Posted originally on the CTH on February 14, 2024 | Sundance
The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI, Chairman Mike Turner is quite predictable in his methods to support the Intelligence Community. {Background Here}
Today, Chairman Mike Turner shocked the DC system by proclaiming Russians from Outer Space were coming to destroy us. This “deadly Russians” narrative, as sold by Mike Turner, supports: (1) Ukraine funding, (2) FISA reauthorization and the (3) “seven ways to Sunday” Deep State.
WASHINGTON DC – A vague warning by the chair of the House Intelligence Committee about a “serious national security threat” Wednesday is related to Russia’s attempts to develop an antisatellite nuclear weapon for use in space, according to two people familiar with the matter.
While the people did not provide further details on the intel, one of them noted the U.S. has for more than a year been concerned about Russia’s potentially creating and deploying an antisatellite nuclear weapon — a weapon the U.S. and other countries would be unable to adequately defend against.
In his statement Wednesday morning, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said his committee had made available the information about the national security threat and called on the administration to declassify the intelligence so officials and lawmakers could discuss the matter with allies.
It is not clear what prompted Turner to issue the statement now, as the intelligence has been available to leaders of the House intelligence committee and their top aides in a secure room on Capitol Hill for more than a week, one of the people said. The Senate intelligence committee has also had access to the information. (read more)
Now, right before the latest Dangerous Russians from Outer Space narrative was triggered, guess where Mike Turner was?
Posted originally on Feb 14, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
A massacre was prevented over the weekend, thanks to a good guy with a gun. Governments globally are looking to eliminate or severely restrict firearm usage, citing that civilians do not need to defend themselves. On Sunday, Genesse Ivonne Moreno, 36, entered a Houston megachurch wearing a black trench coat concealing an AR-15 featuring pro-Palestinian messaging. She did not expect two off-duty police officers to be seated in the pews.
Sadly, Moreno’s 7-year-old son fell by her own bullets inside the church, and another parishioner was also injured after being shot in the leg. Moreno is transgendered and uses male and female aliases. Their ex-husband is Jewish, and police said they found “anti-Semitic” writings but have not published them. Moreno has a long history of arrests spanning from 2005, including unlawful possession of a firearm. This person was NOT in legal possession of the weapon that they were intended to use to kill Christians.
The men who intervened acted heroically and fatally shot Moreno. Would you have preferred to wait until the police were called and more lives were taken by this disturbed, violent criminal? We saw how the police failed to act after the Uvalde school shooting that claimed the lives of 19 students and two teachers.
The point of the matter is that gun restrictions are a danger to our society. No one knows how Moreno obtained a weapon, but criminals will always have access to firearms. Regulations only prevent law-abiding citizens from self-defense, first against others and, secondly, against their own government. Authorities are still investigating whether this was a hate crime, which should raise eyebrows.
The media claims perhaps she acted hatefully towards Jews because her ex-husband had Jewish relatives. The “Palestine” sticker on the assault rifle should give some indication as to her motive. Others say she acted hatefully towards Hispanics as she entered prior to a Spanish-speaking service. No one is discussing how this happened in a church, and she intended to hunt Christians, hence why this story is receiving minimal coverage since Christians are not a protected class in America.
Posted originally on Feb 11, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
I have listened to the oral arguments and have considered this entire 14th Amendment nonsense. Some have tried to argue that it is self-executing, meaning that Congress does not need to write a statute. That is really absurd, for we are talking here about trying to overthrow the entire foundation of democracy when pretending to be defending it. That is like pushing the button to attack Russia because I knew they wanted to do so; therefore, I was acting in self-defense by pushing the button first.
States have the right to control their local elections. However, they cannot interfere in federal elections. To do so would mean that they are depriving the rest of the country of their right to vote, for a federal election cannot take place if some states remove a candidate and others do not. This is a justified argument for separating the United States.
While nobody raised the Commerce Clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, the Founding Fathers may have never anticipated a rouge action like Colorado and Maine in banning Trump from the ballot. Still, they did address this issue of one state interfering with the rest of the nation. The Commerce Clause PROHIBITS any state from trying to impose a ban on the exports of another state to boost its own production. The Commerce Clause gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among states, and with the Indian tribes.”
The Commerce Clause expressly forbids a state from interfering in national commerce. That jurisdiction is reserved strictly to Congress. I cannot imagine how any state can claim such a power to interfere in the federal election for the national office of the Federal Government that is not a local state office.
If the Supreme Court upholds Colorado’s decision, then it is time to break up the UNION, for it is no longer viable. I fear we will see violence regardless of how the court rules.
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s Absolute Immunity claim, saying: “We cannot accept that the office of the presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter,” the judges wrote.”
The Constitution does not directly discuss presidential immunity from criminal or civil lawsuits. Instead, this privilege has evolved over time through the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article II, Section 2, Clause 3:
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
It is generally accepted that the President is absolutely immune from civil liability for suits arising from actions relating to official duties. This includes all acts in the “outer perimeter” of those duties. However, the President is not immune from actions arising from unofficial conduct. In fact, nobody was actually given immunity by the Founding Fathers. It has been the course have have credited immunity – not the Constitution.
“Prosecutorial immunity” is also a judge-made doctrine that cloaks prosecutors in near-absolute immunity from suit. Under this doctrine, prosecutors cannot be sued for any actions related to their job as a prosecutor, no matter how egregious the behavior. For example, prosecutors cannot be sued for knowingly prosecuting an innocent person, withholding evidence of innocence, or even fabricating false evidence of guilt.
Prosecutors can do whatever they want, and you have ZERO rights, even human rights, against those in the Deep State. This entire question of immunity to me defied the Declaration of Independence, and this is the intent of the Constitution to restrain government. With ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, they can fabricate evidence, put you on trial, and execute all knowing that you were innocent. This defies everything that the Constitution intended.
Declaration of Independent Complaint #15
“For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States.”
In 1768, two citizens of Annapolis, Maryland, were murdered by Marines from a British ship. Even though there was overwhelming evidence against them, the Marines were acquitted.
I doubted that the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals would ever rule in favor of Trump. They have their marching orders. To me, either nobody has absolute immunity, or everyone does. There is NOTHING in the Constitution that grants such immunity to anyone! That very proposition stands in direct confrontation with the Declaration of Independence. If this disgusting Jack Smith, who indicts Trump in Washington, which he can control for a crime he has to prosecuted in Florida, shows that he is violating the very intent of the Sixth Amendment. But he is ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE for anything he does to the nation or Trump. That is wrong!
They had President Nixon hands down, and yet they pardoned him to save dividing the nation. Those ideas no longer exist, and the entire problem here is these prosecutions have torn the nation apart and polarized the people. They have set in motion the ultimate division of the United States – it cannot stand as a united nation when one side tries to impose a dictatorship, their ideas offending even the religious beliefs.
In Greek Democracy, it is true that women had no right to vote. What is overlooked is the fact that they did not need one. This was all before SOCIALISM, and there was not even an income tax. The head of the household voted like a congressman for everyone in the house. But those were questions like war. Even if someone killed another, the victim’s family is prosecuted – not the state. The ONLY crimes where the state became evolved were those directly against the state of offending the gods, as was the case with Socrates. With socialism, then laws were made directly against behavior, and income tax was applied to everyone. Thus, everyone then had a right to vote. This is what is tearing the country apart – this belief that one side gets to dictate behavior. What if Muslims gain political control and then dictate you have to have four wives? What if Mitt Romney were president a issued an executive order allowing multiple wives? This is the whole problem that is terminating the union.
So, unfortunately, this entire immunity question is NOT law – it is the discretion of judges, and therein lies the crisis. The Founding Fathers relied upon the definition of law articulated by Lord Coke and Blackstone. Nobody seems to care anymore.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has done more to prevent America from invasion than the entire federal government. Abbott has explained countless times that the Biden Administration is simply lying to the American people by claiming that the situation is out of the president’s hands. More so, he rightfully believes the federal government is now, more than ever, INCENTIVIZINGillegals to cross into our nation.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams requested and was approved to receive $53,000,000.00 to provide to illegal migrants. Every migrant will receive a free pre-paid debit card each month on top of the free shelter, healthcare, and electronics that the government has provided them. Homeless citizens, veterans even, do not receive this luxury. Adams said the program will save taxpayers in the state $7.2 million annually when there is no reason for citizens to pay for illegal aliens in the first place. TheAssociated Press posted a story to clarify that they are receiving debit cards and not credit cards, as if it is better that they will not be expected to repay.
“[The program] sounds like insanity is behind it because it really is offensive, it may be the most reprehensible thing that I’ve seen take place over the past 48 hours,” Greg Abbott told reporters, noting that these people have shown no respect for America or the legal system. “What’s going on in New York is outrageous and Americans across the country are angry, not just about what’s going on in New York, but the underlying cause for it, which is Joe Biden’s open border policies,” he said.
Biden has the power to secure the border immediately. Instead, he is incentivizing people from around the world to cross into US territory to receive their taxpayer-subsidized life.
“Biden says he needs Congress to give him the power to do whatever he needs to do to secure the border. The fact is as we all saw from what President Trump did, the president of the United States has the power. I must emphasize this. There are laws in the United States that require the president to deny illegal entry to any illegal immigrant and then if they do get in the United States, he has a legal obligation to detain those illegal immigrants,” Abbott explained.
The role of the president in securing the border is derived from the powers vested in the Executive Branch, as the president can issue executive orders to direct executive officers or clarify and further existing laws, which can include measures related to border security. This can include issuing executive orders to implement and enforce immigration laws, enhance border security, and provide resources for border enforcement. Additionally, Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the Constitution recognizes states’ sovereign power to repel invasions, which some argue provides a constitutional basis for states to take action to secure their borders in the absence of sufficient federal government action.
These socialistic programs almost guarantee that more people will cross into America in the days and weeks to come. Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution defines treason as “levying war” against the United States or “adhering to [the] enemies [of the United States], giving them aid and comfort” and that is precisely what is happening to our once great nation.
Posted originally on the CTH on February 5, 2024 | Sundance
Exactly how bad is the “bipartisan” legislation, which should be called, ‘the border insecurity in exchange for Ukraine money act’? The bill is so bad, and makes things so much worse, that James Lankford may end up voting against his own legislative creation.
Making matters worse, Mitch McConnell is now pretending the entire fiasco wasn’t his idea, further leaving James Lankford out to dry on his own.
(Politico) – […] Several members of GOP leadership came out against the legislation in the past 24 hours, further boxing in Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. The Kentucky Republican, who supports the agreement linking border policy changes with aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, called Monday’s meeting an “interesting discussion.”
Inside the room, McConnell told Republicans that if they didn’t like the direction that the bill is going, they should vote against moving forward this week, according to two people briefed on the meeting who were granted anonymity to speak candidly.
According to two attendees, McConnell did not forcefully whip for or against the bill. He instead discussed the specific policies and politics of the legislation, which is opposed by Speaker Mike Johnson and former President Donald Trump.
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who struck the deal, even suggested he might vote against moving forward if his colleagues weren’t ready to move.“That’s not voting against the bill,” Lankford said of voting to filibuster the bill from coming to the floor. “So that’s not the final passage. That’s the beginning point.” (read more)
Posted criminally on the CTH on February 5, 2024 Sundance
The Senate immigration bill, aka border security bill, is only designed as the cover for the Senate to send $60 billion more to Ukraine. The Ukraine money is the priority (corps/lobbyists) the border “security” bill is the technique to create and spend it.
That said, they certainly would not want to let a created and purposeful border crisis go to waste, and they didn’t. The latest version of the Senate Immigration Reform Bill is now public [SEE HERE]. The proposed Senate border security bill provisions are actually worse than existing non-secure border provisions.
America First Legal did a great job hitting on the top-line issues created by this new bill. In many ways, multiple ways, this supplemental “border security” bill makes things worse. The bill codifies into law the loopholes currently being used to increase the number of illegal aliens. By this design the bill makes things worse.
Link to thread taking the bill apart section by section – SEE HERE
Posted originally on Feb 5, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
We know that the mail-in voting system was implemented as a measure to control the vote. The question becomes how far does the fraud go? The Rasmussen Reports and the Heartland Institute conducted a survey that found one-in-five mail-in voters committed voter fraud during the 2020 US Presidential Election.
These are merely the people who admitted to illegal voting practices. Around 21% admitted that they filled out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf or someone else, while 19% admitted they permitted someone else to vote on their behalf. Another 17% admitted they signed a ballot on behalf or a family member of friend without their permission.
An alarming 17% of mail-in voters surveyed admit they illegally voted in a state where they do not reside. Democrats (36%) were more likely than Republicans (24%) to vote by mail, but both admit to outright voter fraud. If anything, Republicans were slightly more likely to voter fraud, in fact, with 19% admitting to signing a ballot on behalf of a family member or friend compared to 16% of Democrats. As for illegally casting a vote in a different state, 24% of Republicans admitted to doing so compared to 17% of Democrats.
Minorities reported a higher rate of voter fraud as some agencies were paying them to vote. About 29% of Hispanics, 15% of Blacks, and 3% of Whites admit that they were bribed for their vote in the last presidential election.
Justin Haskins, director of the Socialism Research Center at the Heartland Institute, called the survey results “nothing short of stunning.” “For the past three years, Americans have repeatedly been told that the 2020 election was the most secure in history. But if this poll’s findings are reflective of reality, the exact opposite is true. This conclusion isn’t based on conspiracy theories or suspect evidence, but rather from the responses made directly by the voters themselves,” he added.
Now these are merely the people who were honest enough to admit that they voted illegally. Perhaps those against voter fraud should spin the story and say that in-person voting with identification is necessary to prevent Trump, not Biden, from stealing the election.
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 