My personal opinion on the FISA-702 reauthorization is well known {GO DEEP}.  However, I am not naïve enough to believe there is enough DC support to stop it. {GO DEEP} That said, I am disappointed the reauthorization will not be attached to the Save America Act as leverage.

[Via Truth Social] – “I am working very hard with our Great Speaker, Mike Johnson, along with Chairman Jim Jordan and Chairman Rick Crawford, to get a clean extension of FISA 702 through the House of Representatives this week. I am asking Republicans to UNIFY, and vote together on the test vote to bring a clean Bill to the floor. We need to stick together when this Bill comes before the House Rules Committee today to keep it CLEAN!

I was a victim of the worst and most illegal abuse of FISA in our Nation’s History, by Radical Left Lunatics, who lied to the FISA Court to spy on my 2016 Presidential Campaign in their attempt to RIG the Election in favor of Crooked Hillary Clinton. Their use of this instrument in the 2020 Presidential Election was even worse! When the Dirty Cop, James Comey, the failed Head of the FBI, went after me, he was using FISA Title I, the Domestic Collection, not FISA 702, the Foreign Collection, which needs to be extended today.

While parts of FISA were illegally and unfortunately used against me in the Democrats’ disgraceful Witch Hunt and Attack in the RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA Hoax, and perhaps would be used against me in the future, I am willing to risk that as a Citizen in order to do what is right for our Country.”

(more…)

I’m going to try and keep this short.

You can tell from the transcripts of the testimony from ICIG Michael Atkinson that at the time of his testimony, September 19, 2019 and October 4, 2019, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) was not in a classified session; simply closed-door.

In fact, during the October 2019 deposition, Ranking Member Devin Nunes went out of his way to clarify the status of the hearing itself.  Chairman Schiff reemphasized this was not part of the impeachment inquiry, simply a hearing to clarify questions from Republicans to ICIG Atkinson about the nature of the complaint created by CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.

This is interesting, because that means at the time of the hearing itself in 2019 any one of the members could have immediately gone to the microphones and discussed all of the information gained from within the questioning.   They didn’t.

Later on, Chairman Adam Schiff classified the Atkinson testimony in order to bury it.  The Lawfare impeachment crew, led by Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Mary McCord, Dan Goldman, Barry Berke, Stephen Castor and Norm Eisen also weaponized the “ongoing investigation” classification to keep the CIA/ICIG report hidden during the impeachment effort.

President Trump was not even allowed to see/review the classified IC IG information that was being used to impeach him.

Now, as you can see from the attendance above, John Ratcliffe was present for both Atkinson depositions.  Despite his immediate silence, we know John Ratcliffe was concerned about the content within ICIG Atkinson’s statements as he relayed in a series of questions during a public hearing December 9, 2019 {SEE HERE}.

Ratcliffe questioned both Dan Goldman and Stephen Castor who were part of Adam Schiff’s staff and present during the October 2019, testimony of ICIG Atkinson.  WATCH THIS: 

(more…)

Taking a break from the DC hate mail, to review other current events.

[SOURCE]

He’s “deeply sorry.”

(more…)

Against the backdrop of President Trump calling attention to the narcissism podcast universe, several people have made inquiry about relationships, motives, financial structures etc.

For those unaware, the traditional media framework of billionaire and corporate opinion/information shaping, modified itself for a new digital era.  However, the motives that underpinned the original control mechanisms remain the same, only the venues are different.

RED SEAT VENTURES HERE

As an example, most reasonably intelligent people caught on to the manipulative political content pushed by Rupert Murdoch, his family of control agents and the Fox Corporation media empire.  However, most people are unaware that Fox Corporation controls the information space of well-known current and former Fox News employees and contract agents that shifted to the podcast venues.

Fox Media purchased Red Seat Ventures {Citation} and expanded the narrative control operations through “podcasting.”  As a consequence, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Piers Morgan, Bill O’Reilly and many more still work for Fox Corporation, just in different venues.

When Tucker Carlson is interviewing Megyn Kelly during a podcast, or when Piers Morgan is interviewing Bill O’Reilly during a podcast, it is no different than Megyn Kelly interviewing Piers Morgan on Fox News television.  The platform changed, but the relationships -and more importantly the information content itself- is the same.  The same control mechanisms apply; it is just a different distribution channel.

Instead of watching Fox News, you are essentially watching Fox News ‘podcasting’ division, via Red Seat Ventures.

(more…)

According to statements made by Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, the United Kingdom has not done anything to shift their military strategy or defense posture for the past 30 years.  The changing relationship with the United States and NATO now indicates that Britain must formulate a military plan.

According to the concerned military man in charge, institutional Knowledge has been lost, muscle memory diminished, and several years of calm has created a situation where very few in the U.K would know how to respond to a war footing.

(VIA MSM) – […] According to Knighton, the UK is updating its Government War Book, a strategic blueprint not actively maintained since the Cold War, in a ‘modern context, with a modern society, with modern infrastructure.’ He said lessons from that era had been lost over 30 years of relative peace and needed to be relearned.

The updated strategy aims to coordinate the military, police, hospitals, and private industry. The goal is to ensure that the machinery of the state does not grind to a halt in the face of an existential threat. Knighton emphasised that the modern era requires a whole-of-nation approach to national readiness.

(more…)

In typical U.K political fashion, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer flew to Saudi Arabia to present the optics of participation, when he found out about the Iran ceasefire deal.

Immediately, Starmer, with an apparent mouse in his pocket, heads for the cameras to announce, “well, we’ve just reached this ceasefire.”   WATCH (prompted):

.

(more…)

Two weeks ago, after a lengthy back-and-forth process between the HPSCI and DNI offices, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) reported they released the transcript of former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).  No further information has surfaced following that announcement.

“The transcripts will be posted on the Committee website once they undergo the standard classification review with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.”  (source)

It has been two-weeks.  The transcript is not public. In my estimation, this transcript could potentially be exceptionally revealing.  The background ‘delay’ is likely due to the significant revelations within it.   Also, this is a rather extensive stakeholder equity.

The declassification process involves having every equity stakeholder named in the deposition ¹agree to allowing the information, their information, to be released.

Ex. if Atkinson discussed the Senate Intel Committee, they (Cotton/Warner) would need to allow and/or demand redaction. If the CIA was discussed, again another stakeholder who needs to review and approve. If HPSCI, same/same. If any of the internal agencies were discussed by Atkinson, National Security Council (NSC, White House, Rubio), National Intelligence Council (NIC, in CIA at the time), the same process has to flow through each agency.  Also, this testimony is in 2019, making it possible contact with FBI or DOJ-NSD coconspirators (Mueller Inc.) may have taken place; the same would apply.

Each stakeholder gets to review the transcript content that applies to their mention and determine if they ¹approve the declassification process.

This is how the silo defense mechanisms work.  You can see how convoluted these systems have become.

According to the originating HPSCI public release, remember, they are the originating stakeholder of the classified information; well, the transcript is then returned to the House Intelligence Committee for publication.

[¹If they don’t agree, a battle begins. Remember the battle over the Nunes memo?]

What would all these equity stakeholders be hoping to conceal?  That’s where things get interesting.

(more…)

You would have to read dozens of energy industry reports to get the information provided here in this exceptionally well-done news segment.

Sky News economics and data editor Ed Conway presents a fantastic look at how the issue with the Strait of Hormuz has impacted the global distribution of energy, oil, LNG and Kerosene (jet fuel), with particular emphasis on the vulnerabilities of the “modern industrialized western nations.”

Conway never points the finger to the “net zero” carbon goals of Europe, the U.K and Australia. However, he shows the outcome of their dependence on production and refining by other non-participating nations. The timelines clearly show, as the Green Energy policies were pushed the vulnerability inherent within any supply shock begins to get worse. This is a very well-presented data-driven analysis that is worth watching.

The last two-minutes also shred the claims by EU and British leadership, and highlights how Europe and the U.K are now dependent on the United States to meet their energy needs. WATCH:

.

(more…)

ActBlue is to the Democrat party fundraising machine as WinRed is to the Republican side of the equation.

In a rather stunning outline by the New York Times [SEE HERE] the progressive outlet is reporting of serious concerns within the leadership of ActBlue related to their willfully blind reception of foreign sources of money to fund Democrat candidates.

The remarkable aspect is not just that ActBlue takes foreign funds, but rather the New York Times revealing internal legal discussions about it.  According to the Times reporting, the Eric Holder law firm Covington & Burling, the primary legal mechanism for the ActBlue/DNC machinery, lies at the heart of the matter.

(NYT) […] The firm concluded that ActBlue’s chief executive had given a potentially misleading response to congressional Republican investigators in a 2023 letter explaining how the organization vetted donations to ensure that they were not illegally coming from foreign citizens.

The letter from the chief executive, Regina Wallace-Jones, said ActBlue carried out “multilayered” screenings of contributions that helped “root out” those from overseas. In fact, the law firm found, some of the steps she had described were not always followed.

“This presents a substantial risk for ActBlue,” the law firm, Covington & Burling, wrote in one of two memos expressing legal concerns. One memo raised the specter of a criminal investigation if prosecutors believed that ActBlue had tried to conceal facts about its efforts to prevent foreign contributions. (source)

To really appreciate the scheme that seems to be outlined by the internal documents, it is worth remembering that James O’Keefe previously did some boots on the ground research into ActBlue [SEE HERE – 2023] and found that multiple, perhaps thousands, of “donor” names and addresses were assigned to contributions the donors said they never made.

(more…)

In a two-week period right after the 2024 election, the most energy expended by the transition team putting a cabinet together was toward Main Justice or the Dept of Justice.  As a consequence, those around Lutnick and Wiles spent an incredible amount of time thinking about the Attorney General pick.

Following an insider discussion, I spoke with several people about positions and appointments, focused on pointing out that the transition’s priorities were misplaced. The AG needed to be someone with exceptional moral character, capable of gathering information and presenting it for public consumption, with the option of supporting criminal referrals if necessary.

The Attorney General wasn’t going to be the tip of the spear in any operation to confront the Deep State, because if Main Justice wanted to confront Lawfare they needed to confront the Intelligence Community first.  The IC controls all of the activity within the Dept of Justice.

Read that again for emphasis.  For the issues of greatest importance, the Intelligence Community controls all of the activity within Main Justice.  The IC is in control of the source material.  The IC is above the DOJ.  If you don’t strategize a confrontation with the IC first, it doesn’t matter what you do with the Dept of Justice.

The best example I could reference at the time was the Mar-a-Lago documents case and Judge Aileen Cannon.  In that example the Executive branch was targeting Trump through the DOJ/FBI, and representing the Judicial branch Judge Cannon was the firewall ensuring the appropriate administration of justice.

Trump’s defense, through Cannon, pushed back against the DOJ (Jack Smith) while Smith leveraged all his Lawfare tools back against Cannon.  You might remember the “classified document” issue went to the 11th CCA.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the government position that any documents defined as “classified” by the executive branch that claimed, “national security,” should not be disclosed to the defendant, Trump.  The 11th CCA said when it comes to matters of national security, the judicial branch must defer to the determinations of the executive.

Basically, if the intelligence community decides certain information is tied to national security and labels it as classified for the DOJ, that decision can’t be challenged. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed this view. As a result, when it comes to national security issues, the judicial branch has to defer to the executive, giving the IC significant control over the DOJ.

If you drag former CIA Director John Brennan into court and Brennan’s lawyers argue ‘national security’ as a defense against indictment, inquiry or questioning, it’s not the DOJ (Attorney General) who matters – it’s the ‘national security’ determination of the Intelligence Community (Tulsi Gabbard) who controls the outcome.

(more…)