabbard is working through the process of identifying how the various govt silos were weaponized, who weaponized them, what role the intelligence community played in the targeting, and she is taking direct action to change the systems in place in order to take away their capability of doing harm.

FBI Director Kash Patel stands with one foot in agreement with the goals of DNI Gabbard, but also with one foot to maintain institutional power of the FBI while underneath him remains an entire operational system against the goals of Gabbard.  Again, in short, Director Kash Patel is trying to serve two masters.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is not beholden to the retention of any silo agency, even her own office.  So far, she has been a steward on a mission for the truth regardless of how ugly that truth might appear.  This puts a big DC target on the back of Mrs. Gabbard, as the entire DC system is dependent on retention of a very corrupt intelligence information control and operational targeting system.

In examples we have already documented, the CIA (Directorate of Analysis), the DoD (Defense Intelligence Agency), and the Lawfare operatives within the DOJ have all targeted Tulsi Gabbard using DC schemes and manipulative leaks to media in an effort to undermine her and get her removed – they failed.  However, now the FBI is participating in the same risk avoidance measures.

DNI Gabbard represents a threat to the operational mission of an institutionally corrupt Federal Bureau of Investigation.

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out nor more doubtful of success nor more dangerous to handle than to initiate a new order of things; for the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order; this lukewarmness arising partly from the incredulity of mankind who does not truly believe in anything new until they actually have experience of it.

― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

[SOURCE]

Oct 29 2025

House Oversight Committee Releases 100-page Report on Joe Biden Autopen – Requests DOJ Open Investigation of All Executive Actions


Posted originally on CTH on October 28, 2025 | Sundance 

The House Oversight and Reform Committee has released a 100-page report [pdf HERE] highlighting how people around Joe Biden hid information about his cognitive incapacity and worked around the issue using his autopen signature to authorize presidential actions.

The House committee has released the video and transcript of all the witnesses questioned during their investigation [SEE HERE] to support their contention and referral to the Dept of Justice for a criminal investigation of the events.

WASHINGTON—Today, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a staff report titled “The Biden Autopen Presidency: Decline, Delusion, and Deception in the White House.” The report exposes how President Joe Biden’s top advisors, political operatives, and personal physician concealed the President’s mental and physical decline from the American people. The findings reveal that as President Biden’s condition deteriorated, his aides exercised presidential authority and facilitated executive actions without his direct authorization, including misusing the autopen and failing to properly document decision-making processes. 

Following the findings of its investigation, the Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) sent a letter to the U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi requesting the U.S. Department of Justice conduct a comprehensive review of all executive actions taken during the Biden presidency and scrutinize key Biden aides—Dr. Kevin O’Connor, Annie Tomasini, and Anthony Bernal—who pleaded the Fifth Amendment during the investigation. Chairman Comer also sent a letter to the District of Columbia Board of Medicine seeking its review of actions taken by Dr. O’Connor to determine any potential wrongdoing in his medical care of the former president. (more)

[SOURCE]

Nov 25 2024

Megyn Kelly Goes Off On “Trans” Perverts: We Refuse to Participate in Their Sexual Fetishes!


Posted originally on Rumble By The Charlie Kirk Show on Nov 23, 2024 at 8:00 pm EST

Nov 25 2024

Extremism – Its the LEFT’s Feel Good Policy 


Posted originally on Nov 25, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

Extremist

LEFT always points to the RIGHT to make people feel better

May 15 2023

Scalia & the Right to Secede


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted May 15, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty; There are those who say Scalia was wrong for he claimed the civil war was correct and he changed the meaning of the Second Amendment. You are the real constitutional scholar on these issues. Is there a right to secede by a state? Did Scalia really change the Second Amendment?

Thank you so much for your diverse background.

Kirk

ANSWER: As far as the question of the Civil War, Scalia answered a question for a movie and it was simply a letter and not a court decision that he rendered. Saying that question was decided by the Civil War and that the precedent was that there is no right to secede was not his opinion, but the established law of the Court. Scalia could not respond otherwise for that was in fact the law, right or wrong. The decision of the Court was not Scalia’s. The argument for secession is not nearly as clear-cut as people think. The Supreme Court in 1869 ruled that secession is illegal.

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869 where Texas sought to recoup its bond losses. The case involved a claim by the Reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. Texas filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court under the Constitutional provision giving the Court original jurisdiction.

The court ruled that Texas had remained a state of the United States ever since it first joined the Union. The fact that it joined the Confederate States and was at the time under military rule. Therefore, they decided on the merits of the bond issue. That is where the Court held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States. Consequently, that meant that all the acts of the legislatures within the Confederate states were “absolutely null” and void. Hence, that decision was mandatory or the US would have to also honor the bonds of the Confederate States. That is why the 14th Amendment was passed stating that the Confederate states would not question the debt of the North, but there would be no compensation for the debt of the South.

Therefore, those who ridicule Scalia are just typical soap-box lawyers who pretend to know things they do not. Scalia’s response was correct for that was the precedent and we see that the same position is taken in Europe. Once you join, there is no divorce. We see the war in Ukraine is also over the secession of the Donbas. This was the difference between Lenin and Stalin. Lenin believed that the states could secede from the federation and Stalin said no way.

Scalia is correct. The power of the federal government will NEVER acknowledge any right of any state to secede. Scalia said that the Civil War decided that issue which is correct because any secession today would also have to be by force of arms – not in some court.

What people seem to wrongly think is that Justice Antonin Scalia made some ruling on this subject. Scalia was responding to a letter from a screenwriter working on a comedy dealing with secession in 2006. Scalia wrote he could not imagine such a case ever reaching the Supreme Court. Scalia wrote in 2006:

“I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be.  Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment?

But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.”

Scalia said that the last attempt at secession also established a clear precedent.

“If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.” 

Scalia is correct insofar as Texas v White established that there is no right to secede. However, there is no strict construction of the Constitution to support that. Many historians and legal experts also say the Civil War clearly established there is “no right” to secede. However, that was by force of arms – not law! Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution lists acts that states cannot undertake, and secession is not on that list. That was a decision that was biased and necessary at the time to prevent having to pay the debts of the South. The real question is when the United States breaks up, I seriously doubt that it will be a legal case asking permission. I personally believe that the Constitution does NOT prohibit secession. That is simply the self-interest of Washington and thus the only real right will be by force of arms. Anyone who claims otherwise is a toss-up between an idiot and a fool.

As far as Scalia’s decision in DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER back in 2008, his strict construction came shining through. Many people who want to eliminate gun ownership argue that bearing arms was only for a militia that has been supplanted by a standing army and therefore the Second Amendment is no longer valid.

It was Scalia who shot that argument down. He held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Second Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the 2nd Amendment. Pp. 28–30.

(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts, and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47. That shows what I am talking about with strict construction. The liberal view would have said the right was tied to a militia exclusively. He wrote:

” We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns, see supra, at 54–55, and n. 26. But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. “

So I do not see where anyone can say that Scalia somehow rewrote the Second Amendment to deny gun rights. All things, including speech, have limits and regulations. It is not free speech to yell fire in a movie theater. Judge Amy Coney Barrett has vowed to follow Scalia. It was Apprendi v New Jersey, the decision championed by Justice Scalia was based upon strict construction. Before then, it was Judges deciding facts – not juries. The denial of a right to a jury trial was common practice in the United States. It was Scalia who change the Judiciary and defended the people. No other judge would protect citizens and finally, Scalia was able to convince others that this was a violation of the Sixth Amendment. Anyone who disparages Scalia must be a leftist who loves government power. Scalia had no problem ruling against the government.

When I got to the Supreme Court, they ordered the government to explain how they were keeping me in prison on civil contempt without a trial indefinitely when the law, 28 USC 1826, said the maximum sentence was 18 months. They were rolling it every 18 months. Only when the Supreme Court ordered the government to respond, then I was released and they told the court the case was “moot” for I was suddenly released. Without Scalia, I would probably have died in prison. He at least stood up for the law and 18 months was one-term, not indefinitely, where the NY judges protect the bankers. Trump will NEVER get a fair trial in NYC. From what I saw with others, nobody gets a fair trial in the Second Circuit or State court. When my case began, my lawyer, Richard Altman, said NYC practices law differently. Boy was that an understatement. Nobody should do business with any bank domiciled in NYC.

May 15 2023

Protect The Kids – Powerful Testimony by Democrat Shawn Thierry Texas Bill to Restrict Gender Modification in Children


May 14, 2023 | Sundance 

Texas State House Representative Shawn Thierry, D-Houston, joined with Republicans to support Senate Bill 14 which would restrict gender modification in children. As a Democrat from the Houston area, Mrs. Thierry came under blistering assault from organized alphabet activists in her decision to support the House version of the Texas bill.

Facing threats, ostracization, ridicule and direct personal attacks against her, Ms. Thierry stood against the rage of the mob and voted to support the bill. Explaining her position, Representative Thierry delivered eloquent and powerful remarks on the issue to the House chamber. WATCH:

.

At times it feels like we are living in a dystopian era well beyond the prescient writing of George Orwell.  Indeed, I think we can all feel the shift that has taken place as the battle between commonly accepted right and wrong has morphed into a spiritual battle between good and evil.

Joe Biden was installed as a one-term disposable Cloward-Piven opportunity for the most destructive elements of political activism.  Every left-wing fantasy operation is now enveloping the United States and tearing at the fabric of the nation.  In this era, any Democrat who stands up for moral values with an intent to protect the children becomes a mortal enemy to the tribe of wicked enterprise.  Shawn Thierry should be appreciated for taking a stand against the raging mob.

TEXAS – Texas is one step closer to banning gender-affirming care for transgender minors who live in the state.

On Friday, the Texas House of Representatives voted to preliminarily advance Senate Bill 14, a measure that would prohibit the administration of puberty blockers and hormone therapy to people under 18 years old who are transitioning.

Rep. Tom Oliverson, R-Cypress, told lawmakers from the House floor that he believes gender dysphoria should be treated with counseling rather than gender-affirming care.

“In contrast to experimental medicine and surgery, professional counseling and psychotherapy is a proven alternative that helps children overcome gender dysphoria,” he told lawmakers.

The legislation is one of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s priorities and has already passed the Senate.

Under the Senate version, minors currently on transition-related medical care would have to stop their treatment after the bill goes into effect in September.

The version passed Friday in the Texas House, however, would give transgender minors a period of time to wean off treatment.

Still, trangender-rights advocates say the legislation is hateful and will have a negative effect on the lives of transgender minors.

Sofia Sepulveda, the community engagement and advocacy manager with the LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Texas, said SB 14 is just one of many measures targeting people in the LGBTQ community.

“It feels like every other day there is legislation or there’s a hearing targeting the trans community,” Sepulveda told reporters Friday morning. “We are literally fighting for our lives.”  (read more)

The ideological leftists have gone totally nuts on this issue.

Their activism on the mutilation of children is evil.  These are not issues that can be debated in nuance and soft pastels.

Protect the children.

The mentally ill alphabet people are filled with psychosis.

Where is the Nashville mass murderer’s “Manifesto”?

May 13 2023

Disney Shareholder Dumpster Fire, Bud Light Disaster Spreads | MEitM #403


By Midnight’s Edge Posted ordinally on Rumble on May 12, 2023

May 12 2023

Biden Administration: “Birthing Persons” or “Unpaid Caregivers” are Bad for the Economy


Armstrong Econo9mics Blog/WOKE Re-Posted May 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Happy early Mother’s Day to the women in charge with shaping our society. The vital role of a mother, arguably the most important responsibility one can take on, has been dismissed in recent years as society changes drastically. The woke agenda feels that the word “mother” is offensive and wants to replace the term with “birthing persons.” I have not heard anyone refer to fathers as “inseminating persons,” as part of the woke agenda is to eliminate the importance of women in society. Economic conditions have made it nearly impossible for the average family to survive on one income. Yet, those who can and do choose to stay home deserve appreciation for the role they play in our society.

The Biden Administration recently took a jab at stay-at-home mothers, claiming they are hurting our economy. His administration supports sending “free” money to “hard-working families” as long as they are receiving some income tax revenue. The schools can raise our children according to their way of thinking.

“[M]any Americans — particularly women — stay out of the workforce to care for their families, making it hard for businesses to attract and retain a skilled workforce and for the economy to grow. A BCG brief forecasts losses of $290 billion each year in gross domestic product in 2030 and beyond if the U.S. fails to address the lack of affordable child care.”

The cited report from the BCG refers to parenting as “unpaid caregiving” as it lowers the number of taxable workers. Instead of staying home with your children or elderly relative, the government believes you should move into “paid caregiving.” “About 1.8 million critical-care jobs, including nursing assistants, home health aides and childcare workers, are open, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics,” the report noted. The report also noted that these jobs often have terrible pay and poor benefits. Furthermore, the study noted that 40% of caregivers have missed “more than five days of work over the last year simply because their paid-care support has fallen through.” Other countries will laugh at the US for that one. They also talk about implementing a “government-run childcare system that begins at birth.” That is sad prospect. Even dogs have an 8 to 10 week grace period before their puppies can be adopted, a luxury not provided to women living in the financial capital of the world.

Caretaking roles are only seen as essential is they benefit the government. It is almost impossible for one 40-hour salary to support a family comfortably. Preschools and childcare centers often cost more than the salary a parent would bring home. And they wonder why there is a steep decline in the birth rate. The nuclear family has no place in woke America. Whether you stay home or choose a career, a mother’s role is essential.

Ca

May 12 2023

Elon Musk Hires Ultra Woke Linda Yaccarino as CEO of Twitter – Former Head of NBCUniversal Advertising – WEF Board Member – Pioneer of DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) Wokeism


Posted originally on the CTH on May 11, 2023 | Sundance 

Elon Musk has reportedly hired Linda Yaccarino as the CEO of Twitter.  Unfortunately, this decision is the exact opposite of what everyone hoped about Musk’s intentions with the platform.

Ms. Yaccarino is the head of NBCUniversal Advertising and Partnerships [Example Here], and she is the tip of the spear in the creation of DEI (Diversity Equity and Inclusion) indexing and corporate scoring.  You might be familiar with ‘DEI’ as a result of the Bud Light woke advertising campaign to promote beer for transgenders.  Well, that’s DEI in action, and Ms. Yaccarino is one of the pioneers in the advertising industry.

Additionally, Linda Yaccarino is the Chairwoman of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Taskforce on Future of Work.  As she noted in her position, “every CEO and executive needs to look inward, and build workplaces that ensure our employees, current and future, can always succeed amid rapid transformation.” Overlaying the Diversity Equity and Inclusion mindset, you will note Yaccarino says, “long-term benefits for the unemployed, women, and communities of color.”

Why would Elon Musk bring the most woke NBC advertising executive to become the CEO of Twitter?  Obviously, he is focused on generating revenue, and Yaccarino can bring woke credentials to the platform luring corporate advertisers.  Unfortunately, in order to achieve that objective, the platform content will have to be modified.

That means the public square of Twitter needs to become a platform of non-controversial NPCs (Non Player Characters) which generally are identified in memes [SEE HERE].  The content on Twitter must fit an approved standard for advertising. Leading this effort to control platform content through the control of the monetization, is literally what Yaccarino has done in her work at NBCUniversal.  Thus, her efforts to promote DEI take on a new level of importance.

Ms. Yaccarino also supports Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and follows him and his fellow influencers through her Twitter account.  Politically this puts her in alignment with Elon Musk and the acceptable Republican group that promotes the Florida Governor.

Keep in mind, for DeSantis, the “woke issues” are political tools to achieve an objective; nothing more.  Ms. Yaccarino supporting Ron DeSantis is not a misnomer, it’s just politics.

Similarly, for Elon Musk, it appears Ms. Yaccarino brings a greater financial value to the table offsetting any contradictions in his belief system about wokeism as a danger to speech and culture.   Obviously, this hire says Musk is more concerned about revenue generation than actual free speech.

Regarding opposition or alignment with what is colloquially called “wokeism”, Ms. Yaccarino is somewhat of a touchstone.  Her bona fides on DEI make her a subject matter expert on the weaponization of advertising to advance a cultural objective.

Just accept things as they are and not as you might wish them to be.  That way you are not disappointed later.

Accept the Musk selection of Ms. Yaccarino as exactly what it says for the Twitter platform.  First, money is the most important issue right now; revenue generation for Musk is the #1 priority.  Second, the content of the platform will modify accordingly.

[ Yaccarino on Twitter ]