Catherine Herridge has been released from employment with CBS as a round of job terminations and cost cutting initiatives have been triggered.
Many people liked Herridge and she seemed to do a better job than normal given her position(s) inside the machinery. However, I lost most of my respect for Herridge approximately 4 years ago, and eventually just considered her a great pretender amid a multitude of big pretenders.
CBS News president Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews reportedly fired Herridge.
New York Post – […] Sources said CBS News’ Washington bureau, where Herridge covered national security and intelligence, was hit particularly hard.
As expected, the lawyers representing Donald Trump have asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the DC appellate court decision on presidential immunity. [SEE pdf Here]
At the heart of the matter is really the intersection of politics and a weaponized judiciary. If presidents do not have absolute immunity while in office, then their political opposition can just threaten to file charges against them once their term expires. The obvious problems are easy to see.
WASHINGTON DC – Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Monday to block a lower court’s ruling that he is not immune from criminal charges stemming from his bid to subvert the 2020 election.
The 39-page motion puts the fate of his criminal case in Washington, D.C. squarely in the hands of the nine justices, three of whom he nominated.
Here’s the baseline context of my review on this discussion provided by Tucker Carlson, as he takes part in the “World Government Summit at What’s Next for Storytelling?”
Tucker is shocked, shocked to see with his own eyes that Russia is a modern, beautiful, safe, clean, well-run nation filled with generally happy people who are just like you and me – only they don’t pretend. That’s it, that’s the major difference.
If you were to analyze all of the varying realities around the opinions of those few people from the West who have literally put boots on the ground in Russia, the major thing that everyone would have a hard time explaining is this non-pretense. However, as soon as you say, “They don’t pretend,” anyone who has visited Russia in the last two years says, “Yes – that’s it; exactly that.” Essentially, that’s what Tucker is trying to explain also.
Yes, we in the West are being played by Western interests in creating our opinion of Russia. Yes, to just about everything Tucker Carlson is saying in this segment – only more. Tucker didn’t even go to the beautiful places like St. Petersburg; he was limited by self-choice to being stuck in Moscow. WATCH (prompted):
.
Any independent journalist who writes about the constructs in/around Russia, yet has not been there in the last few years, can be completely disregarded. Yes, we are all getting played, and I have repeatedly said the same thing openly.
Three judges from the Washington DC Circuit Court of Appeals have denied the immunity request from President Trump.
In a rather stark decision reached by the panel [SEE Ruling Here] “We have balanced former President Trump’s asserted interests in executive immunity against the vital public interests that favor allowing this prosecution to proceed,” the court wrote in its ruling Tuesday. “We conclude that the interest in criminal accountability, held by both the public and the Executive Branch, outweighs the potential risks of chilling Presidential action and permitting vexatious litigation.”
WASHINGTON – The judges put their decision on hold only until Monday to allow Trump to ask the Supreme Court to take up the immunity fight on an emergency basis. If he does so, the decision won’t take effect until the high court acts on his request, the appeals panel decreed. (read more)
The court essentially stayed its own ruling, pending a punt to the Supreme Court.
The leftist-media claim a 5-year sentence was harsh. However, in terms of the violations of privacy and law the sentence was a mere slap on the wrist.
Charles Littlejohn (38) previously pleaded guilty to stealing and leaking the tax returns of Donald Trump and approximately 2,000 other high-profile people. The tax returns were given to The New York Times and ProPublica, who published the contents of 152 individual tax returns.
Charles Littlejohn (right) and his attorney.
WASHINGTON – A former IRS consultant was sentenced to five years in prison for leaking former President Donald Trump’s tax returns as well as the filings of thousands of other wealthy people to the news media.
A district court judge on Monday agreed with the Justice Department that Charles Littlejohn, 38, deserved the maximum statutory sentence for what she called “egregious” crimes.
Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden nominee to the bench, focused on Littlejohn’s decision to release Trump’s filings, which Reyes called “an attack on our constitutional democracy.”
Rudy Giuliani brought up some good points that were surreptitiously also noted by Victor Davis Hanson. As Giuliani noted in an interview with Newsmax, the core elements of the E Jean Carroll claims never made any sense.
Specifically, Carroll couldn’t even put a date or YEAR on her claims against Donald Trump, but that really didn’t matter in a civil case where the New York state legislature literally wrote a new law that permitted the lawsuit against Donald Trump. WATCH:
VDH – […] “The civil suit serves as a mere preview of four additional leftwing criminal prosecutions, leftwing judges, and leftwing juries to come—all on charges that would never had been filed if Trump either had not run for president or been a liberal progressive.
Yet here we are.
The E. Jean Carroll case is the most baffling of all five. She, the alleged victim, did not remember even the year in which the purported sexual assault took place, nearly three decades ago. Observers have pointed out dozens of inconsistencies in her story.
It was never clear what were the preliminaries that supposedly (Trump denies meeting her) led both, allegedly, willingly to retreat together to a department store dressing room, where during normal business hours the alleged violence took place.
Moreover, the sexual assault complaint came forward decades post facto—and only after Trump was running for and then president.
President Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, delivered furious remarks to the assembled media pool following the Trump -vs- Carroll defamation trial and jury verdict. Habba outlines the lawfare effort of the New York court system. WATCH:
A revelatory article in Politico [SEE HERE] discusses a secret tribunal that Joe Biden has created to act as an arbiter in the space between the USA internet and the EU user privacy rules. However, if you apply the Occam’s Razor perspective, you might discover the tribunal or secret court is really just an arbiter of content, a “filtering system”.
Those who do not pretend have long ago realized the systems deployed to control information and communication will always be the priority. You cannot intentionally abuse a victim and yet allow them to have uncontrolled contact with family, the abuser needs to keep the victim isolated. The same is true for government in their need to control information that might expose their purpose.
Recently European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said controlling information was the #1 priority of the WEF group for 2024. That makes sense, when you consider that organized pushback would be counter to their agenda.
The western alliance of nations is collaboratively focused on definitions to help with their disinformation, misinformation and malinformation agenda.
Into this mix comes the European Union with rules and regulations on user data, a valuable commodity when enmeshed with commerce and the internet. The USA does not have those same rules and regulations on user privacy, all our metadata is under surveillance by corporations and government, so an arbitration system is needed where an EU member, group or nation can demand the stoppage of an American company from retaining EU user data.
Joe Biden has assembled a tribunal or quasi-judicial court system for the purpose of having a destination for EU complaints and violations. One of the people appointed to the tribunal review team is Eric Holder.
In a 14-page opinion and ruling today [SEE pdf HERE] four judges from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals deconstruct the previous ruling from their own court as well as the DC judge beneath them that gave Special Counsel Jack Smith access to President Trump Twitter account data and then enforced a non-disclosure order.
There are multiple layers to this story, but the substantive part is the scheme and the construct of how the Lawfare took place. There’s no way this was coincidental; I’ll explain why.
First, there are only 7 members on the full DC Circuit Court of Appeals. When the Twitter case to gain access to President Trump communication came to the appellate level, somehow all three of the most left-wing judges were assigned to hear the appeal.
An “en banc” review would have included the full 7 members. However, that review was made moot by the release of the information (a result of the appellate decision). The release itself was done with the use of a non-disclosure order, hiding the ruling in secrecy and keeping President Trump from knowing about it. Once the other four members of the DC CCA eventually found out about the case and the ramifications for ‘executive privilege’ their opinion lambasting their own court is released.
As noted from the panel, “the court here permitted a special prosecutor to avoid even the assertion of executive privilege by allowing a warrant for presidential communications from a third party and then imposing a nondisclosure order.”
The Circuit Court justices note that Jack Smith could have gone to the National Archives for the information as they held the same set of documents and information. However, Smith didn’t want to go that route because the National Archives would inform President Trump as customary and provide him the ability to assert executive privilege over any of the 32 Direct Messages requested.
In her keynote address at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen reaffirmed Europe’s unwavering support for Ukraine in the face of Russia’s invasion. However, in the open admission of priority, President Von der Leyen declares the #1 priority of the corporations who run the WEF and world of politics, must be control of speech and information against their interests.
She goes on to note that political dissent, what she calls “polarization within our societies” must be controlled, as the ability of individuals and groups to assemble against the WEF plan remains a constant threat to the fulfillment of the agenda. [Insert a picture of dissident enemy #1, Donald Trump, here] Yes, you do not need to interpret their intent, you only need to listen to their words and accept them. WATCH (first two minutes):
“There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation” or “malinformation”. There is only information. There is information you accept and information you do not accept. You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.” ~ Sundance
