Posted originally on CTH on January 26, 2026 | Sundance
The violence in Minneapolis erupted when the scale of financial fraud was discovered. The administration of President Trump has begun to highlight this non-pretending reality.
On the surface it seems like ICE enforcement is the issue; however, in reality Governor Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey have been leading a criminal syndicate, with the entire region engaged in money laundering and financial fraud.
State political leadership are involved. The local Minneapolis police are involved; the Minneapolis municipal leaders are involved; a large and dedicated segment of the migrant population is involved; corrupt judges and officers of the courts are involved; public and private sector agencies involved in fraudulent exploitation of benefits are involved, and the community activists -footsoldier communists- are engaged in the process of using civil unrest as cover.
As the violent insurgency escalates, President Trump has announced Border Czar Tom Homan is being sent to the region:
“I am sending Tom Homan to Minnesota tonight. He has not been involved in that area, but knows and likes many of the people there. Tom is tough but fair, and will report directly to me. Separately, a major investigation is going on with respect to the massive 20 Billion Dollar, Plus, Welfare Fraud that has taken place in Minnesota, and is at least partially responsible for the violent organized protests going on in the streets. Additionally, the DOJ and Congress are looking at “Congresswoman” Illhan Omar, who left Somalia with NOTHING, and is now reportedly worth more than 44 Million Dollars. Time will tell all. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” ~ President DJT
When we went to Iraq/Afghanistan, American political leadership said we were going to fight them “there” so that we didn’t need to fight them “here.” However, that same American political leadership then imported hundreds-of-thousands of them to here.
The communist-minded community activists have joined with the Antifa domestic terrorists and adopted the strategy of insurgencies. Former retired Green Beret Officer Eric Schwalm writing on X accurately draws attention to the similarity of action:
Eric Schwalm: “As a former Special Forces Warrant Officer with multiple rotations running counterinsurgency ops—both hunting insurgents and trying to separate them from sympathetic populations—I’ve seen organized resistance up close. From Anbar to Helmand, the pattern is familiar: spotters, cutouts, dead drops (or modern equivalents), disciplined comms, role specialization, and a willingness to absorb casualties while bleeding the stronger force slowly.
What’s unfolding in Minneapolis right now isn’t “protest.” It’s low-level insurgency infrastructure, built by people who’ve clearly studied the playbook.
Signal groups at 1,000-member cap per zone. Dedicated roles: mobile chasers, plate checkers logging vehicle data into shared databases, 24/7 dispatch nodes vectoring assets, SALUTE-style reporting (Size, Activity, Location, Unit, Time, Equipment) on suspected federal vehicles. Daily chat rotations and timed deletions to frustrate forensic recovery. Vetting processes for new joiners. Mutual aid from sympathetic locals (teachers providing cover, possible PD tip-offs on license plate lookups). Home-base coordination points. Rapid escalation from observation to physical obstruction—or worse.
This isn’t spontaneous outrage. This is C2 (command and control) with redundancy, OPSEC hygiene, and task organization that would make a SF team sergeant nod in recognition. Replace “ICE agents” with “occupying coalition forces” and the structure maps almost 1:1 to early-stage urban cells we hunted in the mid-2000s.
The most sobering part? It’s domestic. Funded, trained (somewhere), and directed by people who live in the same country they’re trying to paralyze law enforcement in.
When your own citizens build and operate this level of parallel intelligence and rapid-response network against federal officers—complete with doxxing, vehicle pursuits, and harassment that’s already turned lethal—you’re no longer dealing with civil disobedience. You’re facing a distributed resistance that’s learned the lessons of successful insurgencies: stay below the kinetic threshold most of the time, force over-reaction when possible, maintain popular support through narrative, and never present a single center of gravity.
I spent years training partner forces to dismantle exactly this kind of apparatus. Now pieces of it are standing up in American cities, enabled by elements of local government and civil society. That should keep every thinking American awake at night.
Not because I want escalation. But because history shows these things don’t de-escalate on their own once the infrastructure exists and the cadre believe they’re winning the information war.
We either recognize what we’re actually looking at—or we pretend it’s still just “activism” until the structures harden and spread.
Your call, America. But from where I sit, this isn’t January 2026 politics anymore. It’s phase one of something we’ve spent decades trying to keep off our own soil.” [source]
Posted originally on CTH on January 25, 2026 | Sundance
It is rumored that President Trump is likely to invoke the Insurrection Act in Minneapolis, Minnesota, perhaps as early as Monday afternoon. This is potentially why the following statement has been released by President Trump:
(VIA Truth Social) – During the four years of Crooked Joe Biden and Democrat failed leadership, Tens of Millions of Illegal Alien Criminals poured into our Country, including Hundreds of Thousands of Convicted Murderers, Rapists, Kidnappers, Drug Dealers, and Terrorists.
I won the Election in a Historic Landslide, and Republicans won Majorities in both the House and Senate, in large part, because we pledged to SEAL THE BORDER, which we have done, and launch the largest Mass Deportation of Illegal Alien Criminals in American History. This Deportation effort is underway, and in Republican run Cities and States, these operations are going peacefully and smoothly, because Local Law Enforcement Officers are allowed to work with their federal counterparts.
For example, in the five Republican run States of Texas, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Louisiana, ICE has arrested 150,245 Criminal Illegal Aliens over the past year — with ZERO protests, riots, or chaos. Why? Because Local Police and ICE are cooperating and working together.
Meanwhile, Democrat run Sanctuary Cities and States are REFUSING to cooperate with ICE, and they are actually encouraging Leftwing Agitators to unlawfully obstruct their operations to arrest the Worst of the Worst People!
By doing this, Democrats are putting Illegal Alien Criminals over Taxpaying, Law-Abiding Citizens, and they have created dangerous circumstances for EVERYONE involved. Tragically, two American Citizens have lost their lives as a result of this Democrat ensued chaos.
That is why I am hereby calling on Governor Walz, Mayor Frey, and EVERY Democrat Governor and Mayor in the United States of America to formally cooperate with the Trump Administration to enforce our Nation’s Laws, rather than resist and stoke the flames of Division, Chaos, and Violence:
1. Governor Walz and Mayor Frey should turn over all Criminal Illegal Aliens that are currently incarcerated in their State Prisons and Jails to Federal Authorities, along with all Illegal Criminals with an active warrant or known Criminal History, for Immediate Deportation.
2. State and Local Law Enforcement must agree to turn over all Illegal Aliens arrested by Local Police.
3. Local Police must assist Federal Law Enforcement in apprehending and detaining Illegal Aliens who are wanted for Crimes.
4. Democrat Politicians must partner with the Federal Government to protect American Citizens in the rapid removal of all Criminal Illegal Aliens in our Country. Some Democrats, in places like Memphis, Tennessee, or Washington, D.C., have done so, resulting in safer streets for ALL.
In addition, I am hereby calling on the United States Congress to immediately pass Legislation to END Sanctuary Cities, which is the root cause of all of these problems. American Cities should be Safe Sanctuaries for Law Abiding American Citizens ONLY, not Illegal Alien Criminals who broke our Nation’s Laws.
All of these requests are rooted in COMMON SENSE, and will provide the best possible circumstances to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! The Trump Administration is standing by and waiting for ANY Democrat to do the right thing, and work with us on these important matters of MAKING AMERICA SAFE like it is in all sections of our Country where we are, together with Local Leadership, participating and involved.
Posted originally on CTH on January 25, 2026 | Sundance
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears on ABC News with narrative engineer Jonathan Karl to discuss the outcomes of the Davos assembly, the Canadian trade conflict and the U.S-NATO deal over Greenland. Video and Transcript Below:
[Transcript] – KARL: I’m joined now exclusively by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who is just back from Davos and joins us here in the studio.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Secretary. Let me start with the threat that the president made just yesterday to Canada. He said, if Canada makes a deal with China, it will immediately be hit with a one hundred percent tariffs against all Canadian goods. Why is Donald Trump threatening Canada again with another trade war?
SCOTT BESSENT, (R) UNITED STATES TREASURY SECRETARY: Well, Jonathan, good to be with you. And look, Prime Minister Carney went to — went to China, came back, dropped some industry specific tariffs on Chinese goods, and we have a highly integrated market with Canada, sometimes in autos, which he dropped the E.V. tariff, I believe, from a hundred percent to six percent.
The goods can cross across the border during the manufacturing process six times. And we can’t let Canada become an opening that the Chinese pour their cheap goods into the U.S. We have a USMCA agreement, but based on — based on that, which is going to be renegotiated this summer, and I’m not sure what Prime Minister Carney is doing here, other than trying to virtue-signal to his globalist friends at Davos.
I don’t think he’s doing the best job for the Canadian people.
KARL: But there’s confusion from President Trump on this. I mean, we heard from him just — I think it was nine days ago, eight or nine days ago. He had this to say about Canada negotiating with China.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: How do you see the deals — Canada and China just signed trade deals between the two partners?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, that’s OK. That’s what he should be doing. I mean, it’s a good thing for him to sign a trade deal. If you can get a deal with China, he should do that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: OK. So, he gives a green light to a deal with China just after they do it. And then nine days later, he’s saying that’s it, hundred percent tariffs.
BESSENT: Well, no, there’s possibility of hundred percent tariffs if they do a free trade deal. So, what —
KARL: So, it’s not now? It’s — this is if they go further than what’s already happening?
BESSENT: Well, it’s — if they go further, if we see that the Canadians are allowing the Chinese to dump goods. And Jonathan, just to be clear that the Canadians, a few months ago, joined the U.S. in putting high steel tariffs on China because the Chinese are dumping. The Europeans also have done the same thing. And it looks like that Prime Minister Carney may have done some kind of about-face.
KARL: You’ve got tariffs that have been in place since April. And the idea is to bring back manufacturing jobs, but in fact, every month, according to the data from the Fed, every month since April, we’ve actually had a decline in manufacturing jobs in the country.
BESSENT: Well, that — those are the manufacturing jobs. What we’re seeing is a burst in construction jobs because we’re seeing record number of factories construction. I was just in my home state of South Carolina a couple of months ago. There’s a rare earth magnets factory, 800 construction jobs. It could morph into 3,000 factory jobs.
I was just at the Boeing plant in Charleston. Thanks to President Trump’s constant push during the trade deals to sell more aircraft, Boeing is expanding their capacity there by fifty percent. So those will be construction jobs that morph into factory jobs. So, I could not be more upbeat about the prospects for manufacturing, for the economy in 2026.
KARL: And how do you explain what happened with Greenland? I mean, the president goes into Davos, not ruling out military force, talking about imposing tariffs on the Europeans who oppose us retaking Greenland. And now, suddenly, he’s OK with essentially, it seems like the same agreement that’s been in place since the ’50s.
BESSENT: Well, I think you haven’t seen the full agreement. Secretary General, Mark Rutte was a very good interlocutor between the Europeans and between President Trump. But look, a lot — a lot of things have changed up in Greenland. Jonathan, do you know what the Istanbul Bridge is?
KARL: Tell me.
BESSENT: A Chinese freight ship that, for the first time in October, came across the Arctic into the U.K. They are shortening their travel time. So, the Arctic is changing. Very important strategically for the U.S. to help control that.
KARL: OK. But again, it seems like we’re going to basically have the — I mean, Greenland’s not going to become part of the United States. We’re going to have the same access that we’ve had.
(CROSSTALK)
BESSENT: I promise you, the deal is not what we had before.
KARL: OK.
BESSENT: It is much more fulsome for the United States. And again, Jon, just to be clear, for 150 years, American presidents have had their eye on Greenland. We administered Greenland during World War II after the Danish were invaded by the Nazis.
KARL: Let me — let me ask you. Let me show you a photo that was posted by the French Defense Ministry yesterday showing coffins of French soldiers who died fighting alongside Americans in Afghanistan. And we also heard from the Italian prime minister, a good supporter of Donald Trump, Prime Minister Meloni, reacted to what the president had to say about European troops serving in Afghanistan, saying that she was astonished, and noted that 53 Italian service members were killed, more than 700 were wounded.
Does the president regret what he said about our NATO allies and their service in Afghanistan?
BESSENT: Jon, I was traveling. I haven’t seen any of that, but I can tell you that the president values NATO, and since his first term, he has worked hard to make sure that our NATO allies are pulling their fair share.
Just to be clear, since 1980, since 1980, the U.S. has spent $22 trillion more on defense than NATO. And now by President Trump getting our NATO allies, including Canada, who was very deficient in the funding, NATO is going to be stronger than ever.
KARL: But this is about sacrifice. Let’s play President Trump’s words so you understand exactly what they were talking about, what I’m talking about.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan or this or that, and they did. They stayed a little back little off the front lines.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: I mean, do you understand why our European allies, the ones you’re negotiating with, are insulted by that?
BESSENT: Again, I think President Trump is laser-focused on the strongest NATO possible, that he has worked to negotiate a settlement on Russia-Ukraine. The U.S. has made much bigger sacrifices than the European has — Europeans have. We have put 25 percent tariffs on India for buying Russian oil. Guess what happened last week? The Europeans signed a trade deal with India.
They — and just to be clear again, the Russian oil goes into India. The refined products come out, and the Europeans buy the refined products. They are financing the war against themselves. So, President Trump’s leadership, we will eventually end this Ukraine-Russia war.
KARL: And before you go, I know this is not your lane, but I got to ask you about what’s happened in Minneapolis. As a member of the — of the Trump cabinet, are you concerned to see another American citizen ends up dead, shot by federal law enforcement?
BESSENT: Jonathan, it’s a tragedy when anyone dies, but I can tell you the situation on the ground there is being stirred up by Governor Walz. I was out there two weeks ago. Governor Walz declined to provide a security detail for me to go into the Minnesota capital with the state police. So, he is fomenting the — he is fomenting chaos because there is substantial waste, fraud and abuse.
My job as Treasury secretary is to investigate that, and I think that, you know, this chaos that’s going on out there, and again, I am sorry that this gentleman is dead, but he did bring a nine-millimeter semi-automatic weapon with two cartridges to what was supposed to be a peaceful protest. I think that there are a lot of paid agitators who are ginning things up, and the governor has not done a good job of tamping this down.
KARL: Yes. I mean, as you know, he was an ICU nurse, worked for the Veterans Administration, and there’s no evidence that he brandished the gun whatsoever. In fact, it appears that —
BESSENT: He brought a gun.
(CROSSTALK)
KARL: He’d been disarmed before he was —
(CROSSTALK)
BESSENT: He brought a gun. Have you ever gone to a protest, Jonathan?
KARL: I mean, we do have a Second Amendment in this country that —
BESSENT: Jonathan, have you ever gone to a protest?
KARL: I mean —
BESSENT: Have you gone to a protest?
KARL: I mean, I’ve — no, actually, as a reporter covering it.
BESSENT: OK. I’ve been to a protest.
KARL: Yes.
BESSENT: Guess what? I didn’t bring a gun. I brought a billboard.
KARL: OK. Secretary Bessent, thank you for joining us.
Coming up, we’ll have the latest on the massive winter storm sweeping the country. We’re back in a moment.
Posted originally on CTH on January 25, 2026 | Sundance
Canadian Ambassador to the U.S., Kirsten Hillman, appears on CBS Face The Nation to discuss ongoing political and trade relations between Canada and the United States – Video and Transcript below.
During one segment of the interview, Ambassador Hillman is asked about the dissolution of the USMCA (CUSMA) trade agreement, and immediately Hillman falls back upon the same Justin Trudeau position of the government. The U.S. politicians will not allow President Trump to dissolve the USMCA.
“I think that we have to believe that our political leaders are going to be listening to the people in the constituencies for whom that instrument was drawn up, and they’re saying, this is vital to us, do no harm.”
Canada is counting on American political opposition to defend the economic interests of Canada. This is exactly the same position that former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau espoused in 2017 and 2018.
[Transcript] – So a lot is going on in the relationship between our two countries. We are so deeply integrated here on trade, you buy more from the U.S. than any other country. We have the world’s longest land border. We have shared defense interests through NATO, shared air defense with NORAD. Are we like in the middle of a divorce? Like, how do you describe the relationship?
AMB HILLMAN I- I- we’re not in the middle of a divorce, but we are in the middle of a change. There’s no question about it. I think that we are finding ourselves, quite frankly, in- in a situation where some of the foundations that have governed our relationship for a long time, that you know, integrated supply chains are good, that working together on strategic issues is- are important, that looking out for each other in important ways is- is a number one priority. I think in some quarters, Canadians feel that those foundations are being tested. We will adapt. We will make it through, I have no doubt about that, but it’s yeah, it’s a complicated time.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Well, you know, Canada had agreed to join this Board of Peace that President Trump announced out at Davos, and then overnight Thursday, the president disinvited Canada. Is this kind of public snub interfering in the relationship, and- and what does that indicate to you about what this Board of Peace is that Canada had said it did want to be a part of?
AMB HILLMAN
So we had expressed an interest in the Board of Peace a number of weeks ago, and essentially, a Board of Peace that is seeking to find peace, in particular, in Gaza and stability, is something that Canada was very much supportive of. The- the parameters of that Board of Peace had just really started to come out and- and our government was considering it, but hadn’t- hadn’t really made a decision. But I think that- that honestly, I think that the most important thing to say here, from the perspective of Canada, is that we have always and will always be promoting peace and stability and human rights around the world. We’ll do it with our allies in various fora, at NATO, at the U.N. bilaterally with like minded countries. So we’re not going to change that and- and we will give it our all in- in any fora that- that is available to us.
MARGARET BRENNAN
It- It’s kind of now described as an alternative to the United Nations. Is that something you’re comfortable with?
AMB HILLMAN
Well, we are deep supporters of the United Nations. We feel that it’s, you know, it’s not perfect, no large institution is, but having a place where the whole world can get together and express their views on issues that are important to the globe is vital. And as I say, NATO is vital, and we work with our EU counterparts and EU-Canada, you know, security discussions and in- in various other configurations. So probably all of these different fora are- are essential. The Board of Peace has yet to be fully, I think, understood, and we’ll see- we’ll- we’ll see where that goes, but the outcomes are what matter to Canada.
MARGARET BRENNAN
So your prime minister gave a national address on Thursday, and I understand he denounced authoritarianism and exclusion. He did not mention President Trump by name, but he did rebuke the claim that Trump made at Davos, that Canada lives because of the United States. You’re talking about what people receive at home, everyone has local politics, so when something like that is said, do you fear that this is starting not just a spat, but this is like a generational split between our two countries, like, how are people receiving this at home?
AMB HILLMAN
Look, I think Canadians- Canadians know that Canada lives because of Canadians, because what Canadians do for Canada, and right now, that’s where we’re trying to focus our attention. By doing what- you know, focusing our attention on what we can control as a nation for ourselves and our own economy and our own security and our own relationships around the world. The United States is always going to be a vital partner. Geography, as you said in your opener, 5,500 miles of border, deep ties, millions of Canadians and Americans that work together every day, that- that you know, do research and study and have families across the border so that- that is there, and that is something that I actually think brings strength to the relationship at times where, you know, in other- at other levels, and maybe at the political level, it- it’s more complicated.
MARGARET BRENNAN
It’s very complicated. I mean, it- it’s almost unthinkable that a phrase like authoritarianism and exclusion that that could be thought to be referring to the leader of the president of the United States?
AMB HILLMAN
Well, I think that there are concerns globally for- by our government, that we have institutions and norms, rules that have governed our countries, yours, mine, and all like minded countries for generations that are really being tested, really being tested. And- and I think what matters is how we react in the face of these tests, and for us, for our country, for our prime minister, you know, there are important implications for our country. And he’s- he’s trying to articulate a vision. And I think he is articulating a very strong vision for how we must adapt. And again, it’s- it’s about being pragmatic and principled, and that’s- that’s what we’re going to continue to be.
MARGARET BRENNAN
You have had a long career here in the United States, deeply involved with trade in particular. You helped to negotiate that free trade deal known as USMCA during the first Trump administration. President Trump was asked about it, January 13. He said, I really don’t care in terms of renewing it, there’s no real advantage. We don’t need Canada products here. Is that free trade deal doomed?
AMB HILLMAN
No, it is not doomed. That is my view. All three countries, Canada, the U.S. and Mexico did broad consultations, national consultations, with their business communities in particular, on what- how that agreement works for them. And really without exception, the American comments back were sure we’d like to maybe update this or change this a little bit, but job number one is to do no harm to this agreement, which is the economic foundation of our continental partnership and leads to very important U.S. competitiveness, and Canadian and Mexican competitiveness vis-a-vis other parts of this world. So I think there’s- I think that we have to believe that our political leaders are going to be listening to the people in the constituencies for whom that instrument was drawn up, and they’re saying, this is vital to us, do no harm.
MARGARET BRENNAN
So do you think there’s a bilateral trade deal here? Is that what the Trump administration is going for, rather than the three way deal or–
AMB HILLMAN
I- you know, I think- I- I- we hear- we hear that sometimes, we hear different things. It is important to remember that even within that agreement, there are a lot of bilateral elements, but there is- there are advantages to doing things trilaterally. There’s a lot of supply chain movement that happens between our three countries. And if you, if you break it into two, you could have different rules and disconnects there that are inefficient for business. So we’re driven- look, Canada will be driven by what the best thing to do is, as I say, for the companies and constituencies that are relying on that agreement to create jobs.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Because you heard the commerce secretary say at Davos, you know, globalism isn’t working. I mean, these free trade deals are part of that globalism. And it was just a week ago, your prime minister was in Beijing, and he described Canada’s relationship with China as more predictable than its relationship with the United States. He really meant more predictable than the Trump administration’s United States.
AMB HILLMAN
Look, there’s no question that the last number of months have been unpredictable for us in our relationship with the United States. You know, we have a trade agreement that had us virtually tariff free between our two countries, and now we have very serious tariffs on steel, aluminum, autos, lumber, and that’s causing a lot of challenges within our country. There are people that are losing their jobs. There are industries that are being reoriented, and it’s very difficult. So that is seen as, yes, unpredictable.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But fortress North America had been an idea. I mean, the treasury secretary talked about it, that the United States, Mexico, Canada, we could stand up together, you know, have shared values, and stand up to China. That seems dead, if Canada is really describing a new alliance here with Beijing.
AMB HILLMAN: Well, I think- I think we have to put this in perspective. The- the agreement that we did with China a few weeks ago was a very focused and surgical agreement that was largely, or almost exclusively, designed to de-escalate some tariff escalation that had happened over the past year and a bit. So over the past year and a bit, China had put very punitive tariffs on Canadian agricultural products and fish and seafood, shutting Canadians out from one of their primary markets, if not for some of them, their primary market. And so we went to Beijing to re-establish market access for our farmers and our fishers. It’s exactly what the U.S. administration did in October when they re-established market access for U.S. soy farmers, and in exchange, rolled back some tariffs and fees. So this is a very pragmatic, very focused approach. I think it’s important to put it in context.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But even Ontario’s premier said this is letting Chinese “spy cars” into your country. I think he means electric vehicles that will be cheaply made in China. Are you worried about becoming too beholden to China and its cheap manufacturing?
AMB HILLMAN: No, we’re not, because, we- the- the auto side of this agreement was again to take us back to 2023, we had the importation of vehicles made in China. Many of those were Teslas, as a matter of fact, and we’ve gone back and stuck to the level of 2023 for those imports. So this isn’t a revolutionary new thing. This is really just trying to roll back or de-escalate what had been escalated over the past year and a bit.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Well, the treasury secretary is saying that Albertans are going to have a referendum on succeeding from Canada. He seems to be urging that. What do you make of this–
AMB HILLMAN: Well–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –and comments like that?
AMB HILLMAN: I think it’s important to let Albertans and Canadians manage their own very delicate domestic, you know, politics themselves. I think that that’s probably wise counsel. Having grown up in Alberta, you know, it’s a- it’s a- it’s a province that has lots of strong views about the way in which it interacts with the rest of the country, as do other parts of our nation. And those are important debates to be had, but they’re debates for our country to have within its own citizenry.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It seems to be stirring the pot there a bit, but I want to ask you what your prime minister said at Davos. He got a standing ovation for this speech. He described a ruptured global order, the end of a nice story, and the beginning of a new brutal reality, which he described as a predatory one. Take a listen.
MARK CARNEY, PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA: Stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised. Call it what it is: a system of intensifying great power rivalry, where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion.
[SOUNDS ON TAPE ENDS]
MARGARET BRENNAN: He said, if you’re not at the table, then you’re on the menu. What does this new world order look like?
AMB HILLMAN
Well, that’s a good question. I mean, I think he laid out in his- his discussion, his speech, his- his view of what is happening in our world. And it’s- it’s a world in which rules that governed every player in the globe, every country were maybe not perfectly abided by, as he said, maybe not always exactly exercised as one would hope, but still were sufficient to form the basis of the prosperity, the stability, the predictability that we all used to maximize peace and stability and- and maximize economic reality. So we’re moving away our economic benefits, and we’re moving away from that, and we have to- countries like ours, have to figure out what that means for us. I think that what it does mean for us is that we can’t walk away from our principles. We can’t walk away from our belief in rules that are to be abided by by everyone if they commit to them. But at the same time, we have to be pragmatic and we have to look inward to control what we can within our own economies to be as resilient as we possibly can within our own economies, and part of that means engaging pragmatically with a broad array of countries around the world, in trade agreements, in investment relationships and in partnerships.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Sounds like Canada is picking off our friends.
AMB HILLMAN: You know, I- no, I think Canada is trying to make sure that it is the most resilient it can be for our own benefit.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m being told that President Trump posted on social media just a few moments ago that Canada is against the Golden Dome over Greenland and has voted against it to choose to be closer to China. That’s how it was described to me. Yet President Trump had previously talked about Canada participating in this Golden Dome project, which isn’t yet built, but it’s supposed to be missile- layered missile defense, as I understand it. Do you know what he’s talking about, that Canada has rejected being involved?
AMB HILLMAN: No, I’m afraid I don’t, but what I can say about the Golden Dome is this, Canada is- is investing over $80 billion over the next five years in our defens-, in our defense systems, and a big part of that is Arctic defense. And a big part of our Arctic defense investments are something called over-the-horizon radar, which is a system that allows us to see the threats that are coming into the Arctic before they arrive. So that is part- and when we have talked to the president about protecting our hemisphere, we have talked about ways in which our different capabilities can work together so that we have eyes on the region and we cooperate in a way that protects both of our countries.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the president has described that as Canada wanting to plug in to the system. As you understand it, that’s the better description, your own system that would coordinate?
AMB HILLMAN: Right. Much as we do across all sorts of defense systems, where we’re interoperable. We- we work together. We make our investments that make sense for Canada and defending our territory and defending our sovereignty, but we work with the Americans and- and other allies to maximize the benefits of those.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So in- in short, you do think there needs to be more focus on Arctic defense, but you’re on board to help do that?
AMB HILLMAN: We’re deeply committed to Arctic defense. Absolutely.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I need to ask you about NATO, because you’re also a partner at NATO. The only time that NATO’s Article 5 was ever invoked, and you know this, was after the 9/11 attacks on this country. That collective defense clause, an attack on one is an attack on all, meant that Europe and Canada, they sent troops right alongside American troops on the battlefield in Afghanistan. Here’s what President Trump said.
[SOUND ON TAPE BEGINS]
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan, or this or that. And they did. They stayed a little back, little off the front lines.
[SOUNDS ON TAPE ENDS]
MARGARET BRENNAN
He was speaking about all NATO troops. But we did check and about 40,000 Canadians deployed to Afghanistan between 2001 and 2014. 158 were killed, 635 wounded in action. What is a remark like that do to people at home?
AMB HILLMAN: You know, I think what’s most important is that we know what our Canadians have done, and I know that your American armed forces are deeply respectful and deeply appreciative of having stood side by side with Canadians in those very, very treacherous and difficult fights. We know that to be true. They know that to be true, and that’s what matters.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Ambassador, thank you for your time as it wraps up here in Washington.
AMB HILLMAN: Thank you for having me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Great to have you. We’ll be back in a moment.
Posted originally on CTH on January 24, 2026 | Sundance
Canada signing a trade agreement with China to permit the import of EVs is another escalation in the exploitation of the USMCA compact.
For the position of China, using Canada as a route to ship component goods into the United States is just a slight expansion of their current technique to avoid U.S. tariffs. However, President Trump is taking action immediately.
Noting on his Truth Social platform, President Trump announced that if Canada does effectively go through with allowing the import of Chinese electric vehicles, then the U.S. will impose a 100% countervailing duty against all Canadian imports.
“[…] As a part of the deal, Canada will ease the tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles that it imposed in tandem with the U.S. in 2024. In exchange, China will lower retaliatory tariffs on key Canadian agricultural products.” ~Politico
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney continues giving President Trump the ammunition to dissolve the USMCA trade agreement this year.
USTR Jamieson Greer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick have both expressed anticipation of a new bilateral trade agreement to stop all this Canadian nonsense.
Posted originally on CTH on January 24, 2026 | Sundance
The bad news is that nothing much visible has changed in language or action from the negotiations. The good news is that for the first time military leadership from Russia, Ukraine and the USA joined with the diplomatic negotiators. This could indicate they are trying to work out the details on just how a ceasefire could be executed.
For the first time a trilateral discussion was held between the warring parties of Ukraine and Russia with the U.S. team working as an intermediary. The venue was the UAE acting as neutral turf for the discussion. According to Ukraine President Zelensky, the meeting in the Emirates was the first time representatives from Ukraine, Russia, and the United States were engaged in a trilateral format since the full-scale war began.
Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner traveled to the UAE meeting after three hours of discussions with Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. Zelensky noted the arrangements were coordinated by the American side, describing the meeting as one of several unexpected diplomatic initiatives that emerged during negotiations.
ZELENSKYY – Our delegation delivered a report; the meetings in the UAE have concluded. And this was the first format of this kind in quite some time: two days of trilateral meetings. A lot was discussed, and it is important that the conversations were constructive.
The negotiations also involved military representatives from all three sides. From our side, today’s participants included Rustem Umerov, Kyrylo Budanov, Andrii Hnatov, Davyd Arakhamiia, Sergiy Kyslytsya, and Vadym Skibitskyi. From the American side, the participants were Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Dan Driscoll, Alexus Grynkewich, and Josh Gruenbaum. The Russian side was represented by members of their military intelligence and armed forces.
The central focus of the discussions was the possible parameters for ending the war. I highly value the understanding of the need for American monitoring and oversight of the process of ending the war and ensuring genuine security.
The American side raised the issue of potential formats for formalizing the parameters for ending the war, as well as the security conditions required to achieve this.
As a result of the meetings held over these days, all sides agreed to report back in their capitals on each aspect of the negotiations and to coordinate further steps with their leaders. The military representatives identified a list of issues for a potential next meeting. Provided there is readiness to move forward – and Ukraine is ready – further meetings will take place, potentially as early as next week. I expect a personal briefing from the delegation upon its return.
I am grateful to the United Arab Emirates, and personally to the President of the Emirates, for their mediation and their readiness to host further meetings.
Ukraine is working for peace and security. Thank you to everyone who is helping. (link)
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stunned the World Economic Forum by revealing European leaders privately urged him not to mention long-range weapons like Tomahawks. Zelenskyy said Europe’s fear of offending allies, internal rivalries, and silence are allowing Russia to keep striking Ukraine—and could soon threaten NATO itself.
Posted originally on CTH on January 23, 2026 | Sundance
Hilarious Bloomberg interview with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. The topics are European trade and politics combined with the overlay of Canadian trade and politics. The Bloomberg panelists question Lutnick about the similar “feelings” of the Europeans and Canadians, as it pertains to the outcome of trade discussions. It’s the feelings that make things difficult to negotiate.
Secretary Lutnick doesn’t dismiss the narrative but deconstructs the substance of the topic brilliantly. Lutnick notes the ridiculous nature of the Canadian trade position and their decision to go running to China because their feelings are hurt. Lutnick then affirms the USMCA is going to be dissolved mid-summer and fall of this year.
As we noted at the end of last year, splitting the USMCA into two bilateral trade deals, one for Mexico and one for Canada, will be one of the most interesting and long-term economically significant moves in U.S. trade history. It is going to be a lot of fun to watch these negotiations, and the pre-positioning gives us a preview of what is to come.
Mexico is doing everything almost perfectly in preparation for their bilateral deal. Canada is doing exactly the opposite and positioning themselves for the worst possible outcome of a deal with the USA. The disparity in approaches is so different, even now it is remarkable to watch. PROMPTED:
(VIA BLOOMBERG) – […] Canada has “the second-best deal in the world” with its access to the US market, Lutnick said, behind only Mexico. The Commerce chief also indicated that Canada’s tilt toward China could become an issue in talks over revamping the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement known as USMCA.
If Ottawa opts to import Chinese electric vehicles and other trade-strengthening steps with Beijing, “do you think the president of the United States is going to say you should keep having the second-best deal in the world” during USMCA talks, Lutnick questioned.
[…] Canada’s Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne told reporters in Quebec City that every Group of Seven nation is charting its own strategic path forward with China, and Canada is no different.
“We’ll continue to work hand in hand with our US partner,” he said. “At the same time, I think Canadians have understood by now that diversification is key. We need to be more resilient.”
Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum said separately Thursday that her nation will work to maintain the USMCA trade deal despite recent disputes between Carney and US President Donald Trump. Speaking at her daily press briefing, she also said she would try to talk with Carney.
Next week, Mexico’s Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard will travel to Washington for trade talks, Sheinbaum also said, speaking in Puebla, Mexico. (read full article)
Having travelled to regions of the world in discussions with people who factually determine economic outcomes, it is clear that every single policy shift undertaken by the Canadian government of Mark Carney is exactly the opposite of what is needed. In the next 24 months, the lifestyle of every Canadian will forever change.
President Trump is reestablishing an entirely new economic, trade and finance system. The era of the Marshal Plan is over; it has been factually deconstructed in the past 12 months.
Canadians and Europeans are desperately trying to offset the ramifications, hold on to their economic benefits and find a new mechanism to afford the domestic indulgences now eliminated by President Trump and the absence of money.
The EU and Canada have chased ‘climate change’ and ‘green energy’ schemes into a dead end of economic crisis. German Chancellor Merz has admitted the problem to the world. The direct and collateral damage is generational, and only just now beginning to surface.
When combined with their intransigent resistance to adapt to President Trump’s global economic and trade reset, core issue “reciprocity”, this reality takes both economies down a path that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Choosing to embrace China in lieu of modifying bilateral trade agreements with the USA is a short-sighted fool’s errand. Unfortunately, with political calculations each entity, Canada and/or the EU collective, are pandering to their “feeling” base out of an unwillingness to change trade behavior as demanded by Trump.
From Ottawa to London, to Paris, Berlin and Brussels the geopolitical landscape is changing permanently as President Donald Trump resets their global trade relationship to the United States.
President Trump is leveraging the largest consumer market in the world to the benefit of the customer; that’s America. Trump’s direct and specific intent is transactional, to rebuild an industrial and self-sufficient nation that is the envy of the world.
For several generations, Canada and the EU have exploited their biggest customer and taken the U.S. for granted. Both the EU and Canadian economies are stalled and soon to be shrinking. The USA economy will easily grow above 5% GDP and Mexico is likely to be the biggest beneficiary of their proactive positioning.
It’s not about ‘feelings’ it is just the cold reality of the economics.
Posted originally on CTH on January 23, 2026 | Sundance
Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) Director Dr. Mehmet Oz and Deputy Director for Health and Human Services, Jim O’Neill, just released a stunning video from Minnesota. They discuss a former linen factory that was transformed into 400 Medicaid businesses that generated almost $380 million in billing to CMS.
It doesn’t make sense. One industrial building housing almost 400 individual Medicaid businesses that cost taxpayers $380 million in payments for services that are now under investigation. It is almost guaranteed these complex houses fraudulent fake businesses. Director Oz dropped the video on his X account.
You’d never believe the kinds of fraud schemes happening in Minnesota. @HHS_Jim and I were taken aback to say the least.
“Why did no one in the state figure out this was a concern? Perplexingly to me, in a place of this nature, an industrial complex that people would not come to for child care or autism care or transportation support, how is it possible this could come up like an abscess in the heart of Minneapolis and nobody was watching?!”
“They generated about $380 million of billing that you, the taxpayer, were putting up. That means roughly each business had a million dollars of billing.” … “It’s an industrial area. There’s no reason that you have a mother bring her child.”
“You can’t imagine getting extra business support. An autistic child probably wouldn’t want to come here. You hear the noise. It’s just not a hospitable place.”
“The question is, how is it possible 400 businesses billing almost $400 million were able to thrive here?!”
“I think it’s because they weren’t looking. They didn’t want to know that this problem was happening here.”
“We’re here to figure out why these folks are being defrauded. Why the people who live in Minnesota aren’t getting access to the care they deserve because it’s been stolen.”
Posted originally on CTH on January 23, 2026 | Sundance
Many of you may remember back in 2024 I strongly urged President Trump to consider appointing Harriet Hageman as CIA Director for very specific reasons and intents. Watch this video below and you will see why she was my preferred choice.
Representative Hageman has just found an important trail to discover the missing documents, recordings and transcripts that were destroyed by the January 6 Committee. WATCH:
Keep in mind that former AAG Mary McCord was working for the J6 Committee at the time period being discussed. When the J6 Committee closed, McCord went to work directly with Jack Smith.
McCord was inside the J6 Committee feeding information to the DOJ and Jack Smith. McCord then went to work for Jack Smith.
Always scheming, organizing and planning in the background of Washington DC, Mary McCord was conducting surveillance of an Oathkeeper chat room and sending information to the FBI following the November 2020 election, and in the runup to the January 6, 2021, protest.
This is interesting on a variety of levels, because we have documented Mary McCord working on the Trump-Russia fabrication [FISA warrant], the CIA [Ukraine] impeachment fabrication [as key staff], the January 6th Committee fabrication [again staff], and the Jack Smith fabrication. Now we see Mary McCord actively setting up the “insurrection narrative” ahead of the J6 protests.
It appears Mrs. McCord then forwarded the email to someone [REDACTED], likely within the J6 Committee or Jack Smith investigation on Sept 24, 2021.
There’s a reason why the J6 Committee deleted the records of their activity, an angle missed by most. When you understand what they hid, and why they did it, you then understand why current Speaker of The House Mike Johnson will not go near the subject.
The J6 targets were identified through a collaboration between the legislative research group and the FBI. [That’s unlawful by the way – but that’s another matter]. The FBI contracted Palantir to identify the targets using facial recognition software and private sector databases.
Once identified, the targets were then searched in the NSA database for a fulsome context of identity. All subsequent electronic metadata of the targets was retrieved and utilized in prosecution; however, no one ever discovered this was the collaborative method. That has not come out yet.
Ultimately, the J6 Committee hiding and deleting their files and operational techniques was due to several issues. They really didn’t have a choice, given the unknowns of an incoming Republican majority.
First, the collaboration with the FBI is unconstitutional. Legislative officers are not law enforcement officers. There is a separation of powers issue.
Second, ultimately – and most consequentially – all of the participants did not want the American public aware of the mass surveillance techniques that were carried out as part of the ’round up.’ That’s where FBI operation Arctic Frost appears in the conversation.
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– 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.
If there is one corrupt DC player who has escaped scrutiny for her corrupt endeavors, it would be Mary McCord.
More than any other Lawfare operative, within Main Justice, Mary McCord sits at the center of every table in the manufacturing of cases against Donald Trump. {GO DEEP} Mary McCord’s husband is Sheldon Snook; he was the right hand to the legal counsel of Chief Justice John Roberts.
When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous ‘Woods File’). That’s why the Steele Dossier ultimately became important. It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump.
When the application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin. Carlin quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016, just before the final application was submitted (October 21,2016). John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.
♦ When the FISA application was finally submitted (approved by Sally Yates and James Comey), it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant.
A few months later, February 2017, with Donald Trump now in office as President, it was Mary McCord who went with Deputy AG Sally Yates to the White House to confront White House legal counsel Don McGahn over the Michael Flynn interview with FBI agents. The surveillance of Flynn’s calls was presumably done under the auspices and legal authority of the FISA application Mary McCord previously was in charge of submitting.
♦ At the time the Carter Page application was filed (October 21, 2016), Mary McCord’s chief legal counsel inside the office was a DOJ-NSD lawyer named Michael Atkinson. In his role as the legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, it was Atkinson’s job to review and audit all FISA applications submitted from inside the DOJ. Essentially, Atkinson was the DOJ internal compliance officer in charge of making sure all FISA applications were correctly assembled and documented.
♦ When the anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint was filed against President Trump, for the issues of the Ukraine call with President Zelensky, the Intelligence Community Inspector General had to change the rules for the complaint to allow an anonymous submission. Prior to this change, all intelligence whistleblowers had to put their name on the complaint. It was this 2019 IGIC who changed the rules. Who was the Intelligence Community Inspector General? Michael Atkinson.
Yes, after she left main justice, Mary McCord took the job of working for Chairman Jerry Nadler and Chairman Adam Schiff as the chief legal advisor inside the investigation that led to the construction of articles of impeachment. As a consequence, Mary McCord received the newly permitted anonymous whistleblower complaint from her old office colleague Michael Atkinson.
KEY: Michael Atkinson was forced to testify to the joint House impeachment committee about the CIA whistleblower rule change and the process he authorized and participated in as the Intelligence Community Inspector General. Adam Schiffsealed that deposition, and no one has ever discussed what Atkinson said when questioned.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (Legislative Branch) can unseal and release that testimony to the CIA or ODNI (Executive Branch), and Tulsi Gabbard who is in charge of the ICIG can declassify Michael Atkinson’s deposition. However, Speaker Mike Johnson has to transfer it from the legislative to the executive, and unfortunately it does not appear that Speaker Johnson wants to open that can-of-worms – at least, not willingly.
Moving on…
♦ During his investigation of the Carter Page application, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered an intentional lie inside the Carter Page FISA application (directly related to the ‘Woods File’), which his team eventually tracked to FBI counterintelligence division lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith. Eventually Clinesmith was criminally charged with fabricating evidence (changed wording on an email) in order to intentionally falsify the underlying evidence in the FISA submission.
When John Durham took the Clinesmith indictment to court, the judge in the case was James Boasberg.
♦ In addition to being a DC criminal judge, James Boasberg is also a FISA court judge who signed-off on one of the renewals for the FISA application that was submitted using fraudulent evidence fabricated by Kevin Clinesmith. In essence, now the presiding judge over the FISA court, Boasberg was the FISC judge who was tricked by Clinesmith, and now the criminal court judge in charge of determining Clinesmith’s legal outcome. Judge Boasberg eventually sentenced Clinesmith to 6 months probation.
As an outcome of continued FISA application fraud and wrongdoing by the FBI, in their exploitation of searches of the NSA database, Presiding FISC Judge James Boasberg appointed an amici curiae advisor to the court who would monitor the DOJ-NSD submissions and ongoing FBI activities.
Who did James Boasberg select as a FISA court amicus? Mary McCord.
♦ SUMMARY: Mary McCord submitted the original false FISA application to the court using the demonstrably false Dossier. Mary McCord participated in the framing of Michael Flynn. Mary McCord worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to create a fraudulent whistleblower complaint against President Trump; and Mary McCord used that manipulated complaint to assemble articles of impeachment on behalf of the joint House Intel and Judiciary Committee. Mary McCord then took up a defensive position inside the FISA court to protect the DOJ and FBI from sunlight upon all the aforementioned corrupt activity.
You can clearly see how Mary McCord would be a person of interest if anyone was going to start digging into corruption internally within the FBI, DOJ or DOJ-NSD.
What happened next….
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)
Yes, that is correct. After seeding and guiding all of the Lawfare attacks against candidate Donald Trump, then President-Elect Donald Trump, then President Donald Trump, Mary McCord took up a key legal position inside the J6 Committee to continue the Lawfare against President Trump after he left office.
But wait…. remember the stories of the J6 investigative staff going to work for Jack Smith on the investigation of Donald Trump, that included the raid on Mar-a-Lago? Well, Mary McCord was a member of that team [citation]; all indications are that her efforts continued as a quiet member of the Special Counsel team
That’s the context; now I want to go back a little.
First, when did Mary McCord become “amicus” to the FISA court? ANSWER: When the court (Boasberg) discovered IG Michael Horowitz was investigating the fraudulent FISA application. In essence, the FISA Court appointed the person who submitted the fraudulent filing, to advise on any ramifications from the fraudulent filing. See how that works?
Now, let’s go deeper….
When Mary McCord went to the White House, with Sally Yates, to talk to White House Counsel Don McGhan, about the Flynn call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, and the subsequent CBS interview with VP Pence, where Pence’s denial of any wrongdoing took place, the background narrative in the attack against Flynn was the Logan Act.
The construct of the Logan Act narrative was pure Lawfare, and DAG Sally Yates with Acting NSD AAG Mary McCord were the architects.
Why was the DOJ National Security Division concerned with a conflict between what Pence said on CBS and what Flynn said about his conversations with Kislyak?
This is where a big mental reset is needed.
Flynn did nothing wrong. The incoming National Security Advisor can say anything he wants with the Russian ambassador, short of giving away classified details of any national security issue. In December of 2016, if Michael Flynn wanted to say Obama was an a**hole, and the Trump administration disagreed with everything he ever did, the incoming NSA was free to do so. There was simply nothing wrong with that conversation – regardless of content.
So, why were McCord and Yates so determined to make an issue in media and in confrontation with the White House?
Why did the DOJ-NSD even care? This is the part that people overlooked when the media narrative was driving the news cycle. People got too stuck in the weeds and didn’t ask the right questions.
Some entity, we discover later was the FBI counterintelligence division, was monitoring Flynn’s calls. They transcribed a copy of the call between Flynn and Kislyak, and that became known as the “Flynn Cuts”, as described within internal documents and later statements.
After the Flynn/Kislyak conversation was leaked to the media, Obama asked ODNI Clapper how that call got leaked. Clapper went to the FBI on 1/4/17 and asked FBI Director James Comey. Comey gave Clapper a copy of the Flynn Cuts which Clapper then took back to the White House to explain to Obama.
Obama’s White House counsel went bananas, because Clapper had just walked directly into the Oval Office with proof the Obama administration was monitoring the incoming National Security Advisor. Obama’s plausible deniability of the surveillance was lost as soon as Clapper walked in with the written transcript.
That was the motive for the 1/5/17 Susan Rice memo, and the reason for Obama to emphasize “by the book” three times.
It wasn’t that Obama didn’t know already; it was that a document trail now existed (likely a CYA from Comey) that took away Obama’s plausible deniability of knowledge. The entire January 5th meeting was organized to mitigate this issue.
Knowing the Flynn Cuts were created simultaneously with the phone call, and knowing how it was quickly decided to use the Logan Act as a narrative against Flynn and Trump, we can be very sure both McCord and Yates had read that transcript before they went to the White House. [Again, this is the entire purpose of them going to the White House to confront McGhan with their manufactured concerns.]
So, when it comes to ‘who leaked’ the reality of the Flynn/Kislyak call to the media, the entire predicate for the Logan Act violation – in hindsight – I would bet a donut it was Mary McCord.
But wait, there’s more….
Now we go back to McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook.
Sheldon was working for the counsel to John Roberts. The counsel to the Chief Justice has one job – to review the legal implications of issues before the court and advise Justice John Roberts. The counsel to the Chief Justice knows everything happening in the court, and is the sounding board for any legal issues impacting the Supreme Court.
In his position as the right hand of the counsel to the chief justice, Sheldon Snook would know everything happening inside the court.
At the time, there was nothing bigger inside the court than the Alito opinion known as the Dobb’s Decision – the returning of abortion law to the states. Without any doubt, the counsel to Chief Justice Roberts would have that decision at the forefront of his advice and counsel. By extension, this puts the actual written Alito opinion in the orbit of Sheldon Snook.
After the Supreme Court launched a heavily publicized internal investigation into the leaking of the Dobbs decision (Alito opinion), something interesting happened. Sheldon Snook left his position. If you look at the timing of the leak, the investigation and the Sheldon Snook exit, the circumstantial evidence looms large.
Of course, given the extremely high stakes, the institutional crisis with the public discovering the office of the legal counsel to the Chief Justice likely leaked the decision, such an outcome would be catastrophic for the institutional credibility. In essence, it would be Robert’s office who leaked the opinion to the media.
If you were Chief Justice John Roberts, and desperately needed to protect the integrity of the court, making sure such a thermonuclear discovery was never identified would be paramount. Under the auspices of motive, Sheldon Snook would exit quietly. Which is exactly what happened.
The timeline holds the key.
BACK TO MARY in 2025 – During the question session for Attorney General Pam Bondi’s nomination, Adam Schiff asked Mary McCord about whether AG Bondi should recuse herself from investigating Adam Schiff and Mary McCord. It’s a little funny if you understand the background.
I prompted the video to the part at 01:36:14 when Schiff asks McCord, and Mrs. McCord responds with “yes, Pam Bondi should recuse.” WATCH:
Mary McCord says Pam Bondi must recuse herself from any investigative outcome related to the first impeachment effort.
Who was the lead staff working for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on the first impeachment effort?
Mary McCord.
Now, triggering that first impeachment effort… Who worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to change the CIA whistleblower regulations permitting an anonymous complaint?
Yep, that would be the same Mary McCord.
In essence, the woman who organized, structured, led and coordinated the first impeachment effort, says Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating the organization, structure, leadership and coordination of the first impeachment effort.
If all that seems overwhelming, here’s a short recap:
♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.
♦ McCord helped create 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 on Impeachment Committee.
♦ 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 was working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.
♦ McCord is now coordinating outside Lawfare attacks against Donald Trump in term #2
♦ McCord also testified that AG Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating McCord.
Now, if you’re wondering why I spend so much time and attention on the Mary McCord issue, the information today about her sending the FBI information about the Oathkeepers chat group might clarify things.
When I look at that activity by Mary McCord, and I consider the duplicity of the FBI in conducting the Arctic Frost investigation, I also consider that I was personally targeted by the J6 team of McCord and the FBI.
It all tracks, and Mary McCord is in the very center of all of it.
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 