The number one question raised is how to unite the general population of normal Americans and find a common way to push back against the radicals who have taken control of government and the domestic power structures aligned with the public-private partnership.

There have been several discussions centered around the use of federalism; factually, there is a good argument to be made that tactical civics can have a strong impact on the overall dynamic of a detached, disinterested and yet weaponized system of government.   However, the flaw within this process is thinking the power center operators care about what is happening at the boundaries of our defenses.

Factually, the state elected officials and those sent to DC are part of the same system.  They are detached from us.  Try to contact or use the process of “constituent services” and you will quickly discover how you are viewed as a simple annoyance to those who unilaterally decide how they will participate in ruling over you.

Not only does this UniParty assembly mean our applying electoral federalism (aka tactical civics) results in a slower march toward the same cliff, it also means we are comforted by a sense of something that ultimately provides little value.

We need actionable steps that can be taken.

Additionally, we already know if Donald Trump can take the MAGA fight back to Washington DC, the entire apparatus of government, and yes that includes your elected representatives, will fight to destroy him at every opportunity.  So, how exactly do we: (a) support President Trump, (b) push back against the weaponized state, (c) confront our government abusers.

There are more of us than them, yet each of our efforts seems to face the full force of “them” against a divided sense of “us.”  One of the ways we have discussed direct push back is a modern version of a workers solidarity movement.  Essentially the creation of a system where targeted general work strikes can have an impact on the system that is targeting us.

(more…)

This is likely to be a very interesting interview for multiple reasons.  The “Western world” has not heard much unfiltered or unscripted news about Russian President Vladimir Putin for several years, essentially since the sanctions were imposed in the aftermath of Russia’s entry into Ukraine and the subsequent war.

The backlash against Tucker Carlson has been extreme ever since his entry into Russia and visibility in Moscow was noticed.  President Putin having the ability to speak directly to a Western audience is not something any of the Western government officials are comfortable with.

[ TuckerCarlson.Com LINK ]

The following is an UPDATED version of the Carlson interview. 

(more…)

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.

(more…)

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.

[LINK TO BILL]

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

(more…)

Apparently the Lawfare crew have been working and coaching overtime to give Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold a framework to explain to the Supreme Court how Colorado’s very specific election laws allow for presidential candidates to be disqualified despite meeting all constitutional requirements.  State Solicitor General Sharon Stevenson would be the legal mind representing Jena Griswold. This should be an interesting attempt.

Griswold asked the Supreme Court for 15 minutes to explain how Colorado law supersedes the U.S. Constitution.  In an order announced earlier today [pdf here], the court has granted Ms. Griswold 10 minutes to make her case.  The oral arguments will take place on Thursday, February 8th.

[Source Link]

President Trump’s attorneys will have 40 minutes.  The Lawfare group “Colorado voters”, funded by CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington), will have 30 minutes, and the Colorado Secretary of State will have 10 minutes.

(Via MSN) – The U.S. Supreme Court will hear directly from Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold next week as it considers an appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision finding former President Donald Trump ineligible for the state’s 2024 presidential primary ballot.

The Supreme Court granted Griswold’s request to speak during oral arguments in an order Friday that allotted her 10 minutes. The justices also will hear from lawyers for Trump and the Colorado voters who challenged his eligibility during Thursday’s hearing in Washington, D.C. (read more)

(more…)

In the ridiculous federal election interference case in D.C., President Trump’s attorneys argued to the DC Circuit appellate court that President Trump holds inherent constitutional immunity. In essence, because President Trump was acquitted by the Senate of claims he incited or instigated the January 6, 2021, events, lawyers arguing under the constitution that only impeached and removed presidents can be criminally prosecuted.

The initial 3-judge panel of the court has taken up the appeal, and all subsequent lower court activity was suspended until the constitutional issue is resolved. Again, if President Trump does not have immunity, then all preceding and future presidents can be criminally prosecuted for any/all events and decisions while holding office. This is a core issue, and the DC Circuit Court of Appeals has to tread very carefully with these ramifications at the forefront.

The decision of the 3-judge panel could also be followed by a full en-banc review by all judges in the circuit. Then, depending on their decision, it could -likely will- go even higher to the U.S. Supreme Court. All of this takes time, and the initial 3-judge appeals court have not provided any hints on their timeline.

Apparently, as a consequence, the entire trial of the case has been removed from the lower DC court docket. The removal took place within the last few days, and the Washington Post noticed the removal. This removal means the timing of the case, if at all, is completely unknown now.

WASHINGTON – Former president Donald Trump’s March 4 trial date on charges of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election has been dropped from the public calendar of the federal court in Washington, a sign of what has long been anticipated — that his claim of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would delay his trial while it remains on appeal.

(more…)

Obama and Biden like Iran.  Obama and Biden are facilitating a pro-Iran policy.  Obama and Biden don’t want to do anything against the interests of their pro-Iran position.  That’s the simple baseline.

As a direct consequence, the same U.S. intelligence community that proclaimed the Hunter Biden laptop was disinformation, now modify their prior intelligence to proclaim that Iran likely doesn’t have any control over the various terrorist networks they support.  As a result, Biden cannot conduct a retaliatory strike against Iran because Biden cannot prove a direct link to Iran.

Our intel agencies are essentially falling on the sword of ‘some people did something, but we can’t be sure.’ See how this works?

WASHINGTON – Intelligence officials have calculated that Tehran does not have full control over its proxy groups in the Middle East, including those responsible for attacking and killing U.S. troops in recent weeks, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The Quds Force — an elite branch of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps — is responsible for sending weapons and military advisers as well as intelligence to support militias in Iraq and Syria as well as the Houthis in Yemen. The groups have varying ambitions and agendas, which sometimes overlap, but Tehran does not appear to have complete authority over their operational decision-making, the officials said.

(more…)

Tucker Carlson interviews Bret Weinstein who traveled to the Darien Gap to understand who’s behind the invasion of our country. His conclusion: “it’s not a friendly migration.” He sits down with Tucker Carlson for an in-depth review and analysis.

Weinstein is perplexed, albeit with various theories about the origination and motives behind the mass invasion, however, if you have followed the issue closely since the first rendition during the Obama era in January 2011, the entire “crisis” is nothing more than one growing continuum of the fundamental change.  {Go Deep on Timeline} Obama originated the UAC Central American migration.  The additional arrivals are a confluence of natural opportunists facilitated by various leftist orgs and countries.

The interview itself is very interesting, including how the Chinese saw the opportunity created by the Obama effort and started taking advantage of it.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

During a House Homeland Security Committee hearing yesterday, Representative Robert Garcia (Democrat-CA) wanted to deliver a snarky retort about the unsecure southern border, complete with graphics and talking points.  Unfortunately, what followed was an exhibition in just how detached and silly the Democrats are.   Representative Garcia obviously doesn’t know where the idea for a border moat with alligators came from.

Back in 2011, Barack Obama went to give a speech in El Paso, Texas, proclaiming the security of the border.  Using his customary style of ridicule against any political opposition, Obama said the Republicans were likely to ask for a moat with alligators.  WATCH:

.

This speech became somewhat funny, as the insecure nature of the border and thousands of illegal aliens crossing daily stood in direct contrast with the proclamations of Obama.  Indeed, the “whatever it takes” meme sprang up from this speech as people said sure, get alligators, get gun turrets, get sharks with lasers in their eyes, or piranhas, or whatever… BUT, SECURE THE DAMN BORDER.   Ultimately, it was the Lightbringer who was embarrassed within the pushback.

Fast forward 13 years, the border is still not secure, the border crisis is worse than ever, and Democrat Representative Garcia revises the “alligator moat” remarks thinking it was some snarky comment that originated from MAGA republicans.  WATCH:

(more…)

This is kind of a funny and very real political story if you follow the mechanics of it.   Essentially, it starts out with Politico noting the Ron DeSantis’ Super PAC Never Back Down, paid the Club for Growth Super PAC, Win It Back, $2.75 million dollars to run attack ads against Donald Trump.  {Background Story}

Apparently, Ron DeSantis didn’t want to attack Trump directly, so using the Machiavellian tactics the professionally Republican group is known for, DeSantis funded a third-party to attack Trump on his behalf.   A lot of people take issue with this discovery, but the story is actually deeper, and yes, even more Machiavellian.

You see, you might remember the DeSantis Super PAC was actually funded from the remaining campaign funds of Ron DeSantis in 2022.  This was done with forethought and by specific design.  This part is even noted in the Politico outline.  However, what is missing is the other layer.  The DeSantis campaign was funded with $20 million by the Republican Governors Association (RGA).   That is a big part of the money that was later transferred to the super PAC.

So put this in context, because this is the non-pretending reality that was built into the program.

The RGA gives DeSantis $20 million in 2022 knowing it will be transferred into his presidential campaign super PAC in 2023.  A part of that money – $2.75 million – is then sent to the Club for Growth (C4G).  The Club for Growth then attacks Donald Trump.   In essence, the Republican Governors Association funded the attack against Trump using DeSantis as the broker.  Three layers of plausible deniability built in.

Now, ask yourself, who exactly does the RGA support?    What is the goal and intent of this “approved Republican” political system that operates in the background of our national politics?    When you answer those questions, you realize why the RNC has no support from Republican base voters.

(more…)