In a recent counterpoint posed by Michael Smerconish against his own interests at CNN, ABC and NBC, the pundit was refreshingly honest, albeit maintaining pretense.

Smerconish noted it would be “unfair to the office of the President” to present rebuttal dialogue to a speech they refused to air.  He posed the issue as one of intellectual hypocrisy, which it is; however, in reality, that was a feature of the media approach, not a flaw within it.

For several years CTH has noted there is no such thing as mis-dis or mal-information, there is only information.  The purpose of our emphasis is highlighted in this example.

The leftist media did not want to allow information to reach their sheeple viewers. So, they awaited the conclusion of President Trump’s remarks and then summarized what he said for the audience along with their rebuttal.  By blocking the information from Trump, they limit and control the information to only that which they present.  This is by design.

We are seeing this approach in the USA for the same reason we are noting it in Canada.  The audience for both messaging systems is the same, blind sheeple leftists.  If the source information is never displayed or heard, the only reference is the rebuttal information.  This is the same pattern within domestic abuse situations.

A domestic abuser often tries to isolate their victim from family and friends to cut off sources of information or support that could counter the abuse. If the victim maintained contact, it would be harder for the abuser to manipulate them. Some people draw a parallel between this dynamic and the way they perceive leftist media influencing its audience, casting the media in the role of abuser and the audience as willing participants.

The Smerconish segment highlights how wrong it is for any argument to start by isolating, blocking, or censoring the source of information, then spinning their own version of it and offering counterpoints aimed at eliminating the perceived threat of the information itself.

(more…)

Now that former Maine Democrat senate candidate Graham Platner has ended his 2026 campaign following revelations of his Nazi outlooks and rape propensity, the options for his replacement held a debate last evening.

During opening statements, each of the candidates, David Costello, Elizabeth Dickerson, Dan Kleban and Ashley Webb made the best case for their candidacy to defeat Republican Susan Collins in the 2026 general election.

Some Democrats have pointed to this debate as evidence for why Democrats should have stuck with Graham Platner.  Other people have compared the debate to a Saturday Night Live skit.  However, the bottom line is that currently the Maine senate race is 50/50 with either of the four options. WATCH (5 mins):

.

(more…)

Following up on President Trump’s national address on elections from last night, Dept of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin held a press conference this morning going into more detail on corrupt voter processes.

According to Secretary Mullin over 250,000 illegal aliens are registered to vote in just four states, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Nevada.  Additionally, 400,000 individuals still registered to vote but are deceased.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

78-year-old Ann Widdecombe was a well-known conservative in British politics. She was a staunch defender of free speech, a direct opponent to leftist cultural Marxism and an advocate for the commonsense Reform Party.  Widdecombe was against abortion, gay rights, transgender advocacy and wokism writ large.

Ms. Widdecombe was beaten to death in her home Wednesday July 8th around 12:30pm by an assailant who drove 270 miles to kill her. Immediately the police said her murder was not politically motivated and not connected to foreign or domestic terrorism.

Despite the credulous claim that her brutal murder was not political in nature, the reality was her murderer drove over five hours to kill her. This was an obvious premeditated, calculated and targeted murder.  However, the politically correct leftist media and political institutions within U.K. government, were desperate in trying to deny the obvious.

Yesterday, the British Counterterrorism Police took over the investigation. “Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, said that as a result of “new information and evidence,” specialist counterterrorism officers were “now leading on the investigation into the horrific murder.”” {citation}

Today, it is admitted that her killer had a library of communist and Marxist ideology.

(DAILY MAIL) – […] Yesterday the probe was taken over by Counterterrorism Policing South East which announced the suspect had been re-arrested on suspicion of commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

The suspect, who remains in custody, was the son of a teaching assistant. Relatives said he had become reclusive after the sudden death of his engineer father last year.

(more…)

Generally speaking, CTH is against the Dept of Justice filing warrants and subpoenas against journalists.  However, in this case the actions are warranted.   If this was the Obama or Biden DOJ taking action against journalists, yes, CTH would support the govt side – on this specific point.

The issue surrounds four journalists for The New York Times who filed a public report that President Trump’s new Airforce One airplane did not have anti-missile defense systems at the time it was used in the trip to the 2026 NATO Summit in Ankara, Turkey.

Beyond the issue of the reported leak to the media, the FBI requested the NYT not to publish their article as it would compromise the presidential security detail in a designated hostile environment.  The NYT refused to withhold their reporting and did so specifically with the intent on compromising the security of a United States President.  There is no circumstance where that type of journalistic motive is okay; regardless of who is President.

From the Times perspective, their report reflected an opportunity to cast snark at President Trump’s decision to convert a gifted Airforce One from Qatar.  Additionally, the New York Times knew their report would put the lives of those aboard the airplane at risk.  The journalists went forward specifically knowing the report could lead to a severe security compromise.

NEW YORK TIMES – The Trump administration issued subpoenas on Friday to several journalists for The New York Times, after the news outlet reported this week on security concerns involving President Trump’s new Qatari-donated Air Force One.

The subpoenas — which seek to force the reporters to testify before a federal grand jury in Manhattan on Wednesday — were an extraordinary escalation in President Trump’s efforts to threaten and intimidate independent news organizations.

In some cases, the subpoenas were delivered by federal agents who showed up at reporters’ homes.

(more…)

Ever since we encountered the first and second wave of information control, a background battle has waged on multiple fronts around the internet.  CTH users may encounter disruptions; some information about ‘Subscription Notifications” follows.

I am currently working through another layer of background problem-solving directly related to CTH requests for subscriber notifications.  At the core of the problem are decisions on what terms and conditions we are willing to accept.

Currently people can subscribe to have a notification of a new article post.  Many people have written over the past several months saying they are no longer getting those notifications.  The problem is multi-layered, and at the core is something no one is willing to discuss, because the biggest control mechanisms in your online travel try to keep this information hidden.

Internet Service Providers (ISPs), they’re the entity who you select to use to access the internet (ATT, Comcast, Verizon, or whatever service you pay), long ago began a process to control the content of the information that is processed by their service.

This issue has become more problematic as various nations and governments have also gone beyond their geographic boundary controls with demands upon ISPs to filter information based on determinations of their various bureaucracies.

As an example, the govt of China, Russia, Europe and even Canada may restrict the flow of information available to citizens within that country.  Traditionally, they would put control mechanisms in place to block websites or traffic they deemed averse to the interests of that government.

However, as you might have realized with the Social Media restrictions in the USA based on COVID-19 (example), the issue is not always limited to “hostile” countries but can specifically be determined by the subject matter of interest.

With the advent of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), the need for control creates ever-increasing tentacles.  One of those tentacles for internet content control extends to ISP companies, who now find themselves subject to terms and conditions of operation; that means they must also adhere to the fiats of the country from which, or to which, the dataflow is connected.

(more…)

The Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 in favor of Mississippi -vs- RNC that state legislature can decide how long after election day that qualified election ballots cast may be received.  [PDF HERE] Essentially, federal election day is election day, but ballots can be received after election day for the length of time determined by state law.

Justice Barrett delivered the majority opinion, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson.

Justice Alito dissented along with Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

The Hight Court outlined that congress could change the ability of the states by changing the statutory language of the federal election law to require ballots be received by election day.  As long as federal law does not outline the deadline for ballot reception, states can extend that process at their legislative discretion.  THIS IS A HOT MESS FUBAR!

[5-4 Ruling Here]

“The federal election-day statutes do not prevent Mississippi from counting absentee ballots postmarked by election day but received up to five days thereafter; nothing in the federal election-day statutes requires ballots to be received by election day.”

(more…)

Due to migrant crime, a rape crisis and government fear, the movie ‘Citizen Vigilante‘, written and directed by Ewe Boll, has been banned in the U.K and Germany.

Other European countries are limiting the film’s distribution due to cultural concerns and recent events where national patriots are beginning to push back against migrant’s entering their country with the expressed intention to harm and destroy.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.  European government’s fear this movie.  That said, in order to make it available to audiences behind the EU censorship wall, the makers of Citizen Vigilante have released it on the X-platform, and it is being promoted by Elon Musk himself.

I am going to try to embed the video below (not sure if it will work). It is available to watch until 10:00am on June 27.

https://t.co/yvJOwOS4xE

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 25, 2026

(more…)

I previously saw an interesting discussion with NVIDIA Jensen Huang where in the context of AI he was asked: who is the smartest person you ever met?

Jensen Huang paused for quite a few moments thinking about the question before he answered.

Huang then redefined the word “smart.”

‘Smart’ is a word we have historically used in reference to ‘intelligence’.  If a person was intelligent, we say that person is smart. However, in this era of AI at your fingertips, we must break this connection.

Intelligence, the assembly of knowledge about a particular matter of discussion, is no longer limited to educational or real-life training or study by people who focus intensely on subject material.

All of the knowing about a system, any system, process, history or discussion topic is now available almost instantly to anyone in this era of artificial intelligence.

The NVIDIA CEO then continued, therefore, once we break our historic reference connecting ‘intelligence’ and the generalized term ‘smart’, we can properly address the question you present.

Who is the smart man? Or, in the context of the originating question, “who is the smartest person?”

With this baseline established, Jensen Huang then outlined the traits of the smartest person.  The smartest person is not the person with the greatest knowledge; the smart individual is the person who can tune into the frequency of the universal moment, look at the human reality of what is factually taking place that has not yet become an input into the AI capture record, and then predict the material outcome – the destination of knowledge that has not yet arrived.

Essentially, Huang explains the smart person is alone, tuning themselves into the vibration that is the consequence of human activity, financial interests, geopolitical movement, social transformation, economic shifts and cultural modifications.  Then, positioning their interests at the place in the future where they predict all the activity will arrive.

The accuracy of prediction, or predictive positioning, then determines the scale of smart.  The more accurate a person is under this perspective, the smarter they are.

I agree with this perspective.

(more…)

It is not coincidental that we have seen Australia, New Zealand, the U.K, and now Canada trigger online ‘age verification’ laws; simultaneous with a political push inside the USA to maintain FISA (702) legislation.

Separating the USA for a moment. The intelligence services of Australia, New Zealand, U.K and Canada make up four of the intelligence services 5-eyes. In essence, the British Commonwealth is the IC commonality. [Yes, there is some validity to the Lyndon LaRouche perspective (Promethean Action PAC)] Additionally, I would also posit a reminder of the international assembly who structured the originating financial sanctions against Russia; again, a commonality.

Focusing on the most recent political creation in Canada, there are three bills currently being rushed through the Canadian House of Parliament, C-34: keep kids safe on social media; C-36: stronger privacy rules, and C-22: modern tools for police.

Not surprisingly, it is difficult to find non-govt-approved information about this legislative construct online.

Canadian media must remain compliant with approved government narratives in order to maintain their business model. However, putting together some various information found on non-controlled information sources, it is possible to begin discussion of the situation.

The two issues that merge with the greatest impact are Bill C-22: The Surveillance Bill, and Bill C-34: The Children’s Safety Bill.

Bill C-22 requires that all information transmission providers, every telecom and internet company, retain metadata on all Canadian users for up to one year.  This is electronic metadata which we all know encompasses a lot more than just content.

Signal app, NordVPN, Windscribe, DuckDuckGo, Apple, and Meta have all formally opposed it. Signal app has threatened to leave Canada entirely rather than comply.  This is a government mandated metadata storage library on all electronic communication and activity by Canadian users. 

Then there’s Bill C-34: The Children’s Safety Bill, as noted by Lucy Hargreaves, a bill that ‘Applies to Everyone’, not just kids.   “The government’s social media ban for under-16s is genuinely popular, with 75% of Canadians supporting it in polling. The problem is what it requires in practice. To stop anyone under 16 from creating an account, platforms need to know how old everyone is. There is no way to identify who is under 16 without identifying everyone who isn’t. This means every Canadian adult would need to submit government ID or a face scan to a third-party verification company before posting a photo, using cloud storage, or playing an online game. The bill also creates a new Digital Safety Commission with sweeping powers to set the rules, decide which platforms must comply, and approve or deny exemptions — with almost no criteria written into the law itself.”

(more…)