Do You Really Want The Book?..

Begin with the end in mind.

Whatever happened to…

You see, a funny thing happens when you intercept fraud…. It disappears.

That’s just one tiny example.  There are thousands more pixels.

Which sets up a question.  It’s a very big ugly digest.  All of it.  The sum is much more than its collective parts.  So, do you really want the book?  It’s a trilogy: (Vol 1) The Politics. (Vol 2) The Fraud. (Vol 3) The confrontation.

The number one statement I receive is a version of: “I wish I had never started following your research, because it was so much easier when I did not to know.”  Simultaneously, I receive an equal amount of requests to write a book about them.  [“Them” doesn’t just include the background surveillance against Donald J Trump (aka Spygate), although that’s a recently common reference.]

Here is why I have never, until now, contemplated doing it.

There are many really good and well-written books about politics and scandals.  However, every book, regardless of how well cited, researched and evidenced, always has a big missing part, at least for me: Where’s the confrontation?

Where’s the part in the ‘expose” when the writer takes all of the facts, all of the evidence, all of the cited and documented discovery, and gets in the face of the subject?

What’s the purpose, if not to initiate action.

Where’s the book writer of DC corruption who puts a microphone uncomfortably in the face of Mitch McConnell (or staff), or Peter Strzok, or Andrew McCabe, or John Brennan, or Kevin Clinesmith…  and asks the questions… or confronts Jake Tapper… or travels to the symposium,.. or Tom Perez… or Martin Gugino… or the team of Bubba Wallace…. or Rod Rosenstein… and challenges them in unavoidable detail, to document that part.

Relentlessly.  Visibly.

The answers are just as easily found on the perimeter; but no-one is there.

That Andrew Breitbart approach is always missing; that’s why we miss him so much.

The recent books are great.  I have likely read most.  They are terrific data records and they show solid documentary evidence on a multitude of schemes, but drive no outcome.

We gain knowledge; we seem satisfied; but perhaps, just perhaps, we are satiated only because we have stopped thinking about the purpose any longer.   What value is there in knowing the fraud and scheme if there is no confrontation to conclude it.  Maybe even stop it, or expose it on a level that cannot be denied.

Ongoing denial of truth permits continued trespass.

The villain escapes, ultimately because we have stopped the accountability quest.

Wash.  Rinse.  Repeat.

Next book, new controversy…. new evidence…. same shallow outcome.

Put another way – CTH receives hundreds of requests for interviews on some of our deep dive research; so many that we just don’t respond to them any longer.  But when we did respond, consider this customary reply:

My honest and respectfully intended question to you would be: What is it that makes media folks always want to “get an interview” when the information is there for the taking?

Perhaps, by training, by habit, or by unintended consequence you have developed yourself to live for the process itself as an end result. Is it logical to believe that journalism is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire?

Please forgive my uneducated and poorly worded suppositions, but apparently journalism has evolved into reveling in the process and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter and never actually applies what might be discovered.

In fact, I’m led to believe that sometimes those within the industrial media complex avoid the subject matter deliberately, because if they get their heads around it and nail it home, they won’t have anything to talk about any more–because they will have exhausted their stash.

Not attempting whatsoever to lump your intention into such a fray; however, many have gotten into the habit of milking each situation for “so many leads,” “so many interviews,” “so many column inches,” and “so many angles” that problem-solving does not appeal to them at all. They oddly appear to favor the endless process.

So when there’s an approach like what you are encountering with our significant site research, and my reluctance for self involvement, I don’t fit –because I don’t give a flip about “the process.” And therefore, I do not fit into the rationale of the box or the PERT chart.

If you want to make these truths known, they are free for the taking; and they are by no matter or consequence dependent on my advancement.

The same general outlook applies to my perspective on writing books.  Should not the book itself drive an action?  Does not that action, by necessity require a confrontation?

There you have it.

That’s why I have never written a book about all of the subjects we have deeply researched.

That said, the first two volumes of the Big Ugly trilogy are essentially written.  Vol. I “The Politics”; and Vol II “The Frauds”, are assembled.  The summaries of over a decade of CTH material makes each one about 700-1,000 pages (with citations).  But the missing volume III, “The Confrontations” precludes the release.  I will not release a book outlining fraud without initiating an unavoidable confrontation to expose each individual fraud on a very specific level.

So there’s the question: Do you really want the book?

It’s not really a book, per se’, the pages would be released digitally in live-stream video, a rather direct series of confrontations based on prior assembly.

Recent events have shifted the dynamic.

It would be very ugly, and most likely very public.

Think about it.

This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Election 2020, media bias, President Trump, Spygate, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

745 Responses to Do You Really Want The Book?..

  1. TrustyHaste says:

    CTH fellow treepers: Here is the actual answer to the confrontation issue. You and I need to do that. Each of us. In our own way. Call, email, show up in person. City councils, state capitols, DC. Confront, film and upload to Here’s how:

    A book is great. But real 3D confrontation cannot be done by one person. Not even the famous ones like Alex Jones, Laura Loomer, Breitbart. They are not enough. Each of us needs to get our of our comfort zone and participate. I call and email. I need to get myself out to a meeting and film. Let’s do this!!

    Liked by 9 people

    • Learning says:

      I agree. Get a group of like minded citizens and go meet governing officials in their office and ask what they intend to do about things. Get them off the fence.

      Liked by 5 people

      • TrustyHaste says:

        Here are some more ideas. Find out when your next city council meeting is. Call and “interview” your representatives. Ask them if you can record. If yes, record and upload. Arrange a zoom meeting with these people. A Periscope. Call radio shows, CSPAN. This can’t be a half dozen people, it needs to be thousands. This cannot be a robo call. No copy/paste words. It needs to be in your own words/style. Looking for inspiration on what to say? Maybe we can start a new thread with contact info, tutorials on recording/filming, public speaking tips, etc. There are only 122 days till the election. I’m all in.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Learnig says:

          Great ideas TH. It’s a place to start. We can’t all be Breibart. We can at least hold our local board of ed accountable.

          Liked by 1 person

        • garavaglia1 says:

          Let me know when you have assembled the thousands.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Alan Reasin says:

            We had the TEA Party effort and while we had many people, we were too nice and were basically ignored. In 1999 the attempt to impose an income tax in TN prompted thousands to mob the statehouse to stop it and they did. Politicians ignore nice.

            Liked by 3 people

            • We have learned that they also ignore a “peaceful XXX.” In fact, I think “peaceful XXX” is now code for go do XXX in a way that I can ignore you.

              Liked by 1 person

              • jeff montanye says:

                and also why trials for the crossfire hurricane perps is so critical to current politics and future history.

                also needed is the revelation of many other frauds and hoaxes, eventually leading to the one trump exposed on the day it happened when he said bombs not just planes destroyed the world trade center.

                Liked by 1 person

      • garavaglia1 says:

        You have assembled a group?


      • gigi says:

        And be prepared for whining, ranting, defensive, obnoxious, condescending behavior. From personal experience. From one of my bed-wetting selected, er, “elected” officials.
        I wish that I had a better come back at the time. But one of my consolations is that–to the trained eye, he mad an ass of himself. In front of about 5 or 10 people. Depending on who else was in earshot of the convo.

        Liked by 1 person

      • TWOHAWK says:

        Security will not even allow you into their offices. If you must subvert your quesries, to get within striking range, you will be removed, post haste.


      • Brian says:

        Here’s something I’ve been doing more of’; Calling inner city talk shows (Baltimore) and politely confronting the hosts regarding “racism”, the BLM marxists, the Covid hoax, the white campus commies (ANTIFA) and the real reason behind this divisiveness… the 2020 election. It was fun actually. Other callers (black) called and many agreed. I shifted the topic to a new narrative. Be armed with the facts and don’t be rude. You might be surprised. They just tore down a statue of Frederick Douglass for God sakes! Be a regular caller if possible. Mix it up!


        • dayallaxeded says:

          That’s a great idea! Can listen on a internet feed from anywhere and call in. Baltimore is one of the saddest cases–such a great, historic, patriotic city, absolutely beset by the BLM scourge. And for what? A masochistic junkie. The great double mounted equestrian statue of General Lee and General Jackson, really a monument to friendship and trust between great men has been removed for a while from Wyman Park, across from the Museum of Art and even the Memorial to Confederate Women who served as nurses for all wounded during CW1 (around Charles St and University Pkwy) has been taken down. It’s not about the statues, it’s an attempt to institute “Year 0” and remove all historical, cultural, and moral frames of reference, so the Progzi NWO can be installed as supreme.


  2. farmerren says:

    All this has gotten me worked up. Had to do something, so I just donated to Laura Loomer running for the US House, FL 21. Look her up. She’s a fighter. On Parler too.
    I don’t live in Florida.
    Gave to CTH last week.
    Ready to do more.
    Thank you Sundance for what you do.

    Liked by 6 people

  3. 2020 says:

    How about breaking it down your book into regions, states, counties, even local governments. Point out areas of concern in each area/hot spots. Give us “We The People” info/ questions to take/ pose to our leaders that will show we are very informed and expect answers and change. Secretiveness/ propaganda is one of the main weapons that we need to expose. Aren’t all politics local, really? Maybe, if we all took a bite of this apple starting locally we could make true change. We have been so complacent that we don’t even seem to know how to respond to these attacks. Maybe a citizenry directory of sorts with peaceful yet powerful advice and action steps to turn this seemingly sinking ship around.

    Hope that made some sense.


    Liked by 4 people

  4. bertdilbert says:

    Bretbart Training Manuel, The Trilogy

    Liked by 2 people

  5. icthematrix says:

    Sundance has, as usual, nailed it again. No confrontation, no accountability. Three arms of doing this are compromised.

    Journalism lost it’s virginity to Obama. They’ve always leaned left, but they dove into the back seat with the man who met every ideal and cured all white guilt. When Trump beat the next great symbolic President (it was Hillary’s turn), they got pizzed off…seriously angry, and lost their soul to Satan’s whisper: “whatever it takes”.

    Justice and law enforcement always leaned left, but Trump’s election threatened the dirty leaders who abused the law to spy on him, his campaign and many more in government, plus judges at every level. They could have exposed this evil, but they exacerbated it.

    We thought that Congress, when represented by a majority of Republicans, was a body that would defend our Constitution, drive conservative policy and President Trump’s agenda. How could they be so evil as to sell their soul into the bowels of a Uniparty?

    Literally we are at a point where the only hope for overcoming this lay with our President and the AG/Durham investigation. I fear Barr knows how bad things are, but is running out the clock.

    There is a point where we lose this Republic. We must, as a huge assembly of patriots, get out and demonstrate our support for America, our President, and real conservative candidates. Note today’s story on Breitbart about the traitorous never Trumpers who plan to also return the Senate to Dims via The Lincoln Project. Pathetic.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. CET says:

    In the summer of 1996, one of my closest friends asked a favor. His Methodist minister was a strong Clinton supporter that he was challenging him on moral grounds. The pastor snidely suggested over the phone that he give him just three current news articles that demonstrates Clinton’s unfitness for office. There was a small meeting that night at the church, and my friend decided to do so there. The friend ask me for help, knowing I could easily provide far more than three. Told him to come by on his way and toot, I’d bring them out. The three articles were within the last three days from Investors Business Daily and The Wall Street Journal. The internet was not yet widely used, and most people could not fathom the dishonesty of the media.

    The three articles were a physician’s treatise on partial birth abortion published in Investor’s Business Daily. In that summer, we first discovered this unspeakable act. Many of us were so horrified by the procedure we could not describe it to other people. I still can’t. Yet the Clinton’s without hesitation not only defended, but advocated the unspeakable act. Today, we know the rest of the story, a thriving trade in the products so derived. We even have a sitting governor who described that we make it comfortable, have a conversation with the mother, and do the equivalent to a born living soul. Folks, he wasn’t promoting legislation, he was relating what was already happening.

    The second article regarded Taiwan. The Chinese were once again threatening aggression, so Clinton sent ships as a show of force. He also sent aides to Taiwan to obtain campaign contributions for sending them. At the time, it was illegal to sell China a computer. Before little Bush went away, they owned IBM’s pc division. Now, the CCP has likely more influence in American business, entertainment, and government than the president.

    The third article regarding the selling of MERV technology to China by Loral Space. The Chinese had a growing business launching satellites for US interest, but were having difficulty with launching multiple units. Campaign cash flowed, and they got the tech. This was a far worse treason than Uranium One.

    Naturally, none of these were information that mattered, like so much today. There is no confrontation except with the history of America and the memory of our citizens.

    It has been written that strong delusion will come so that the people will believe a lie. I wonder if this happened in the 1930s German life. Or in the Islamic world. I don’t think the ultimate realization of this was then, but I study whether we have slipped this way now. The lie spoken of is apparent, what is not is the delusion. If this is now, the delusion is liberalism. Where the unspeakable becomes the normal. Murder becomes choice. Working until you drop is privilege. The right to thank God together is halted, peaceable assembly is a crime. Looting, killing and burning is peaceable assembly.

    I’m sorry folks, but the time for confrontation has past. That is the last war, and Trump won. The next war has started, far more insidious, far more dangerous. That voting is under such attack is the best sign that it still matters, so we put great efforts toward that cause. We must put great effort to support others in our cause wherever they may be, especially here.

    It seems to me that the next step is disobedience, and that it will come at a most high cost.

    Liked by 5 people

    • dayallaxeded says:

      So what happened with your friend’s confrontation of the pastor? I’m on the edge of my seat here!


      • Elle says:

        I think it is important to realize WHY the major churches, police, media, academia, politic, NGO’s etc., etc., etc., all lean left. It is because outside forces have spent over 60 years community organizing and promoting those who can be relied upon to do their bidding in exchange for a higher rung on the ladder of status.

        That is the deal and that is why they went bonkers when Trump won. It broke the deal. Trump was the little boy who shattered the illusion of the emperor’s fine clothes. They can see for themselves he is naked, but acknowledging it causes them to instantly lose their position of superiority that they achieved by pretending. Worse, there is no way to admit it without becoming more simple than the simpletons they mocked.

        We all chuckle about community organizing, but it has been insanely successful. They promoted and purged their way to almost absolute power by determining who would reliably be willing to “see” whatever they told them to see – then they, these unseen forces, recruited and supported them.

        So my point is that the majority of people who COULD be police, etc., don’t lean left. Rather, the majority of the ones who got hired and promoted do. It feeds on itself. Until Trump came along, it was virtually unchallenged.

        Look at the Trump rallies and you can see where the numbers and sentiments of the majority really lie. And those are just the people who show up for thee rallies (which is only a very small percentage of Trump supporters).

        The delusion has been shattered and that is what makes it all so dangerous now. Those who advanced beyond their expectations, no matter where they sit on the ladder, will say or do anything to keep the delusion intact.


        • Kent Clizbe says:


          You’re asking the right questions. And you’ve got very close to the right answers.

          For full details in answer to: “…WHY the major churches, police, media, academia, politic, NGO’s etc., etc., etc., all lean left. It is because outside forces have spent over 60 years…” please see the book that provides the whole story–who/what/why/when/where/how:

          Willing Accomplices


    • cantcforest says:

      Writing in individual blogs, whether CTH, PJM, ACE of Spades, Town Hall, Daily
      Caller,…., does not convey the feeling of general belief as the media does when it sings the same song morning, noon, and night and so it is mindlessly repeated by sheeple throughout the day. I don’t know if we could create a wide enough base for OAN to do the job. As Gen. Flynn commented last week, we have 2% about to control 98%. I don’t think it is even 2%. Are there really that many media, DeepStaters and politicians out there?
      In other words, our problem, as well as President Trump’s problem, is finding a way to communicate with the masses, which he accomplished by getting the media to ridicule his ‘mistakes’ in his tweets. I earlier today suggested that we each need to confront politicians, grab some microphones, grab some cameras. Unfortunately, that may take to much time. Maybe we could put up wanted posters on billboards, or redo Brylcreem signs.
      The MemeTeam needs to step up here.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Elle says:

        Agree. I think not only do we need way to inform and confront, but we also need a way to accept back into the fold those who have been bleating on about how fine the emperor’s clothes have been (ie: men and women going along with the leftist delusion). We need to allow them a graceful exit, to say they were wrong without humiliating them so, like the wayward son, they can come home.


  7. The facts need to be presented as clearly and simply as possible. Short video presentations of the subject spouting their lies followed by the truth with proof and references. No screaming matches- it turns many people off and solves nothing, just gives short lived satisfaction though.
    I’m all for it in any form you fell would work Sundance. I’d like to see it start with Wuhan virus fear mongering and useless mask requirements. ( What happens when mask wearers cough for the third or fourth time? Wouldn’t that expel all those supposedly trapped virus particles out in a super spreader spray?

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Tony says:

    Yes, do it. The country needs to hear this.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. BetsyRossRocked says:

    Dear Sundance,
    I read this when you posted and have discussed it all day with my husband.
    You know better than us what is the best road to take but being that
    you asked for our opinion , you have two more votes for go for it !

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mist'ears Mom says:

    I’m a yes on writing that book! We need to do everything in our power to expose these fakes, frauds and crooks!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. cplogics says:

    For what it’s worth, I saw go for it Sundance. We need a Harper Valley PTA moment.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. What’s going on in public is already UGLY. I would rather see the ugly truth than the ugly lies I’ve been seeing. Big YES from me! Uninformed and misinformed voters are killing the American dream….. quite unwittingly.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Linda K. says:

      i am dense. How would more people see a book than a blog? Would a book force a confrontation? Why not both?

      Liked by 1 person

      • You’re not dense, my mind was Sundancing and spinning with the potential. There is so much information blowing past us with not a lot of the full story. Maybe the book would follow up on the aftermaths of previous headlines. What ever happened with that…? Like the old guy getting pushed while it looks like he’s trying to scan the police radios. Weird ‘blood’ pattern made it look like he was a total agitator setting up the police. From set up to follow up – information on that might be a book in itself! Cops got charged but he didn’t afaik.


  13. 2020 says:

    Harper Valley should be our theme song…we should all be “Mama”. 🙂


  14. Alex1689 says:

    So, having read through a good portion of the comments so far, unsurprisingly the vast majority of folks say “Go for it!”

    It is easy to urge someone to take risks where you are not the one counting the costs.

    Only Sundance know what the costs might be, and who might end up paying them. We think to ourselves that if only we were a billionaire like PDJT, we too could step up to the fight. But even President Trump must have taken some moments to think about what could happen on a personal level if he loses the fight – not so very much to him as to his children and grandchildren.

    The earthly component of the enemy consists of highly vindictive people who desire evil to rule. Their advocacy for abortion up to and even past the moment of birth can leave no doubt on that point. (There is a terrible tale there that is yet to be told as to WHY abortion and infanticide have become the core of the Democratic party platform, and why Justice Roberts might be allowed to rule for school choice but will never be allowed to rule against abortion restrictions. I fear to know the answer, yet I suspect we all really do need to find out.)

    To choose the hard and dangerous path in the face of justified fear does not mean it has to be done recklessly. I agree with the comments that have noted that once the confrontation phase begins, the calculation of those who have much to hide about the costs and benefits of an AB like demise is much more likely.

    Sundance has nothing to place behind a “kill switch.” How can we create the equivalent thing? Where the confrontation is effective, but the price for eliminating it is too high for those in the shadows to pay?

    What if we were to crowd source the confrontation and Sundance ran the “clearinghouse”? No single target worth the effort, but a guarantee of a thousand fold increase in disruption if Sundance were to disappear or suffer a “heart attack?” A communal kill switch if you will.

    I keep thinking back to Solzhenitsyn, writing about how if the secret police had had to worry about going home to sleep each night, if men had risen up, how that might have made all the difference.

    Guerrilla tactics, applied to social media. A thousand citizens, showing up in line behind Bob Creamer at Starbucks, asking the tough questions, running the video to Sundance to combine the lies told with the proof of his mendacity to post online for all to see, a hundred more posting flyers showcasing it on their local Starbucks boards, a thousand overpasses decorated with “Clinton is a Rapist”, hundreds of sidewalks chalked with “Black Lives Matter. . In Election Years.”

    We could do it. So much frustration, pent up and waiting for someone, anyone, to call the American patriot into action in a way that is doable by the average person and consistent with law and order, but also highly disruptive to the glamour being cast over the sleeping populace.

    All it needs is a direct call to action. Just that little spark, and a little guidance on where to send the videos.


  15. drg13miami says:

    Far be it from me to attempt a suggestion, but….

    I’d love to see the trilogy. However, prior to totally completing the trilogy, I opine that Sundance ought to do a synopsis, viz., a small version which people would read and get curious.

    Perhaps take the top 6 or 8 or 10 or 12 most recent egregious acts; define them; document them with just a few references; and publish that. That would be on the best seller list in no time. Then go for the longer volumes. Perhaps release the longer versions one at a time. I do understand how time-consuming this is.

    As we all know, time is of the essence to each of us. We are each overloaded with all sorts of fake news and it’s not easy to separate the truth from the bs.

    Sundance, you have proven you can do that. I’ve never seen anyone as clear, lucid, compelling as you.

    But it you come out with a large amount of verbiage, most people simply won’t get to it.

    You know the facts. Your research and memory and writing skills are incredible.

    Please do it. It can help drain the swamp.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. john another says:

    I see no problem at all in you issuing a book in any form.
    My first reaction was that it will impede your already prodigious output, especially in these times of great flux combined with the Federally licensed media that is required to properly inform the electorate bought and paid for by the people who wish the most harm for this formerly Independent Republic.
    I trust your judgment.


    • john another says:

      Epstein and Maxwell didn’t kill themselves and why the hell doesn’t Pence form a commission to bring forth all medical viewpoints and Facts in a very public format?

      Liked by 1 person

  17. I recently had this thought about Rush, but it applies to Tucker, Levin, Hannity, Laura, Buck Sexton, etc. Do they really believe what they say? If their ratings went down, would they tone down some of their statements? If they didn’t have paid security around them, would they say what they say?

    They encourage us to speak out, but what do they really risk? They get paid to speak out, but have to be responsive to their advertisers and network. What has Tucker risked with his recent outbursts? Not much as it moved him to 1st place in the ratings!

    Have they created a fund to bail us out of jail like the liberals do? Do they fund conservative organizations and grassroot efforts? Are they really any better than our Congressional RINOs?

    Has Rush ever put himself on the line to elect a Republican President? I mean risk something. Or is it just a ratings game he plays every 4 years? Most are multi-millionaires BECAUSE we tune them in every day. To me, it makes sense they return some of those millions to the cause, and that they actually put something at risk – if they really mean what they say.

    Liked by 2 people

    • The Phantom Stranger says:

      I’ve been watching and hearing Hannity for over twenty years. Say what you will about the man interrupting guests, but the man is a true believer in the cause. He’s fought the good fight longer than almost anyone else in conservative broadcast media and doesn’t flip-flop overnight because the Left relentlessly attacks him. Hannity was just about the only person in establishment media hammering Obama and his administration for eight years. Hannity is clearly #1 on the Left’s media enemies list.

      I’ll say this about Rush – he’s become much better at pushing a conservative agenda once he started reading right-wing internet sites. I always thought he was more of an entertainer than pure conservative, but he has a much better grasp on the zeitgeist and what’s been going on since Trump was elected.

      Not everyone in conservative media is really a true believer or even that right-wing. They say all the right things but you can tell how they frame their ideological points and cover news. Bannon’s radio show is fascinating because you can tell he isn’t conservative at all and it wouldn’t surprise me if he’s controlled opposition. He’s an eternal optimist in bringing back the Reagan Democrat electorate despite massive demographic changes to the country. His whole schtick feels like talking points cooked up by the CIA.

      Tucker is hard to read, having watched him regularly since the 1990s. He always passed himself off as one of the Left’s token media conservatives, a George Will type that never cared much for partisan Republican interests. He’s clearly changed his modus operandi since getting O’Reilly’s slot on Fox News. Tucker doesn’t support President Trump and likely never supported him. The only difference these days is that he’s calling out certain parts of the Republican establishment that normally don’t get criticized on Fox.


  18. The context for my above post: That Andrew Breitbart approach is always missing; that’s why we miss him so much.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. DV Meca says:

    Yes. I really want it. I also think that it would be useful to have an actual book. Even today, something about books seems more substantive and tends to attract many people who might overlook or not take seriously enough an ongoing Internet-based presentation. If that’s too much extra work, I should clarify that I would consider whatever you decide to release or publish, in any format or formats, to be a wonderful gift and would receive it with deep appreciation and a sense of duty to help support your efforts, POTUS and the vision that brings us all together.

    While including the actual confrontations as the ultimate point everything else leads up to sounds awesome, I wouldn’t regard that as a sticking point. This is because you could potentially include a clearly expressed and specific call to action re: confrontations and other proactive, real-world measures that patriots who have read the info and are aware of the fraud can take, personally or in groups, to transform the book content into tangible action that will have the effects you and most of the people reading your website consider so very important. In other words, including the “Confrontation” section would be great, but you can also provide instructions and a call to arms and enlist patriots to help on that count!


    • Chris says:

      Let the die be cast. It is time to cross the Rubicon.

      I am prepared. I have sharpened my mind and healed my body for this moment as those elected don’t defend me and the walls of a corner are pressing at my back.

      It’s time to stand because for too long it’s been one man, President Trump that has been doing the fighting.

      Why not give him some help and take away the other teams leverage?

      I’m ready. I’ve been silent and playing defensive. It’s time to go on the offensive.

      Pray on it, but I am voting yes on volume 3

      It is time Sundance.


  20. lgstarr says:

    Yes, I want the book.

    But do you, Sundance?

    IF you do, you will partner with James O’Keefe who KNOWS how to put pertinent data into living action.

    Go forth and conquer (before it’s too late).


  21. Alan Reasin says:

    I was standing on my busy corner until Covid-19 struck and will soon return with my signs against the move to the left in our country. Who does this kind of thing besides me. We have millions who are retired and have the time to try and save our country for their grandchildren like I do. The two hrs on my corner has thousand seeing my signs daily being held by a real person.


    • lgstarr says:

      That won’t work here in the Phoenix area (for half the year, anyway) where it’s 100 degrees IN THE SHADE! And tons of retired people who would pass out from dehydration. Plus, in 2004, I stood on street corners in Calabasas (CA) holding up signs and yelling at passing drivers–whew, my upper arms ached so much and that was already 6 years ago.


  22. NancyB says:

    Absolutely, please release it digitally. No one has covered this entire mess more comprehensively than you have, and that includes some of the exceptionally fine books that have already been published.


  23. Donna in Oregon says:

    Crossroads are scary. We are going to make a choice if we do something or we do nothing. Both have consequences.

    This time right now is our test. It is our time to speak the truth and stand for liberty.

    In his winding explanation, Rumsfeld explored Unknowns and Wisdom. On a February 12, 2002, news briefing, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld explained the limitations of intelligence reports: “There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

    Once CTH started on this journey for knowledge and truth, this was to be the natural crossroad. We know. We cannot “unsee”. The road less traveled has already been traversed by CTH.

    The unknowns must be faced. We can choose to wait until we have no choice. Act as though posting to one another is our stand. But is it really? No. I think not. Either path we choose–doesn’t really matter–within our postings, we have already placed our hats in the ring.

    The Bible speaks of wisdom. Sun Tsi, “Art of War” is wisdom. Our own age (an era in which victimhood is virtue and affluence is happiness) could do with a bit of the old Stoicism. Epictetus’s brief Enchiridion, the Discourses, Meditations by the more sophisticated Marcus Aurelius: We must accept those things that are not in our power to control; concern ourselves with the one or two things that do belong to us – our reasoning faculty and the way we choose to react to events beyond our control.

    All of the ancient books of wisdom have purpose through the ages for times such as these.

    Write the book, use the wisdom, make the stand. Many have come before you. Many will come after. Now is your time.

    “What is Wisdom? Socrates and the Known Unknowns”
    Socrates didn’t charge a fee for his services, unlike the Sophists, the professional thinkers of the time. Unlike the philosophers who came after him, he established no school or institute. Socrates wrote nothing and he claimed he had nothing to teach. Yet Socrates, more than any other ancient philosopher, is responsible for creating philosophy as we know it today.

    View at

    Depend on WISDOM as we all face the unknown….The Bible talks about Wisdom in Proverbs 4:7-10

    Proverbs 4:7-10 King James Version (KJV)

    7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
    8 Exalt her, and she shall promote thee: she shall bring thee to honour, when thou dost embrace her.
    9 She shall give to thine head an ornament of grace: a crown of glory shall she deliver to thee.
    10 Hear, O my son, and receive my sayings; and the years of thy life shall be many.

    God bless you. God bless CTH. God bless the United States of America.

    Liked by 1 person

    • waawash says:

      Well done Donna! You finished with a flourish featuring the feminine nature of God. When I teach on Proverbs, I always point to wisdom’s feminine gender; of course my wife loves it ;-


  24. BigTalkers says:

    That’s the objective of “political speech” I’ve discovered over time. To say essentially nothing over and over until the electorate becomes comatose over any given issue. (Which is also one of the things that maddens the “pro pols” so much about Donald Trump.)


  25. Judy says:

    I am wondering if this is all a result of God removing his hand of protection from the USA? Our country has removed him from our schools and our government. If we return to him, He’ll return his hand to protect us. John Paul Jackson prophesied all of this in The Coming Pefect Storm.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. Judy Taylor says:

    Sundance, I have not commented on this site before and …you are extraordinary. You must, of course, write the book that is already written. I thought Trump would save the Republic and then I saw the need for Barr to save the Republic. Trump must run for office right now and Barr is constrained by the need to build unassailable cases. There are a few good people in the Legislative Branch and they can be counted on. So saving the Republic may be up to you. YOU are the “Fourth Estate.” Executive, Legislative and the Fourth Estate. Three out of four isn’t bad. The Republic can probably hang together on that until Barr creates the cases to bring the Judiciary into alignment. So, Sundance, if not you, who and if not now – then yesterday. Thank God you already have documentation and you have identified the other good guys in the media. Godspeed. I’m praying for you.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. snowfalling says:

    Yes. Support you fully with deep appreciation & respect. You and your team are in my prayers.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Orange Man Good says:

    I’m not sure what the age of this group is so this may be pointless. Way back when 60 Minutes was useful, Mike Wallace use to confront people all the time. There was a running joke: you know its going to be a bad day when you find the 60 minute crew in your office.

    Eventually that stopped because Mike and the team started being accused of “ambush journalism”. I was very young at the time so I don’t really remember having an opinion of the events but I do remember a general agreement that the 60 minute type confrontation was good. It left you feeling better than you felt before you watched it.

    I guess my point is it seems the pendulum has swung way to far away from the confrontation scenario. But I would caution at making the confrontation itself be the objective. The objective needs to be to reduce the crime or corruption or malpractice and this is done not just by exposing it but also by making the costs of getting caught grossly outweigh any possible benefits of the unwanted behavior.


  29. TWOHAWK says:

    Security will not even allow you into their offices. If you must subvert to posit your queries, to get within striking range, you will be removed from the premises, post haste. Those put on the spot will turn and run. You will be accused of harassment. Sundance is spot on, I believe, but confrontation even in the most respectful sense, is just not allowed to get in the room.


  30. fractionalexponent says:

    Yes on the book.
    Only problem it, if on paper, it would take a book shelf 6 ft high, 3 ft wide.
    On-line version do-able, accessable, economical, (for us anyway).
    I used to do two-word searches looking for corruption. Problem was, almost any combination revealed not only the suspected corruption, but endless entanglement and conspiracy. The tw0-word searches kept leading me to CTH.
    My main interest is math and physics. I have a better library on that than public libraries. Back before the 2008-9 crash, the Borders book store chain had about a thousand math and physics books on the shelf.
    Fox News gives me heart problems.
    Math, Physics, History calms me down.
    My highschool girlfriend (1959-60, Austin Texas) gave me two books, “Atlas Shrugged” & “1984”. Looked her up on-line recently. She’s become a force in central Texas.

    Bottom line, publish, however you can.


  31. Ana Nimity says:

    The “confrontation” will not happen if those who just keep voting for the same creeps do nothing. American politics has always been local first; so if the constituents don’t care and they keep sending Mitch MCConnell or Adam Schiff or Nancy Pelosi or Lindsay Graham over and over; then the “confronters” will be always looked on as sore-losers.


  32. Olorin says:

    > What is it that makes media folks always want to “get an interview”
    > when the information is there for the taking?

    This is an exceptionally perceptive observation by SD.

    The media operate within fixed narratives–fixed approaches to how one gets, structures, changes, and communicates information. For the broadcast media, many of these approaches either came out of earlier media (radio, newspapers, magazines, speeches, classrooms) or were developed on the fly in the era of TV (both antenna and cable).

    The internet introduced information dynamics that were many to many, peer to peer, and yet the MSM doubled down on these top-down broadcast methods of the 20th century. Those methods were incredibly powerful and established certain mental structures in audience members.

    The above point is an excellent example. MSM figures cling to their genre of “the interview.” This “talking head” function is so deeply ingrained in Americans’ (and worldwide) psyches by now partly because it plays on deeply held human psychology that seeks a leader, an expert, a priest of the “higher message.”

    But as we have seen, those structures are open to capture by bad players. Government intel agencies and private sector ones too (intelligence mercenaries) grabbed those methods and used them for their own ends, propagandizing the public. We speak of MOCKINGBIRD, but we have no name really for the intel mercenaries (unless you include them under MOCKINGBIRD for their partnerships there).

    I knew that things were really starting to shift in the era of the internet when information corporations starting locking down public comment because it was “too much trouble,” or “racist,” or whatever. And then started redefining any fact or opinion that disagreed with their (MOCKINGBIRD?) narratives as racist, nazi, etc. And even also reached back to older propaganda campaigns of the 20th century to add to the burden of DISSENT SIN on the part of anyone speaking his mind on the internet.

    I must get back to the family now, but I wanted to thank Sundance for bringing up these points and hopefully laying the groundwork for more consideration/discussion. The dead albatross of 20th century media is hanging around our necks and dragging us all to a watery death. But what comes next? Hard to say when the new media are so saturated with evil players seeking only gain.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. CountryDoc says:

    Can someone outline what the Andrew Brietbart approach is/was?


  34. LetsPlay says:

    Currently reading “Imperium” by Robert Harris. This quote stuck me as appropo given our times and those with money and selfish, malevolent motives who are behind the cascade of crises that we face leading up to the election. Funny, how times change but man does not, regardless of how much we think we have progressed. Human nature.

    From Chapter III –

    “There is an old saying, gentlemen, among the merchants in the Macellum, that a fish rots from the head down, and if there is something rotten in Rome today—and who can doubt that there is?—I tell you plainly that it has started in the head. It has started at the top. It has started in the Senate.” Loud cheers and stamping of feet. “And there is only one thing to do with a stinking, rotten fish head, those merchants will tell you, and that is to cut it off—cut it off and throw it out!”

    Renewed cheers. “But it will require quite a knife to sever this head, for it is an aristocratic head, and we all know what they are like!” Laughter. “It is a head swollen with the poison of corruption and bloated with pride and arrogance. And it will need a strong hand to wield that knife, and it will need a steady nerve, besides, because they have necks of brass, these aristocrats, I tell you: brassnecks, all of them!”

    Laughter. “But that man will come. He is not far away.

    Your powers will be restored, I promise you, however hard the struggle.”


  35. RightAroundTheBlock says:



  36. brewmama says:

    The answer is yes, but what DID happen to that guy who flopped on the sidewalk?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s