Blocking some Blog Posts


Armstrong Economics Blog/Censorship Re-Posted May 19, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Despite the claim that the West is a free society and a democracy, they are engaging in the denial of free speech and censorship. Depending on your service provider and your country, they are starting to block emails updating when we have posted something to the blog. They appear to be reading the headline and determining if they do not want you to know about that subject. This all started with COVID. It has now expanded into politics and even war.

We are investigating a possible workaround, but it would most likely involve just a notice a blog was posted without a title.

The Queen of the Neocons


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted May 19, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

The full leaked conversation between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt can be found here. There is a reason I have called Victoria Nuland the “queen of the neocons” due to her insistence on warfare against Russia that has been at the forefront of her entire career. The plot behind Ukraine is far deeper than anyone is willing to talk about publically. The leaked phone calls between Nuland and Pyatt show that there was a plot to wage war long before Russia crossed into Ukraine. All they needed was an “atta’ boy” puppet to sign his stamp of approval, and Biden was already knee-deep in suspicious business dealings in Ukraine.

Victoria Nuland is of Ukrainian Jewish descent. Her family changed their name to try to hide their Jewish ethnic background. She really would be Nudelman, not Nuland. She is the daughter of Yale bioethics and medicine professor Sherwin B. Nuland, who changed his surname from Nudelman to Nuland. She retained her family name Nuland to perhaps further hide her Jewish connection by marrying Robert Kagan.

Her husband, Robert Kagan, authored the “Real Iraq Study Group” report for the American Enterprise Institute. This was the Neocon view of regime change. Kagan was said to have convinced President George W. Bush to order the “surge” plan, which changed the course of the Iraq War. It was Kagan who co-founded the neoconservative think tank in 1997, which was known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) with fellow Neocon William Kristol. Kagan strongly advocated starting a war with every nation that the US has even the slightest issue with such as Syria, Afghanistan, and Iran.

When Ukraine failed to quiet the masses who opposed their installed government in 2014, the US threatened Ukraine with sanctions. The EU did not want to be involved, leading Nuland to make the statement: “Fuck the EU.” She was hell-bent on carefully placing all the pawns in the correct order for the war we are witnessing nearly 10 years later. Everyone says that the EU has more to lose from “Russian aggression” than the US, but the US neocons were the first to instigate the situation.

Here is a video from seven years ago where Nuland testifies before Senate that the Russian oligarchs are attempting to infiltrate Ukraine:

She highlights “rights for the Donbas” knowing that the entire Minsk Agreement was a lie, as Angela Merkel later admitted upon leaving office. There would be no war if not for these bloodthirsty warmongers, who are now ready to harvest the bounty of war from the seeds they planted many years ago.

This topic is pervasive and too long for a blog post. So why is the globe entering the next world war? How did this all begin? The corruption is more profound than you could imagine. I explain all this and more in my new book, “The Plot to Seize Russia.” This is the second edition and goes into further depth than the book provided to World Economic Conference attendees. Paper and labor shortages have led to a delay from our publisher, but the book should be available soon. I will make an announcement once it is available for purchase at all major retailers.

(Images below provided by our publisher)

Biden Nominates First Hispanic Woman to Fed Board – Who is She?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Central Banks Re-Posted May 16, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

The headlines praise Biden for nominating the first Latina woman to the Federal Reserve’s board. None of the current headlines list her qualifications, which is a given since this administration favors diversity over experience. I, for one, would like to know more about the people being placed in positions of power since their nationality has no relation to their responsibilities. Yet Sen. Robert Menendez (D, NJ) continually criticized the Fed for not having any Latino members. Let us look into Adriana Kugler, who may become very influential in the financial world.

Kugler, 53, was an executive director for the World Bank. She earned a Bachelor of Arts from McGill University in 1991, graduating with first-class honors in economics and political science. She was awarded her Ph.D. in Economics by the University of California at Berkeley in 1997. She worked as the chief economist for the Labor Department under Obama from September 2011 to January 2013 as well.

A recent article from the Wall Street Journal actually shines some light on Kugler and her policies. The picture they used of her was taken at a World Economic Forum event. She fought for the US government to provide families with $26,400 in funding during the pandemic and proposed three separate pilot programs to raise unemployment benefits. “For every one dollar that we put into the pockets of the unemployed working Americans, two dollars ripple throughout the economy, and it’s actually a win-win—it helps everybody,” she said. Well, that line is troublesome for obvious reasons since inflation should be the top priority for the Fed.

She is a proponent of closing the wage gap and eliminating income inequality. She penned an article about “income redistribution in the form of tax and transfer programs” to offer social insurance for the poor.

“Income redistribution in the form of tax and transfer programs provide social insurance and protection against many types of risks over a person’s lifetime and over his or her career that are not always provided through private insurance. Thus, social insurance in the form of transfer programs—such as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, program; Medicaid; the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps; and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, more commonly referred to as WIC—allows individuals to make decisions that involve higher risk, while at the same time affording them greater mobility than they would otherwise undertake.”

She argues that America needs a “more progressive tax system” in addition to “transfer programs” to redistribute wealth. “[P]rogressive taxation and transfer to the poor is not only the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do,” the new Fed appointee stated.

The World Bank executive is also a big proponent of open immigration policies and climate change initiatives. “It is the biggest existential threat of our time, and I do believe that we need domestic action to go hand in hand with global leadership on climate change,” she claimed.

Biden has also elevated Philip Jefferson to be the Fed’s vice chair, making him the #2 guy at the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve is intended to be separate from the government, but Biden is installing people who openly hold partisan views regarding economics. Kugler supports Biden and the Build Back Better globalists in terms of her views on wealth redistribution, combining climate change with fiscal policy, government aid, increased social programs, and more. But hey, at least she is Hispanic and female.

Devin Nunes Gives His First Assessment of Durham Report


May 15, 2023 | Sundance 

Appearing on Newsmax, former Republican Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Devin Nunes, gives his first assessment of the Durham report as it was released mid-day Monday. {Direct Rumble Link}

Devin Nunes was one of the first people in congress to realize the FBI, DOJ and Obama-era intelligence community were conducting full surveillance of candidate Donald Trump in 2016.  Nunes statements in March 2017 preceded the counter offensive narrative launched by Senator Mark Warner in collaboration with then FBI Director James Comey. WATCH:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has reportedly invited John Durham to testify before the committee May 25th.

U.S. Virgin Islands Issues Subpoena to Elon Musk Questioning Connection to Jeffrey Epstein


May 15, 2023 | Sundance 

People have been gobsmacked by a seemingly 180° change in the ideological outlook of Twitter owner Elon Musk.  The hiring of Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) czar Linda Yaccarino as CEO caught everyone by surprise. {link} A Day later he conceded a free speech position to the government of Turkey, agreeing to silence the political opposition of Recep Erdogan. {link}  Perhaps some clarity can be found in a recent Bloomberg article:

Pay attention to DATES:

(Bloomberg) Elon Musk was issued a subpoena by the US Virgin Islands in its lawsuit accusing JPMorgan Chase & Co. of knowingly benefiting from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking.

The US territory said in court papers it had reason to believe Epstein may have referred or attempted to refer Musk to JPMorgan as a client. Several other billionaires, including the Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, have also been issued subpoenas by the USVI.

The USVI on Monday asked the judge overseeing the case to authorize alternative means of serving the April 28 subpoena on Musk. The territory said it made good-faith efforts to obtain an address for Musk, including hiring private investigators, but had been unable to locate one. 

[…] The USVI subpoena seeks documents reflecting communications or meetings between Musk and JPMorgan or Musk and Epstein relating to the two men’s accounts at the bank. It also seeks from Musk any documents “regarding Epstein’s involvement in human trafficking” or concerning fees the Tesla CEO paid to Epstein or JPMorgan in connection with his accounts at the bank. (more

On April 18, 2023, Elon Musk meets Linda Yaccarino for the first time.

April 26, Elon Musk meets Chuck ‘six-ways-to-sunday’ Schumer.
“We talked about the future,” Musk told reporters after exiting the meeting that lasted about an hour. {link}

April 28, Attorney General of USVI triggers subpoena to Musk about Epstein.

First weeks of May, USVI investigators trying to serve Epstein subpoena on Musk.

May 12, Musk hires DEI advocate Linda Yaccarino as Twitter CEO.

A curious sequence of events that preceded Musk’s recent actions.

All probably just a coincidence.

However, Suspicious Cat remains, well, suspicious…

John Durham Releases 316 Page Report About FBI, DOJ, Intelligence Community and U.S. Govt Targeting Donald Trump


May 15, 2023 | Sundance 

Special Counsel John Durham has released a highly anticipated 316-page report outlining corrupt U.S. activity during the targeting of presidential candidate, president elect, and subsequent President, Donald J Trump.

[FULL REPORT pdf HERE]

I have completed my first review of the report, and suffice to say the details within it are not new.  The majority of the reaction so far has been centered around how Special Counsel Durham is not prosecuting anyone for their corrupt conduct outlined within the report.  However, for the sake of this first review, I will draw attention to a few aspects you will likely not see discussed anywhere else.

Please note this detail found at the bottom of page 3 and top two lines of page #4:

[…] “The Office exercised its judgment regarding what to investigate but did not investigate every public report of an alleged violation of law in connection with the intelligence and law enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns.”

As perhaps the only person who tracked down and subsequently interviewed the investigators on the Durham team, and as a person who subsequently came away with a full understanding of how the silo operation inside this investigation was going to play out, I can reasonably assure you that notation and reference by team Durham is entirely directed to us.

That statement above tells us why none of the DC politicians who engaged in specific violations of law were criminally charged. This is part of the silo effect within government, which I will explain later.  As a good friend said, “Yeah great, but we don’t have badges.”  So, we went to the badges with the evidence, but the badges did not want to act upon the evidence, because it would have been, in their estimation, too damaging to the framework of our government.

First a positive note about the report.  Unlike all other reports of similar internal investigation, I will give the Durham team credit for not using the ‘executive summary’ of the report to cloud, positively shape or disguise the corruption outlined within the body of the report.  This is the first such report where the executive summary actually summarizes the scale of the corruption within the details.

Perhaps the parting message was considered, “If you are going to whitewash this s**t [ie entire govt operation], at least be intellectually honest with the American people, and not whitewash the investigation in the ‘executive summary’ of it.”  I’m pretty sure that was the exact parting phrase.  It was after that conversation [Aug 2020] when CTH then said, do not anticipate anything from Durham.  Bill Barr was the bondo, John Durham is the spray paint.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=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%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1293790806113955840&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2Fblog%2F2023%2F05%2F15%2Fjohn-durham-releases-316-page-report-about-fbi-doj-intelligence-community-and-u-s-govt-targeting-donald-trump%2F&sessionId=8c7c164b4308a5cd8478173bb30093abdc851a18&theme=light&widgetsVersion=aaf4084522e3a%3A1674595607486&width=500px

The “Report on Matters Related to Intelligence Activities and Investigations Arising Out of the 2016 Presidential Campaigns” is a full uncovering of just how politically corrupt the DOJ, FBI and larger Intelligence Community were/are as it relates to the 2016 election.

Team Durham, while not indicting anyone for ancillary crimes – of which there are many – does lay naked the motives and intentions of the people at the top of the FBI, DOJ, CIA and ODNI. The full weight of government was weaponized against Donald Trump and the Durham report lays out all the details.

It is the background of this report that stands as the current motive for those same institutions to remove Donald Trump in 2023. Quite simply, they fear retaliation.

[…] “If this report and the outcome of the Special Counsel’s investigation leave some with the impression that injustices or misconduct have gone unaddressed, it is not because the Office concluded that no such injustices or misconduct occurred. It is, rather, because not every injustice or transgression amounts to a criminal offense, and criminal prosecutors are tasked exclusively with investigating and prosecuting violations of U.S. criminal laws. And even where prosecutors believe a crime occurred based on all of the facts and information they have gathered, it is their duty only to bring criminal charges when the evidence that the government reasonably believes is admissible in court proves the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.” [Page #6]

Durham walks through the missing predicate that initiated the Trump-Russia investigation.  Essentially, as the Durham team noted, there was nothing ever to trigger the authority of the FBI to investigate Donald Trump or his campaign in the first place.

The Obama FBI and DOJ justified full physical and electronic surveillance of their political opposition, through false justifications manufactured by the FBI.  As Durham notes, “Our findings and conclusions regarding these and related questions are sobering.” Really, “sobering”?  Nice choice of understatement.

Everything was predicated on The Big Lie:

[…] As set forth in greater detail in Section IV.A.3 .b, before the initial receipt by FBI Headquarters of information from Australia on July 28, 2016 concerning comments reportedly made in a tavern on May 6, 2016 by George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign, the government possessed no verified intelligence reflecting that Trump or the Trump campaign was involved in a conspiracy or collaborative relationship with officials of the Russian government. 

Indeed, based on the evidence gathered in the multiple exhaustive and costly federal investigations of these matters, including the instant investigation, neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

[…] As set forth in greater detail in Section IV, the record in this matter reflects that upon receipt of unevaluated intelligence information from Australia, the FBI swiftly opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. In particular, at the direction of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok opened Crossfire Hurricane immediately. Strzok, at a minimum, had pronounced hostile feelings toward Trump. The matter was opened as a full investigation without ever having spoken to the persons who provided the information.

Further, the FBI did so without (i) any significant review of its own intelligence databases, (ii) collection and examination of any relevant intelligence from other U.S. intelligence entities, (iii) interviews of witnesses essential to understand the raw information it had received or (iv) using any of the standard analytical tools typically employed by the FBI in evaluating raw intelligence.

Had it done so, again as set out in Sections IV.A.3.b and c, the FBI would have learned that their own experienced Russia analysts had no information about Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials, nor were others in sensitive positions at the CIA, the NSA, and the Department of State aware of such evidence concerning the subject.

In addition, FBI records prepared by Strzok in February and March 2017 show that at the time of the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI had no information in its holdings indicating that at any time during the campaign anyone in the Trump campaign had been in contact with any Russian intelligence officials.

The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign. [Page 10]

I’ll have more on the substance of the report, as well as share the details of others following their review.  However, in the interim, it is important to understand how the investigative silos, created by DC administrators, impact the investigative outcomes as displayed in this report.

Former FBI Director James Comey is a criminal.  Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe is a criminal. Former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok is a criminal.  Current Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman, Senator Mark Warner, is a criminal.

Any criminal conduct that is discovered by a person who is not the direct victim of the criminal conduct does not penetrate the DC system.  Meaning, just because you can show criminal activity in Washington DC, that doesn’t mean anyone has a responsibility to investigate it.

If the criminal conduct is not identified by the investigators inside the DC system, the criminal conduct essentially does not exist – unless the evidence of criminal conduct in DC, is provided by a specific victim of the crime being reported.

There is a silo effect in place within the DC system that permits the investigative authorities to dismiss claims of institutional or administrative criminal conduct from outside entities, including ‘whistleblowers.’  The DOJ/FBI arbiters of what constitutes crime are the same DOJ/FBI arbiters in charge of protecting the institutional system.

If the DC system is threatened by the conduct of an outside entity, a crime may have been committed.  However, if an agent, operator, official or politician representing the DC system is the one threatening, there is no crime.  The justice system in DC is designed to protect itself.

Holding DC officials accountable for criminal conduct first requires the deconstruction of the silos that protect them.  Deconstructing those silos requires strategy and legislative willpower….

Support CTH Efforts Here ]

Can Socrates find new solutions to Crises?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Socrates Re-Posted May 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Allison Schrager at Bloomberg claimed that AI does a great job finding solutions based on existing rules and information. But it’s less suited for finding novel solutions to new problems. Somehow, this does not seem to apply to Socrates for there are no new problems anyway. Am I correct that Socrates will find new solutions?

GU

ANSWER: Yes, you are correct. However, Socrates has a database that is unprecedented and cost tens of millions of dollars to assemble. It can find solutions that are certainly not mainstream and may appear to be revolutionary but in fact, may have taken place even 2,000 years ago.

Socrates is NOT a Neutral Net. This is something I created from scratch. I put myself into this system. I had to teach Socrates how to analyze. I did not create some open AI and let it develop in some unknown manner. This is not Chat GPT where it is searching the net to come up with answers to what is the name of Lady GaGa’s dog.

Socrates has the largest financial database in the world. It has a money supply recreated from the coinage of thousands of years. It has correlated that with wars and plagues and it makes the connections. It has a database of 6,000 years which is unsurpassable. If I even tried to recreate this at today’s prices, it would be more than $1 billion.

Just on Forex Exchange, I had staff recording all the currencies back hundreds of years taking down quotes for all the world newspapers stored at the Royal Newspaper Library in London for years. Without that, we would never have been able to forecast that the pound would drop to par in 1985 when it was trading at $2.40.

What Socrates will do is it will test what attempts were made to solve crises in the past and what worked and what failed. Diocletian (284-305AD) imposed wage and price controls to try to stop inflation the same as Richard Nixon.

There was a major earthquake in Turkey that devastated the region. Emperor Tiberius issued coins to provide relief and suspended all taxes in the region to help rebuild. There have been so many different solutions that people today would never consider, but Socrates will.

Here is a Larger Video of Socrates’ Solution


Armstrong Economics Blog/Socrates Re-Posted May 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

This was the Question asked:

Socrates, how do I solve a debt crisis without a default that is fair to both sides?

Die Vaccinated


Armstrong Economics Blog/Vaccine Re-Posted Apr 6, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

A reader shared this story from last year, highlighting the stupidity of vaccinations. Germany permits legal euthanasia for those suffering from terminal illnesses who meet specific qualifications. One of those qualifications is that they must be vaccinated against COVID-19. The German Euthanasia Association announced in November 2021 that they would only assist patients who have received the vaccination or recovered from the illness. So although you may be ready to depart from this world and cannot handle any additional side effects, Big Pharma still needs to be paid.

The group demanded that suffering patients follow Germany’s 2G rule that permitted them to deny access to the unvaccinated (geimpft) or those who have recovered (genesen). The mental gymnastics needed to create this rule stated that since patients will come in close contact with caregivers, “human closeness” could be a “breeding ground for coronavirus transmission.” The associated declared, “[T]he 2G rule applies in our association, supplemented by situation-related measures, such as quick tests before encounters in closed rooms.” The phrase “encounters in closed rooms” is a delicate way to word suicide. I suppose St. Peter is checking for vaccination passports at the pearly gates in line with the pope’s guidelines.

The German Constitution protects personal freedom and the right to choose how to die, but you may not choose how to live.

Joint Chiefs Chairman, General Mark Milley, Sees Ukraine as a Long-Term Protracted Battle


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 5, 2022 | Sundance

April 5, 2022 | Sundance | 152 Comments

In the lead-in to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, all of the U.S. involvement in the country was operated by bureaucrats and politicians from the U.S. State Dept, CIA, Intelligence Community and Senate.  The Pentagon played a far lesser supportive role.

As a consequence of that previous investment, the current U.S response to the Russian “special military operation” has been spearheaded by the same DoS officials, intelligence agencies and politicians.  The Ukraine engagement is a political operation using NATO and western allies.   As we saw in the Afghanistan withdrawal, the Pentagon is a tool for the politics.

The division between the two interests (Pentagon vs State Dept) surfaces most quickly and easily when things SNAFU, and the blame casting begins. That’s when the division becomes noticeable to the public.  The important point to remember is this… despite the involvement of NATO in the current Ukraine response, it is not the Pentagon calling the shots, it’s the state dept.

Earlier today, Army Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee “[Ukraine] is a very protracted conflict.”  Milley anticipates many months, if not years, of combat fighting inside Ukraine as Putin carves out the eastern side of the country permanently.

According to Milley, “I think it’s at least measured in years… this is a very extended conflict that Russia has initiated. I think NATO, the U.S., Ukraine and all of the allies and partners supporting Ukraine are going to be involved in this for quite some time,” he said.  The nature of Milley’s remarks outlines what will likely become an insurgency/proxy war funded by the United States for years against Russia.

As much as JC Milley is a political figure, Milley is operating his role under the assumption and direction of what the State Dept is creating.  As a consequence of that long-term conflict prediction, the Pentagon is recommending several new rotating military bases for U.S. troops in eastern Europe.

It is also critical to recognize what is not being said by those same DoS and U.S. intelligence officials.  The absence is deafening. What is not being advanced is any discussion of a diplomatic resolution or negotiated settlement.  Milley’s defense request is predicated on a position that no diplomatic solution will be advanced.  This is a key part of both General Milley and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s testimony.

Ukraine cannot fight without the United States sending money and weapons.  Combine that with Austin and Milley’s statements about Ukraine, and what you quickly see, albeit undiscussed in media, is that a long-term war is baked into this cake.  The United States will not allow Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to enter negotiations with Vladimir Putin.

When we review western media statements about Putin not willing to enter “peace talks” with Zelenskyy, keep the testimony from Milley and Austin at the forefront of your mind.

Why would Putin enter any negotiations with Zelenskyy, knowing the U.S. position is to carry out a long-term insurgency war in Ukraine against Russian military forces?   What would be the purpose of Putin talking with Zelenskyy when the U.S. is openly saying the Ukraine military will be used by the State Dept. to maintain a conflict against Russian forces?

Russian President Putin knows the only group he could negotiate with are in the United States.   However, that truth would expose the puppet strings, so the United States government must play the pretend game.

The position of Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a puppet to the U.S. State Dept and Intelligence Community interests, is inherent in the Pentagon position.  If Zelenskyy was free to make decisions, Austin and Milley could not be so assured as to put a timeline on the Ukraine conflict.

This context becomes increasingly important as we look at how the media are positioning all resources to support a protracted war.  Anyone who is not 100% pro war in Ukraine, for whatever length of time the DoS/IC determine is needed, is immediately cast as a Putin apologist.

This war emanated from the bowels of politics via U.S. political influence in Ukraine to the extreme.  This level of U.S. involvement in Ukraine ultimately triggered Putin to say enough, and he started the “special military operation.”   In many ways the operation is not so much against Ukraine – but more against the U.S. involvement in supporting Ukraine against Russia.

Because it started from political origins, the Ukraine conflict will continue to be run from the nerve center of U.S. politics, the U.S. State Dept, the U.S. Senate, and CIA operations.  The actual Pentagon involvement will be transport and logistics for State Dept military operations.

Do you remember when the DoS Benghazi mission was attacked, and the Pentagon had no idea there was even a U.S. operational mission taking place in eastern Libya?  That same “Operation Zero Footprint” disconnect is what I am describing above.  It’s likely the Pentagon has very little idea what the State Department and CIA are doing in Ukraine right now.

This context is also why the propaganda around Ukraine in the United States has been so critical and important.  We will see this level of propaganda continue so long as it is the DoS/CIA running the western response to the war.

What makes this conflict a little more interesting, is the need for the U.S. to control the information.  We have seen the initial first phases of their control with Big Tech saying they will not permit anything that does not follow the official U.S. government narrative on social media.

Additionally, the State Department launching their own cyber-control division is an extension of this same intent.  They are planning for the long-term usefulness of Ukraine as a proxy battle against Russia.

.

Websites like CTH, who talk honestly about the background of what is happening in Ukraine, may eventually need to start using coded language in order to share information.  There are trillions at stake, and the people who control the events are not going to permit too much exposure.