Posted originally on the CTH on June 20, 2024 | Sundance
Most of the time Fox News builds in plausible deniability; however, this time the notorious Fox News pollster Daron Shaw has gone full bananas on behalf of those who pay him to create polling narratives.
Daron Shaw should be well known to CTH readers {Go Deep}. Shaw has been the Fox News poll manipulator and narrative engineer for over a decade. Knowing the Trump v Biden debate was coming, we knew Fox News would arrange some anti-Trumpism media narrative to capitalize on the predictable corporate theme. However, to see the Fox team make “Threats To Democracy” the #1 concern of voters, is just a talking point too far.
Fox News creating/promoting the “Trump is a Danger to Democracy” narrative via polling, is as predictable as Megyn Kelly and her 2015 “Trump is a sexist” debate narrative. Keep in mind, in order to see the strings on the marionettes you first have to stop pretending the performance is real life. Far too many people are comfortable pretending.
FOX NEWS – […] “The underlying demographic tendencies that have defined the race remain in place,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts Fox News surveys with Democrat Chris Anderson. “Biden has improved slightly with women and seniors, which keeps him afloat despite significant reductions from 2020 in support from younger voters and African Americans.” […] The top two issues to voters are the future of American democracy and the economy. Next, stability and normalcy, followed by immigration and health care. Nearly half say abortion and guns will be extremely important to their vote, while closer to one-third feel that way about standing up to elite interests, climate change, and the Israel-Hamas war. (read more)
Funnily enough, President Trump can see exactly what they are doing.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2024 | Sundance
It is a very unfortunate situation any time you can easily spot manipulation that is taking place on behalf of hidden interests.
In this example today TPUSA was pushing the results of a poll from this past weekend.
Charlie Kirk and his organization claim that JD Vance won the straw poll of 1,600 attendees to the TPUSA event. However, as quickly identified, the only options presented to the audience were JD Vance, Marco Rubio, Tim Scott and Doug Burgum. Somewhat of a self-fulfilling presentation.
Why only four candidates? According to Charlie Kirk and his pollster Richard Baris, those are the final four as determined by them and media.
Something just didn’t smell right. Lots of media articles have other names including Kari Lake, Ben Carson, Vivek Ramaswamy, Lee Zeldin, Michael Flynn, Devin Nunes, Ron DeSantis and many more. So, what exactly was the agenda of TPUSA and by extension, Richard Baris.
Well, for his participatory role, it appears Richard Baris was only a tool who polled the audience based on names Charlie Kirk gave him. Then when you consider that Charlie Kirk had already publicly claimed J.D. Vance was the best choice for vice-president {SEE HERE}, the pre-selected names appeared to be chosen to create a specific outcome, ie “the illusion of choice.”
JD Vance won the TPUSA poll because Charlie Kirk wanted J. D Vance to win the poll. Richard Baris delivered the data to support it by using a pre-filtered candidate list that only included 4 names.
After being called out for the manipulative tactics, their attempts at justification ended up just being silly. [SEE HERE]. The narrative engineering fiasco would be embarrassing and shameful if the issues were not serious.
In the background we have Peter Thiel. In addition to having a lot of money to spend on organizations like TPUSA, Mr. Thiel also supports JD Vance. Thiel is the primary funder of JD Vance, and unfortunately Thiel is also an FBI informant {SEE HERE}.
Oddly, Senator J.D Vance was a vitriolic Never Trumper throughout his time in politics (exceptional hatred for Trump), until Vance had a sudden and mysterious change of heart, which coincided with his financial backer, billionaire Peter Thiel, becoming an FBI operative.
In essence, just as Thiel started working for the FBI, then J.D Vance started to support President Trump…. Coincidence? Go figure.
Now, I tell you this because the unknown question is whether Peter Thiel has funded, or is funding, the TPUSA efforts of Charlie Kirk. Mr. Kirk has sent out tweets praising Mr. Thiel; but neither of them will respond directly to the question.
Because I’m sick and tired of this manipulation, and the background billionaires that operate the opaque machinery… and the people who take their money to do their bidding, while pretending they don’t. And who gets screwed? US, THE VOTERS! Wash – Rience – Repeat
Vivek Ramaswamy and J.D. Vance were college buddies, later funded by billionaire Peter Thiel who is BFF’s with billionaire Elon Musk. Beside their Big Tech relationship, what do Peter Thiel and Elon Musk have in common?…. DHS, IC and FBI activities.
We have already seen the history of placing a VP Mike Pence with Donald Trump just to undermine the MAGA agenda. Now we have an FBI informant, working with a political manipulation effort (TPUSA) to position his asset, JD Vance, into the Pence role for 2024.
And no one wants to admit this is happening, because it might be too uncomfortable to admit.
The bottom line is that this TPUSA poll was purposefully manufactured, created with specific names eliminated, to deliver a very specific outcome. That outcome may or may not matter to anyone; but it’s the manipulation that’s the point.
It is exhausting keeping track of all these fake pretenses, ulterior motives, financial schemes and billionaire agendas.
Go figure.
ps. Dr. Ben Carson or Harriet Hageman would be good considerations.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 16, 2024 | Sundance
This interview by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner is buckets of interesting and simultaneously very revealing.
Playing along with the big club intelligence game as framed by Margaret Brennan, HPSCI Chairman Turner showcases his weasel nature and alignment with the worst actors in the Intelligence Community from the outset. Watch it closely and you will notice that Turner frames national intelligence activity as a political product.
Instead of telling Ms Brennan that it is impossible to hold a public hearing on terror threats because her President refuses to declassify the intelligence, thereby limiting conversation to only closed-door hearing discussion, Turner intentionally obfuscates to cloud the issue.
Then the bigger reveals start to happen as Ms. Brennan brings up the fabricated issues around Scott Perry and Ronny Jackson. Brennan says Perry is under FBI investigation (Perry is not and Turner knows he is not), but Turner refuses to say that Perry is not under investigation. Brennan then makes an outlandish claim of Representative Jackson taking perfectly legal medication to help him sleep. Instead of quashing the ridiculous narrative, Turner plays along with the intent to hold leverage over Jackson (think blackmail).
Representative Mike Turner really is one of the worst members of congress. I would rank Turner’s corrupt and Machiavellian status right next to SSCI Chairman Mark Warner. Turner will defend the corrupt IC Deep State even more than Marco Rubio. Remember, it was Turner who manufactured the letter of support for his FISA renewal strategy, falsely attributing supportive signatures of Devin Nunes and John Ratcliffe.
IF you are good at spotting corruption, WATCH between the lines and the Turner comments shout at you:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re going to begin with the Republican Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Ohio Congressman Mike Turner.
Welcome back to Face the Nation.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER (R-Ohio): Good morning, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Chair Turner, last week, as you know, there were federal immigration arrests of these eight individuals with suspected ties to ISIS. They were rounded up in Philadelphia, Los Angeles and New York.
They traveled from Central Asia, Tajikistan, across the southern border into the U.S. Do you have any indication that there is an act of terror plot?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, Margaret – I’m – your – I can neither confirm nor deny all the details that you’ve just reported.
But what’s important about these reports and what we’re seeing, especially in conjunction with Director Wray’s public statements that we are at the highest level of a possible terrorist threat, that the administration’s policies have absolutely – you know, directly related to threats to Americans.
These are no longer speculative, no longer hypothetical. And we have actual administration officials stepping forward. And, certainly, our committee and our committee members have concurred on the intelligence that we’re seeing, that, as a result of the administration’s policies allowing people to cross the border unvetted, we have terrorists that are actively working inside the United States that are a threat to Americans.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the issue, as we understand it from our reporting, is that there was vetting, but that the vetting didn’t turn up any derogatory information.
Doesn’t that indicate that there’s a broader problem with the system that Congress would also have to address?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, Margaret, as you know, there – there are those who are vetted and – and in the vetting process.
They – there is no evidence the United States currently has that they’re actively engaged in terrorist plotting or engaged with terrorist groups, organizations. And this administration, by their own policy, are then allowing those individuals in, instead of fully vetting them, fully understanding what the risk is to the United States, and for the fact that they’re letting them in, and there they are – they’re entering the United States through the southern border illegally.
And that’s what the threat is. That’s what Director Wray is identifying and is bringing forward. This administration’s policies are directly resulting in people who are in the United States illegally who have ties to terrorist groups and organizations, and this is a threat.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The U.S. has already been in a heightened threat environment.
But, this past week, our CBS colleague and the former Deputy CIA Director Mike Morell wrote a piece in “Foreign Affairs” warning that the United States faces a serious threat of terrorist attack in the months ahead.
He called on Congressional Intelligence Committees, like the one you chair, to have public hearings with the director of national intelligence, the CIA, the FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center. Will you commit to doing that?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, we have.
In fact, the testimony that you just played of Director Wray…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Public unclassified information from those individuals?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: The – the – the testimony that you just played of Director Wray was a result of the Intelligence Committees, including mine – Director Wray was testifying before my committee and said exactly the same thing publicly of the threat.
What we have done, and continue to do, and what this administration needs to be held to, is that they need to declassify the information of the terrorist threats that they’re seeing, so that there can be a public discourse concerning what the administration’s risk and threats are.
You know, this was notable and expected as a result of the Biden administration’s policy of an open southern border. And we are seeing it absolutely across the country. The – and my – my committee has been open, my members have been open…
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: … and publicly discussing this threat and pointing the finger directly at the administration’s policies.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, as you know, the administration points back at Congress, saying they asked for more authorities and Congress refused to act.
But I want to ask you about the Intelligence Committee. You’ve tried to keep it nonpartisan, as you’ve said on this program. Speaker Johnson, though, recently decided, as you know, to add two congressmen, Scott Perry and Dr. Ronny Jackson, to your committee, reportedly at the behest of Donald Trump.
One of your members, Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan, referred to Perry as a threat to intelligence oversight – quote – “He will be on the very committee that oversees the FBI while he is directly under investigation by this very agency.”
Do you think that is a disqualifying conflict of interest?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, being concerned, obviously, about that issue, and being the chairman, I contacted the I.C. to see whether or not there was an issue that, you know, in due diligence from our committee, that we needed to – to resolve or address.
They indicated that there was not an – a – an ongoing or continuing issue or even a current issue that we needed to address.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The FBI told you that?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: The issue, I think, here that’s most important – the I.C. told us that.
I think what’s very important here is that the speaker makes this appointment and then what he’s done since. The speaker has absolutely committed himself to these two individuals following the rules, not only the laws. Both of them have military experience. Both of them have had access to classified information before.
And there’s been no reports of any incidences of their handling – mishandling of classified information. The speaker has met with our committee, Republican members. He has spoken directly to Jim Himes. We’ve had a meeting with Mr. Perry, myself and the speaker, where all of these assurances have been made.
But the speaker has said this, that he’s going to continue to monitor the situation, if there’s any indication of anything improper happening, that he will intervene. And I believe the speaker will assert leadership here.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And withdraw that nomination potentially?
Well, look, I – Scott Perry has come out and took aim at you, as you know, because he said, if he gets on this committee, he’ll conduct “actual oversight, not blind obedience to some facets of our intelligence community.”
And he claimed they’re spying on the American people. How do you respond to that?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, he has – he has apologized. And, certainly, those are – are the types of words that you would not want from somebody who’s joining a committee that is obviously very dedicated to national security and very dedicated to working in a bipartisan way.
I think that, upon him joining the committee, and looking at the work that both he gets to do and the work that we’re doing, that he’ll be absolutely satisfied that he can play a role to – in the work that we’re doing for national security.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, I – I understand you said you’ve – you received assurances about their ability to handle classified information that they’ll have access to.
But, as you know, Dr. Ronny Jackson was demoted by the Navy because a Pentagon inspector general report found that he had been taking sedatives while providing medical care to two U.S. presidents. That kind of compromising behavior would be disqualifying for most people when it comes to receiving a security clearance or having any access to the nation’s secrets.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: I’m aware of those reports.
I – as you have just indicated, though, they are unrelated to the handling of classified information. And, certainly, the individuals in his district believe that those issues are resolved. He presents himself to – to Congress with his military background.
And we’re going to be certainly working with the speaker and with Mr. Jackson so that – again, that he is a very productive member of our committee. And, if there are any incidences, the speaker has indicated that, as with Mr. Perry, that he will enforce our rules.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But there are – these seats could be filled by Republicans with national security backgrounds who don’t have these kinds of compromising situations over their heads.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: There certainly was a broad range of individuals who – who sought these seats.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You were with Donald Trump when he was on Capitol Hill this past week and he met with lawmakers.
Is it true, as Congressman Matt Gaetz claims, that Mr. Trump said “Ukrainians are never going to be there for us” and that he was trashing the Ukraine aid bill to Speaker Johnson’s face, which Gaetz said is – “so epic.”
Is that true? And did anyone push back?
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: I don’t believe that the president – Trump did that. I was certainly present. He did raise issues of how the Ukraine issue is being handled.
I think there’s certainly enough criticism to go around the Ukrainians not being given the authority to use weapons inside Russia to hit targets that are hitting them. But I think, overall, what was important is that – that Trump was very focused on what his issues were as to why he was seeking the presidency and the changes in policies in the Biden administration.
Border was an issue. Energy was an issue. The economy, China and inflation were an issue, all ones where he had real, concrete things that the Biden administration did to reverse his policies that have resulted in negative consequences for our country that he intends to reverse back.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We will see if he stands by Ukraine, then, if he is elected.
Chair Turner, thank you for your time.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: I believe he – I believe he will. And – and, certainly, the – of the members who are strongly supporting Ukraine…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: … we certainly believe that he will, and it certainly is essential.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Chair Turner, thank you for your time this morning.
Posted originally on Jun 13, 2024 By Martin Armstrong |
The Rule of Law has been torn to pieces. The entire Justice System in the United States is rapidly becoming a joke internationally as we border on becoming indistinguishable from the Banana Republic, where the pretense of law is only the self-interest of those in power. In Plato’s classic work, you will find the debate between Thraysmachus and Socrates. More than 2000 years ago, Thrasymachus observed what we see going on right now. JUSTICE is the same in every form of government, be it dictatorship, monarchy, or pretend democracy. JUSTICE is always the self-interest of those in power, and NOTHING has ever changed.
Once power is handed to the government, they will expand that power until they terminate all LIBERTY. That is what the CBDCs are all about – total control. If you protest, your bank account will be seized, and you will starve to death, just as they did to the truckers in Canada. This passage from Thraymachus established beyond a shadow of a doubt that HISTORY REPEATS over and over again, BECAUSE human nature never changes.
It was this very Biden administration that has thrown Trump’s advisors in prison in contempt for asserting Executive Privilege, as in the case of Steve Bannon. Bannon was convicted of contempt of Congress in 2022 after failing to provide documents and testimony to the House Select Committee that investigated the January 6th, 2021, US Capitol attack. He was sentenced to four months in prison. The two MOST corrupt courts in the nation are New York and Washington, DC. They have their own agenda and will never apply the law fairly.
While the Justice Department (DOJ) has turned over transcripts and notes from the interview, The House has maintained that they need the tapes to verify the transcript’s accuracy and to confirm that Mr. Hur’s observation was justified. Attorney General Garland of the Department of Justice will not release the actual video and audio tape because transcripts never give the nuances of human speech. A lawyer will always tell you never to joke in court. If you said yes, I killed JFK as well. When read in a transcript, those words appear to be a confession. Without the audio/video, you would not know if it was a joke or not.
Martin Luther King said, “I have a Dream.” He is not the only one to DREAM. This brings tears to my eyes, for the once great nation, the founders’ DREAM, is crumbling to dust before my eyes, and I fear what I will leave behind for my grandchildren. There was a time when men rose against oppression, and their voices resounded in history. Their words were inviting and hopeful of a new land of honor built upon that DREAM of freedom and liberty.
There was a time when honor was paramount, one’s word was your bond, and the vision of the future was exciting. We have reached a time when it all has gone wrong, bribed by money and only the DREAMS of the elite of endless power above the people. The generations before us fought for that DREAM in a time long gone by, when hope was everything and life was worth living in pursuit of happiness, and they had been enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and then the Bill of Rights.
I studied history and the evolution of law, and I once naively believed that this DREAM of liberty and freedom would never die. We embossed our currency with the phrase In God We Trust and once believed in a merciful and forgiving God who has no longer been worthy of a place in our society. Those DREAMS of the founders we may attribute to a young nation naive with hope, standing unafraid on the battlefield against oppression and tyranny. Those days of noble DREAMS are now only relegated to the unread pages of history books. Our currency is to be relegated to digital entries on a smartphone. There was no reason for one to use the pretense of inclusion and equality to strip the rights of individuals behind the facade of caring for some minority. That unity that produced a nation has been torn apart, pitting one group against another to ensure that by dividing the people, they can conquer the cycle of time and seek to retain perpetual power unassailed forevermore.
Freedom of thought, philosophy, and religion was to be carved on a Stella that stood tall and made of white marble for eternity. But that Stella has been discolored, stained with time, and toppled to the ground ignored by those with power. Its edifice no longer shines or glistens in the sunlight. The Age of Wisdom has been overshadowed by the Age of Darkness, engulfed in corruption, and the thirst for ultimate power has ensured that history will complete its wheel of revolution. There are DREAMS of the perfect land that simply can never be.
Law has no value anymore. As Thrasymachus said long ago, it is only the self-interest of those in power. Such is the fate of all civilizations, for they are all buried in a common grave. Garland is an absolute disgrace to the United States. To even argue that voter ID is not necessary when they are secretly pushing for total control with Digital Currencies and IDs so the elite can defeat the wheel of time.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 11, 2024 | Sundance
We all knew this was going to happen, almost this exact way.
December, 2022 – ” Monaco will coordinate the timing of the arrest and indictment of Hunter Biden to coincide with the arrest and indictment of President Trump. This will provide the narrative of blind justice the DOJ will attempt to leverage to stop national reaction.” (LINK)
And, that’s exactly what Lisa Monaco and Main Justice did. Hunter Biden was found guilty of three felony gun charges, and will likely receive a very limited sentence (probation or similar) with no jail/prison time.
The major crimes of bribery, money laundering, public corruption, Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) violations, are all being ignored. The Biden crime syndicate is being protected.
WASHINGTON – Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, was found guilty Tuesday of three felony charges stemming from his purchase of a handgun in 2018.
Biden, 54, is the first child of a sitting U.S. president ever to be convicted in a criminal trial. The president said last week that he would not pardon his son.
The jury of six men and six women issued its unanimous verdict after three hours of deliberations.
Biden remained perfectly still as a court clerk read the verdict aloud. Before leaving the courtroom, he hugged his lawyers and kissed his wife, Melissa Cohen Biden. He and his wife, along with first lady Jill Biden, departed from the courthouse a few minutes later in Secret Service SUVs. (read more)
The New York Times stenographers come along with a screenplay to protect the image of the Biden family.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 11, 2024 | Sundance
The granular issue of this specific whistleblower story pertains to an FBI investigative employee who had his security clearance suspended after officials within the FBI discovered he attended a speech given by President Trump.
However, the bigger issue uncovered during a review of that punishment was written FBI instructions from within the sector of the FBI that investigates and issues security clearances. In essence, the FBI has a documented standard that political ideology determines who will get security clearances approved.
If a person supports President Trump, holds conservative views, or does anything that would identify themselves as not being in alignment with the leftist worldview, their security clearance application or renewal would be denied. Put another way, the FBI has written policy examples that discriminate against political views.
This should not come as a surprise. Factually, when CTH outlined how the Obama administration began to implement the process of filtration and purging of government agencies, we pointed out how the FBI security clearance investigative section was the first sector changed. Obama and Eric Holder then began the process of denying security clearances. {GO DEEP – Fourth Branch of Govt}.
Tucker Carlson points out the larger issues of the FBI using almost identical context from our prior research outline. WATCH:
Posted originally on the CTH on June 9, 2024 | Sundance
“Dear Sundance, could you please write an article that explains the policies that differentiate a GOPe RINO Establishment SIG/Bushie from an America First MAGA Patriot? It would be most beneficial to have a “litmus test” that can be easily used to compare candidates.”
At first blush this might sound like a familiar question that many would disregard. However, let me emphasize a key point often overlooked. The more severely you stop pretending, the more you realize the value of “litmus test” questioning. When you ask a certain type of question in front of an audience, things opinions can change very quickly.
Additionally, when you know the questions that hit the pretending triggers the hardest, then you know how to create the most uncomfortable situations for professional politicians and people in general who rely on their ability to obfuscate language. Lastly, when you know the material well enough to speak of the non-pretending dynamic in a way that doesn’t allow a pretentious lying response, it scares the heck out of the Alinsky/Lawfare tribe.
Brutally honest questioning is very valuable. That said, let me provide a few situational questions that will immediately reveal who you are talking to.
Litmus Question #1: Please, can you tell me your opinion of Robert Mueller?
If the (Republican) respondent replies with any positive about the character, action, purpose and intent of Robert Mueller in the role of special counsel, you can immediately qualify the respondent as a participant in the fraud. There is only one honest response about anything Mueller. Everyone in DC knows Mueller was the coverup operation. No one, not one single person, in Washington DC does not know Mueller’s intent.
Litmus Question #2: Was the 2020 Election manipulated?
If the (Republican) respondent replies with a long-winded answer, implying that some form of electoral manipulation might have been possible, you can immediately qualify the person as a participant maintaining fraud. Pretending out of fear or favor is still pretending.
That’s it. Look them straight in the eye, stand your ground, tell them you can see exactly who they are – then stop talking. The discomfort in the room will always lay heaviest upon the shoulders of the deceivers. You will likely be able to hear a pin drop. The Truth Has No Agenda.
Also, one larger part (with multiple aspects) of the political dynamic is very important to keep at the forefront of your mind. In all the important ways that matter, you know more about the subject matter of corruption within politics than the politicians you might question about it.
You know more than any Republican member of Congress and/or their staff, research team or investigative group. You know more about all of it in the large picture and the granular details than they do. It does not matter what their position within the DC system or what committee they sit upon, you know more.
You, the person reading this, knows more about intelligence system corruption than any member of the intelligence community Gang of Eight that sits in charge of oversight. YOU KNOW MORE, than any person in any DC silo, and that is by design.
What people do not understand about DC is that only the entities within the DC system are permitted to engage in accountability. Meaning, in the world of Republicans, Congress (or any other institution) cannot accept information from outside their silo operations.
Put simply, if a Republican congressional staffer does not originate the raw material evidence that highlights a corrupt activity, then the evidence does not exist. Only the people within the silo system are permitted to discover information that targets any other silo participant. This action/sequence is by design.
The Republican participants in DC will tell you that process is in place to ensure that no goofball material or evidence comes into the system. However, in reality the purpose of this rule is to block any negative information from permeating the silo system. The silo construct protects the silo inhabitants, and no detrimental information or crowdsourcing of evidence is permitted by allowed to be used by Republicans.
The Democrats do not hold themselves to this standard, and again this is part of the design.
The Democrat Party system exists to assemble power. The Republican wing of the system exists to assemble money. Democrats want power. Republicans want money. The policy of Democrats drives their donor activity. The donor activity of Republicans drives their policy.
When Senator Chuck Schumer wants Republican votes to secure policy wins, he buys those votes from Mitch McConnell. When Senator Mitch McConnell wants Democrat votes to secure policy on behalf of the corporations who fund his team, McConnell sells policy (amendments) to Chuck Schumer.
Re-read that prior paragraph to understand how Schumer in majority gains policy victories, and Schumer in minority gains policy victories.
Democrats want power (policy), Republicans want money. This is the nature of two wings of the UniParty and the core reason why people are starting to see how legislative policy shifts left regardless of which party is in power.
In order to maintain the process of gaining affluence, the Republicans within the silo system have rules that block information from reaching them. This is best described as the technical process that creates a Republican system of intentional willful blindness.
The Republicans do not want to be holding specific evidence of corruption because they cannot sell that; ergo, it has no value. This is why Republicans do not factually construct any oversight mechanisms. (See: Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, Spygate, Govt weaponization, etc).
Instead, the leadership of the Republicans writes out a list of what topics are valid for conversation and what topics are not. Republican members then stick to the guidelines of the topics and nothing more.
In this era of great pretending, make them uncomfortable by not participating.
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 