Sunday Talks – Devin Nunes: Without Immediate Corrective Action, It’s Time to Talk About Shutting Down The U.S. Intelligence Agencies…


Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on October 4, 2020 by sundance

Appearing with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the latest series of revelations; as a result of forced document extraction from deep in the bowels of the deep state; representative Devin Nunes now states it may be time to talk about completely defunding the elements of the U.S. intelligence apparatus who are working to usurp the governing authority of the United States.

This is a remarkable statement from the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. Essentially Nunes is saying we remain in a state of an ongoing political coup inside the United States of America…. And he’s not wrong.

Eisenhower warned; JFK tried and they killed him; Donald Trump is facing the same issue with a pending confrontation and awareness.

.

To understand in bold terms what Nunes is accurately saying… The CIA Director non-compliant with constitutionally required oversight. The FBI Director is actively working to support the resistance; and the United States Attorney General is trying to mitigate the sunlight upon the institutions.

To put a finder point on the DOJ element… We all know the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel was operating to overthrow the President of the United States. With that in mind, what exactly has the U.S. AG done, other than deliver grand prose, to stop this usurpation of our government?

Think about your answer very carefully and you might come to the accurate conclusion that AG Barr is managing our downfall; perhaps with the misguided intent that preservation of the institutions is imperative.

Meanwhile, and with that truthful reality in mind, would not all of those deep state interests weaponize COVID opportunities to achieve the objective?

If the Q-anon group would put down the hopeium-pipe long enough to accept the brutal identity of the enemy we face, they might drop their co-dependent enabling behavior and join the battle to save our constitutional republic.  There is no cavalry in the rear about to come charging over the hill…. Quit blowing the bugle of trust and hope.

We The People are all that stands between the domestic enemies we face and the collapse of this nation.  Accept it, there are no honorable  “rank and file”; its us and only us that can win this fight.

Last week the Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, transmitted evidence to the Senate Judiciary Committee showing notes written by CIA Director John Brennan that Hillary Clinton campaign advisors created a “proposal to vilify Trump by stirring up scandal claiming interference by Russian security services” on July 26th of 2016. [pdf link]

(source)

This appears to be the explosive evidence referred to by Senator Lindsey Graham during recent public comments. The date of the proposal to Brennan, July 26, 2016, is pertinent to the recent op-ed published by Brennan where he says he briefed President Obama two days later, July 28, 2016, where Brennan says in his own words:

[…] on the afternoon of July 28, 2016, I informed [President Obama] in a hurriedly scheduled meeting that Russian President Vladimir Putin had authorized his intelligence services to carry out activities to hurt Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and boost the election prospects of Donald Trump. (link)

Hillary Clinton proposing the strategic deployment of a Russian collusion narrative on July 26, 2016, is additionally important because only one day earlier, July 25, 2016, Clinton campaign Manager Robby Mook advocated for this exact narrative on the first day of the 2016 Democrat National Convention in Philadelphia.https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=TheLastRefuge2&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1311019881039618049&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2F2020%2F10%2F04%2Fsunday-talks-devin-nunes-without-immediate-corrective-action-its-time-to-talk-about-shutting-down-the-u-s-intelligence-agencies%2F&siteScreenName=TheLastRefuge2&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

  • July 25, 2016, Robby Mook is presenting the Russian conspiracy narrative.
  • July 26, 2016, a Clinton foreign policy advisor is pushing this narrative to CIA Director John Brennan.
  • July 28, 2016, CIA Director John Brennan pushes the Clinton-inspired Russian conspiracy narrative into the oval office and briefs President Barack Obama.
  • July 31, 2016, FBI Agent Peter Strzok launches the “Electronic Communication” which officially begins the Trump-Russia investigation. [LINK]

Then on August 5, 2016, former Acting CIA Director and Clinton campaign advisor, Mike Morell publishes an op-ed in the New York Times, fueling the Clinton-inspired Russian conspiracy narrative:

…”In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”… (~Mike Morell)

Mike Morell is deeply connected to the Clinton camp, particularly surrounding his prior efforts to defend then Secretary of State Clinton over Benghazi. According to former CIA Director Leon Panetta it was Mike Morell (Intel) and Ben Rhodes (White House) who wrote the infamous Susan Rice talking points, which were all lies.

So the substantive background of how Hillary Clinton’s campaign hired Fusion-GPS and Chris Steele in April of 2016 to create the Russian conspiracy narrative takes on new focus.

Keep in mind, at the heart of the July 2016 Russian narrative was a story about Donald Trump Jr. meeting with a Russian attorney named Natalia Veselnitskaya. That meeting took place on June 9th 2016 in Trump Tower. However, video and images show that 5 days later, June 14th 2016, Ms. Veselnitskaya was a guest of former Obama administration Russian Ambassador Michael McFaul in Washington DC for a House of Representatives hearing on U.S. Policy Toward Putin’s Russia. [Video HERE – and Video HERE]

Ms. Natalia Veselnitskaya is pictured seated in the front row directly behind former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Mr. Michael McFaul at the House Foreign Affairs Committee. This is June 14th, 2016, five days after the reported meeting with Donald Trump Jr.

Link to Ambassador McFaul’s testimony (confirming date) is HERE

It should be noted that Ambassador Mike McFaul was very publicly discussing the ‘Muh Russia’ conspiracy narrative in the media and appeared on numerous NBC and MSNBC broadcasts during the 2016 campaign, and immediately after the election.

Additionally, it was Michael McFaul who was the architect of the Obama/Clinton “Russian Reset”, that eventually led McFaul to becoming the Ambassador to Russia (NYT Link).

Ambassador Michael McFaul immediately caused quite a bit of controversy while in Russia as he indulged with various anti-Putin operatives.

Michael McFaul, the U.S. ambassador in Moscow from 2012-2014, was accused by Russian state television of seeking to orchestrate the overthrow of President Vladimir Putin after hosting opposition activists and Kremlin critics at the embassy in his second day on the job. (Politico Link)

Another example of McFaul’s in-your-face antagonism is HERE.

On the heels of the 2011 WikiLeaks State Department Cables release (example belowAmbassador McFaul was kicked out of Russia:

(C) On January 14, National Security Council Senior Director for Russia Michael McFaul met with Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Milov of the Solidarity Movement, Grigoriy Bovt of the political party Right Cause, and Vladimir Ryzhkov, former head of the now defunct Russia’s Republican Party and professor at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics. All four leaders view Barack Obama as a highly pragmatic president focused on external cooperation with Russia, but supposedly not willing to pressure the Russian government for greater political freedom. President Medvedev is not seen as a viable alternative to Prime Minister Putin, who they believe will likely retake the Presidency in 2012. This, according to them, will ensure that a corrupt and unresponsive government continues to run Russia. They agreed that the aim of the political opposition over the next two years should be to prevent the return of Putin to the presidency. According to them, however, given Putin’s control over society only an emergency situation could bring about his fall from grace.

[…] McFaul opined that “de-Putinization” must come from within Russia, from a focus on civil education to broaden demands within society for increased freedom. Though the President may not be as vocal about his support for civil society within Russia as opposition members in Russia might prefer, McFaul made clear to this group, all of whom he has known throughout his career, that the President fully supports democratic reform in Russia. All agreed that dramatic change in the Russian political landscape would not take place in the near future.

5. National Security Council Senior Director for Russia Michael McFaul has cleared on this cable. (WikiLeaks Cable Link)

It should also be noted that Ambassador McFaul’s friend, Ms. Natalia Veselnitskaya, was initially denied an entry visa into the United States in 2016 and appealed her situation to the U.S. District Court of New York. She was granted a parole letter allowing her to enter the United States on behalf of a client. Here’s her filing to the U.S. District Court in New York.

The actual date of the arguments in the case U.S. -v- Prevezon Holdings was the EXACT SAME date as the meeting in Trump Tower – June 9th 2016 CASE LINK

And look at the participating attorneys. A smorgasbord of anti-Trumpers writ large. Attorney(s) appearing for the case:

JACOB W. BUCHDAHL (Cory S. Buland, on the brief), Susman Godfrey LLP, New York, NY, for Movant-Appellant Hermitage Capital Management Ltd.

PAUL MONTELEONI, Assistant United States Attorney (Cristine Phillips, Margaret Garnett, Assistant United States Attorneys, on the brief), for Preet Bharara, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, for Plaintiff-Appellee the United States of America.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY (Jennifer F. Mintz, Jarrod L. Schaeffer, on the brief), Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP, New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellees Prevezon Holdings Ltd., Prevezon Alexander, LLC, Prevezon Soho USA, LLC, Prevezon Seven USA, LLC, Prevezon Pine USA, LLC, Prevezon 1711 USA, LLC, Prevezon 1810 LLC, Prevezon 2009 USA, LLC, and Prevezon 2011 USA, LLC.

Before: POOLER, LOHIER, and CARNEY, Circuit Judges.

Yes, THAT Preet Bharara.

Natalia Veselnitskaya was also a very vocal anti-Trump person on all of her social media accounts – SEE FACEBOOK ARCHIVE HERE – So why would an anti-Trump Russian with close ties to the Clinton campaign group want to deliver information to Donald Trump Jr? Donald Trump Jr. said he had no idea whom he would be meeting with.

  • April – Fusion GPS hired to dig up dirt on Trump. Fusion hires Chris Steele to write his fabricated Trump-Russia Dossier.
  • June – Clinton campaign coordinates with State Dept. allies to introduce Veselnitskaya to Donald Trump Jr.
  • July – Clinton campaign pushes Russian conspiracy narrative to allies in intelligence community, John Brennan. Peter Strzok begins Trump-Russia investigation; FBI, DOJ and aggregate intelligence community weaponized to assist.
  • August – Clinton campaign advisor writes op-ed in New York Times postulating Trump-Russia collusion narrative.
  • September – U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding “U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.” (link)

Now, let’s see that September 2016 referral !

Tweet Date May 15, 2020

COVID Fear Isn’t The Kitchen Sink – But It’s Close…


Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on October 3, 2020 by sundance

With 30-days left before the election perhaps it’s worthwhile remembering what all of this opposition is about…. Something 99% of American voters do not quite understand.

Congress doesn’t actually write legislation. The last item of legislation written by congress was sometime around the mid 1990’s. Modern legislation is sub-contracted to a segment of DC operations known as K-Street. That’s where the lobbyists reside.

Lobbyists write the laws; congress sells the laws; lobbyists then pay congress lucrative commissions for passing their laws. That’s the modern legislative business in DC.

When we talk about paying-off politicians in third-world countries we call it bribery. However, when we undertake the same process in the U.S. we call it “lobbying”.

CTH often describes the system with the phrase: “There are Trillions at Stake.” The process of creating legislation is behind that phrase. DC politics is not quite based on the ideas that frame most voter’s reference points.

With people taking notice of DC politics for the first time; and with people not as familiar with the purpose of DC politics; perhaps it is valuable to provide clarity.

Most people think when they vote for a federal politician -a House or Senate representative- they are voting for a person who will go to Washington DC and write or enact legislation. This is the old-fashioned “schoolhouse rock” perspective based on decades past. There is not a single person in congress writing legislation or laws.

In modern politics not a single member of the House of Representatives or Senator writes a law, or puts pen to paper to write out a legislative construct. This simply doesn’t happen.

Over the past several decades a system of constructing legislation has taken over Washington DC that more resembles a business operation than a legislative body. Here’s how it works right now.

Outside groups, often called “special interest groups”, are entities that represent their interests in legislative constructs. These groups are often representing foreign governments, Wall Street multinational corporations, banks, financial groups or businesses; or smaller groups of people with a similar connection who come together and form a larger group under an umbrella of interest specific to their affiliation.

Sometimes the groups are social interest groups; activists, climate groups, environmental interests etc. The social interest groups are usually non-profit constructs who depend on the expenditures of government to sustain their cause or need.

The for-profit groups (mostly business) have a purpose in Washington DC to shape policy, legislation and laws favorable to their interests. They have fully staffed offices just like any business would – only their ‘business‘ is getting legislation for their unique interests.

These groups are filled with highly-paid lawyers who represent the interests of the entity and actually write laws and legislation briefs.

In the modern era this is actually the origination of the laws that we eventually see passed by congress. Within the walls of these buildings within Washington DC is where the ‘sausage’ is actually made.

Again, no elected official is usually part of this law origination process.

Almost all legislation created is not ‘high profile’, they are obscure changes to current laws, regulations or policies that no-one pays attention to. The passage of the general bills within legislation is not covered in media. Ninety-nine percent of legislative activity happens without anyone outside the system even paying any attention to it.

Once the corporation or representative organizational entity has written the law they want to see passed – they hand it off to the lobbyists.

The lobbyists are people who have deep contacts within the political bodies of the legislative branch, usually former House/Senate staff or former House/Senate politicians themselves.

The lobbyist takes the written brief, the legislative construct, and it’s their job to go to congress and sell it.

“Selling it” means finding politicians who will accept the brief, sponsor their bill and eventually get it to a vote and passage. The lobbyist does this by visiting the politician in their office, or, most currently familiar, by inviting the politician to an event they are hosting. The event is called a junket when it involves travel.

Often the lobbying “event” might be a weekend trip to a ski resort, or a “conference” that takes place at a resort. The actual sales pitch for the bill is usually not too long and the majority of the time is just like a mini vacation etc.

The size of the indulgence within the event, the amount of money the lobbyist is spending, is customarily related to the scale of benefit within the bill the sponsoring business entity is pushing. If the sponsoring business or interest group can gain a lot of financial benefit from the legislation they spend a lot on the indulgences.

Recap: Corporations, mostly modern multinationals (special interest group), write the legislation. The corporations then contract the lobbyists.  Lobbyists then take the law and go find politician(s) to support it. Politicians get support from their peers using tenure and status etc. Eventually, if things go according to norm, the legislation gets a vote.

Within every step of the process there are expense account lunches, dinners, trips, venue tickets and a host of other customary financial way-points to generate/leverage a successful outcome. The amount of money spent is proportional to the benefit derived from the outcome.

The important part to remember is that the origination of the entire process is EXTERNAL to congress.

Congress does not write laws or legislation, special interest groups do. Lobbyists are paid, some very well paid, to get politicians to go along with the need of the legislative group.

When you are voting for a Congressional Rep or a U.S. Senator you are not voting for a person who will write laws. Your rep only votes on legislation to approve or disapprove of constructs that are written by outside groups and sold to them through lobbyists who work for those outside groups.

While all of this is happening the same outside groups who write the laws are providing money for the campaigns of the politicians they need to pass them. This construct sets up the quid-pro-quo of influence, although much of it is fraught with plausible deniability.

This is the way legislation is created.

If your frame of reference is not established in this basic understanding you can often fall into the trap of viewing a politician, or political vote, through a false prism.

The modern origin of all legislative constructs is not within congress.

“We have to pass the bill to, well, find out what is in the bill” etc. ~ Nancy Pelosi 2009

“We rely upon the stupidity of the American voter” ~ Johnathan Gruber 2011, 2012.

“If Congress isn’t going to convene until the bill is ready to vote on… who the hell is writing the bill?” ~ Tom Massie, 2020

Once you understand this process you can understand how politicians get rich.

When a House or Senate member becomes educated on the intent of the legislation, they have attended the sales pitch; and when they find out the likelihood of support for that legislation; they can then position their own (or their families) financial interests to benefit from the consequence of passage. It is a process similar to insider trading on Wall Street, except the trading is based on knowing who will benefit from a legislative passage.

The legislative construct passes from K-Street into the halls of congress through congressional committees. The law originates from the committee to the full House or Senate. Committee seats which vote on these bills are therefore more valuable to the lobbyists. Chairs of these committees are exponentially more valuable.

Now, think about this reality against the backdrop of the 2016 Presidential Election. Legislation is passed based on ideology. In the aftermath of the 2016 election the system within DC was not structurally set-up to receive a Donald Trump presidency.

If Hillary Clinton had won the election, her Oval Office desk would be filled with legislation passed by congress which she would have been signing. Heck, she’d have writer’s cramp from all of the special interest legislation, driven by special interest groups that supported her campaign, that would be flowing to her desk.

Why?

Simply because the authors of the legislation, the originating special interest and lobbying groups, were spending millions to fund her campaign. Hillary Clinton would be signing K-Street constructed special interest legislation to repay all of those donors/investors.

Congress would be fast-tracking the passage because the same interest groups also fund the members of congress.

President Donald Trump winning the election threw a monkey wrench into the entire DC system…. In early 2017 the modern legislative machine was frozen in place.

The “America First” policies represented by candidate Donald Trump were not within the legislative constructs coming from the K-Street authors of the legislation. There were no MAGA lobbyists waiting on Trump ideology to advance legislation based on America First objectives.

As a result of an empty feeder system, in early 2017 congress had no bills to advance because all of the myriad of bills and briefs written were not in line with President Trump policy. There was simply no entity within DC writing legislation that was in-line with President Trump’s America-First’ economic and foreign policy agenda.

Exactly the opposite was true. All of the DC legislative briefs and constructs were/are antithetical to Trump policy. There were hundreds of file boxes filled with thousands of legislative constructs that became worthless when Donald Trump won the election.

Those legislative constructs (briefs) representing tens of millions of dollars worth of time and influence were just sitting there piled up in boxes under desks and in closets amid K-Street and the congressional offices. Legislation needed to be in-line with an entire new political perspective, and there was no-one, no special interest or lobbying group, currently occupying DC office space with any interest in synergy with Trump policy.

Think about the larger ramifications within that truism. That is also why there was/is so much opposition.

No legislation provided by outside interests means no work for lobbyists who sell it. No work means no money. No money means no expense accounts. No expenses means politicians paying for their own indulgences etc.

Politicians were not happy without their indulgences, but the issue was actually bigger. No K-Street expenditures also means no personal benefit; and no opportunity to advance financial benefit from the insider trading system. Republicans and democrats hate the presidency of Donald Trump because it is hurting them financially.

President Trump is not figuratively hurting the financial livelihoods of DC politicians; he’s literally doing it. President Trump is not an esoteric problem for them; his impact is very real, very direct, and hits almost every politician in the most painful place imaginable, the bank account.

In the pre-Trump process there were millions upon millions, even billions that could be made by DC politicians and their families. Thousands of very indulgent and exclusive livelihoods attached to the DC business model. At the center of this operation is the lobbying and legislative purchase network. The Big Club.

Without the ability to position personal wealth and benefit from the system, why would a politician stay in office? It is a fact the income of many long-term politicians on both wings of the uniparty bird were completely disrupted by Trump winning the 2016 election. That is one of the key reasons why so many politicians retired in 2018.

When we understand the business of DC, we understand the difference between legislation with a traditional purpose and modern legislation with a financial and political agenda.

When we understand the business of DC we understand why the entire network hates President Donald Trump.

Lastly, this is why -when signing legislation- President Trump often says “they’ve been trying to get this through for a long time” etc. Most of the legislation that is passed by congress, and signed by President Trump in his first term; is older legislative proposals, with little indulgent value that were shelved in years past.

Example: Criminal justice reform did not carry a financial benefit to the legislative bodies, and there was no financial interest funding the politicians to pass the bill. If you look at most of the bills President Trump has signed, with the exception of a few economic bills, they stem from congressional construction many years, even decades, ago.

Think about it carefully and you’ll see it. The “First step act”, “Right to Try”, etc. were all shelved by Boehner, Pelosi, Ryan, McConnell, Reid and others before them. When the value of legislation is measured by the financial underwriting and payoffs behind it, what type of legislative calendar does that require?….

Repeal the 17th amendment and watch what happens.

.https://www.youtube.com/embed/cKUaqFzZLxU?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

.

Devin Nunes: Current U.S. Election Status, Combined with U.S. Intelligence Community, Equals a “Banana Republic”…


Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on October 1, 2020 by sundance

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Ranking Member Devin Nunes appears with Lou Dobbs to discuss the 2020 U.S. election as contrast against the known weaponization of the intelligence apparatus.

.

Keep in mind this is a member of the United States Intelligence Oversight group, the “gang of eight” saying the U.S. election is being manipulated by the U.S. intelligence community and political allies.

FBI Director James Comey Testifies to Senate Judiciary Committee – 10:00am Livestream…


Against several recent revelations, former FBI Director James Comey will testify today before the Senate Judicary Committee.  The anticipated start time is 10:00am ET.

[Livestream Links Below]

Fox News Livestream Link – Fox Business Livestream – Senate Judiciary Livestream

 

.

The FBI Knew in December 2016 Steele’s Primary Sub-Source Was a Suspected Russian Spy – Did James Comey Know?…


On September 24th Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham released a letter from Attorney General William Barr and a declassified summary from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) indicating Christopher Steele’s Primary Sub-source was a likely Russian agent and had previously been the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation.  In advance of former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony today, the question is: did Comey, Andrew McCabe or Bill Priestap know?

John Spiropoulos outlines the issue.  WATCH:

(Document Source)

Key takeaways from the FBI’s declassified summary:

  • The Crossfire Hurricane team knew in December 2016 that Christopher Steele’s Primary Sub-source was an individual who the FBI had indicated in 2009 “could be a threat to national security.”
  • In May 2009, Steele’s source reportedly attempted to recruit two individuals connected to an influential foreign policy advisor connected to President Obama, offering that if the two individuals “‘did get a job in the government and had access to classified information’ and wanted ‘to make a little extra money,’ [Steele’s source] knew some people to whom they could speak.”
  • FBI databases revealed Steele’s source “had contact in 2006 with the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers, [including contacting a known Russian intelligence officer] ‘so the documents can be placed in tomorrow’s diplomatic pouch.’”
  • One individual interviewed by the FBI noted that “the Primary Sub-source persistently asked about the interviewee’s knowledge of a particular military vessel.”
  • Significantly, the “record documenting the closing of the investigation [of the Primary Sub-source] stated that consideration would be given to re-opening the investigation in the event that the Primary Sub-source returned to the United States.”  (source)

Trump Approves Railroad to Help Alberta


COMMENT:  Trump to approve $22B railway between Alaska and Alberta
Is Trump aiding Alberta’s separation? This is a very big deal for our landlocked oil market!

AG

REPLY: Yes. Trump stands against the Globalists who are seeking power via the United Nations and to end all fossil fuels. His two speeches at Davos and the United Nations threw down the gauntlet against the entire Gates-Soros-Schwab-Gore alliance. This is why this election is so heated, for they are desperate to remove him for their climate change agenda which will put Alberta out of business.

The Debate


The debate was not very presidential. Trump was too hot and interrupted way too much. Biden did not act very presidential either way too many lies and too many name-callings. Neither Biden nor Trump really provided any clue as to how to deal with COVID. Trump tried to rattle Biden but that worked only marginally.

Biden suddenly abandoned the extreme left saying he does not support the violence or defunding police but said he was the Democratic Party yet then said he is not President so he did not call any Democratic governors to tell them to bring in the national guard.

Of course, we vote for parties, not individuals. That died with the 1800s. So, it really is not about either candidate personally for they are limited in their capacity to actually run the nation as a single individual. It takes Congress to legislate the laws.

Nevertheless, both these individuals revealed how far politics has fallen. I have never heard in any debate someone calling the current head of state a clown. This entire debate was really a disgrace.

Project Veritas Exposes Corruption in Harvesting People’s Ballots


 

Presidential Debate Night – President Trump -vs- Joe Biden – 9:00pm ET Livestreams


President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden take part in the first presidential debate between the two 2020 candidates. The Cleveland, Ohio event is moderated by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace who will transparently assist Joe Biden.

The anticipated start time of the debate is 9:00pm ET and will be broadcast on all network channels. To avoid the narrative engineers C-SPAN, OANN and Newsmax will also be broadcasting the debate live.  We are providing the livestream links early to prepare.

RSBN Livestream – CSPAN Livestream – Fox News Livestream – Fox Business Livestream

 

.

.

.

Sidney Powell Discusses Today’s Flynn Persecution Hearing With Lou Dobbs – Where is this going, and why are we in a handbasket?…


The hearing today in the courtroom of Judge Emmet Sullivan was an abject showcase in judicial nuttery.  The one good thing to come out of the adversarial arguments was that millions more Americans got to hear first-hand just how broken and corrupt the federal system of the judiciary has become.  The judicial farce was only exceeded by the legal nonsense exhibited by Sullivan’s extra-judicial prosecutor/amicus John Gleeson.

At one point in the proceedings Sullivan even threatened Flynn’s defense attorney with a referral to the BAR association for her letter of introduction to AG Bill Barr during the transition between defense counsel.  Yes, the judicial activism was that ridiculous.

Yes Alice, unfortunately the fiasco is scheduled to continue… Sidney Powell discusses the day’s events with Lou Dobbs: