Something about this doesn’t pass the proverbial sniff test, and when asked for a direct answer – well, things get salty.

For two days a self-proclaimed Trump advisor and frequent guest on the Steve Bannon Warroom podcast, Mike Davis, has claimed that President Trump and the Trump campaign authorized a California GOP rule change that would permit proportional delegate distribution against the interests of President Trump.

The claim itself made no sense because, if Mike Davis and Harmeet Dhillon were correct, essentially Trump would be approving a GOP change that would give delegates to his GOP nomination competition – namely Ron DeSantis.  Mr. Davis was asked to explain who specifically from the Trump campaign authorized and approved of the plan.

Mr. Davis refused to answer the question publicly, which, as normal, created additional suspicions about the validity of the claim.  More and more people started to pay attention and put the question out, because, well, quite frankly, it just doesn’t make sense.

Instead of responding simply and publicly to the question, and saying who in the Trump campaign knew about, authorized and approved the California plan, Mike Davis responded with the following Direct Message: “Go fuck yourself.”

(more…)

During a series of desperate attempts to obfuscate and defend fellow lawyer Harmeet Dhillon, unfortunately Mike Davis joins the ranks of former Bannon Warroom members Matthew Tyrmand and Steve Cortes.  It will be interesting to watch how Mr. Bannon responds to the latest sunlight upon his network of allies.

The issue started with Laura Loomer doing an excellent job exposing a scheme within the California GOP to change the delegate apportionments to proportional as a result of the state change in primary dates.  California representative to the RNC, and former RNC Chairwoman candidate, Harmeet Dhillon then lied about the construct of a rules change. {GO DEEP}

Mrs Dhillon claimed the California changes forcing proportional allocation were not optional. Mrs. Dhillon claimed the ability of the CA GOP to maintain “winner take all” delegate allocation no longer existed. [below left] However, that claim is false.  As reflected in RNC rule 3(ii) so long as the state keeps a “votes received” threshold above 50%, the delegates can be apportioned via winner-take-all. [below right]

The bottom line is really simple.  Laura Loomer caught on to the California GOP constructing a plan to deliver a disproportionate delegate slate to Ron DeSantis, the presumed runner up amid a contest that President Trump is dominating.

The California GOP and members of the RNC then attacked Ms. Loomer, initially denying the reports, not knowing Loomer possessed leaked emails from the organizing team that included Harmeet Dhillon.  Loomer then published the emails which highlighted the scheme; in response Dhillon lied saying the CA GOP “must also change a proportional method“, when the RNC rules [3(ii)] do not require that.

The truth is basic; like many states after seeing Trump at 50% or higher in the polling, the CA GOP wanted to have proportional distribution.  Dhillon et al proposed a rule change supporting that proportional approach and ignored their ability under RNC rule 3(ii) to keep winner take all.

After the CA GOP were called out, things got interesting.

Suddenly, a group of MAGA affiliated entities like another attorney and Bannon Warroom frequent guest, Mike Davis, came to the defense of Harmeet Dhillon. Some GOP defenders even claiming that Mrs. Dhillon likely didn’t know the RNC rules, despite Mrs. Dhillon sitting on the RNC rules committee, running for RNC chair this year, and being the lead GOP representative from California to the RNC.

(more…)

A federal judge chose the 4th of July to deliver a key ruling blocking Biden administration agencies and officials from meeting and communicating with social media companies.  [Read 7-page Injunction HERE]

The temporary injunction targets an ongoing legal battle brought by the state of Louisiana and Missouri against federal agencies for collaborating with social media to censor speech content against the interests of the federal government.  The final ruling on govt involved censorship could have profound effects on the First Amendment.

Judge Terry A. Doughty, has not made a final ruling in the case, but he wrote that the Republican attorneys general “have produced evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.”  The ruling may have implications for tech companies, which have been exposed in recent months/years for regular communication with government officials.

“This Preliminary Injunction precludes said named Defendants, their agents, officers, employees, contractors, and all acting in concert with them from the aforementioned conduct. This Preliminary Injunction also precludes said named Defendants, their agents, officers, employees, and contractors from acting in concert with others who are engaged in said conduct.” (link)

Obviously, trying to stop the government from coordinating with social media groups to suppress information adverse to both their interests is a little like squeezing Jello in a closed fist; they will find an angle out of the limitations.

(more…)

By now everyone is aware how the corruption in Washington DC is fraught with internecine relationships; however, this one takes the proverbial cake.  The prosecutor who organized and signed the plea deal for Hunter Biden worked for Hunter Biden’s business partner.

Senator Ron Johnson is calling attention to Title 28, Section 45.2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which says: ‘no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation if he has a personal or political relationship with […] any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation‘.

As if this entire episode wasn’t sketchy enough, Assistant United States Attorney Derek Hines (top left) was one of the prosecutors to sign off on Hunter Biden’s charges and plea deal. Hines previously worked under ex-FBI director Louis Freeh (bottom left), who was a business partner of Hunter Biden.  Hines worked for Freeh Group International Solutions which was specifically involved in the foreign company influence issue at the heart of the Hunter Biden case, and Freeh is a close friend of the entire Biden family.

This is nuts.

(Via Daily Mail) – A prosecutor who signed off on the documents charging Hunter Biden with tax and gun crimes previously worked with one of the First Son’s business partners, DailyMail.com can reveal.

Delaware US Attorney David Weiss officially filed charges against the president’s son last Tuesday after a near five-year probe into his alleged tax crimes and foreign financial dealings.

Weiss’s deputy, Assistant United States Attorney Derek Hines, signed off on the charging documents alongside his boss and two other assistant US attorneys – indicating he has a central role in Hunter’s criminal prosecution.

(more…)

I added a NOTE about Musk’s nonsense justification.

If the lessons of COVID-19 have taught us anything, it should be that each step the totalitarian dictatorships take -under the guise of protecting new democratic norms- must be viewed through the prism of future targeting.

We should pay attention, lest we find ourselves on the alternate side of populist uprisings under state targeting.

I sent the prior warning message around the collaboration between private industry and western government surrounding financial restrictions placed on Russia. When VISA, Mastercard and other payment mechanisms willingly and willfully supported the intentions of the Western Government coalition, few people thought about the Rubicon this new merge and partnership was establishing. {SEE HERE} In essence, private industry determining the lifestyle of Russian citizens in an effort to target their political leadership. Few people were paying attention, fewer still think long term.

With France now pledging to shut down internet communication in an effort to control organizing through social media, there is a bigger picture that must be considered.

[SOURCE – Translated from French]

Let me take you back to 2010 and 2011 when the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, CIA Director Leon Panetta and French President Nicholas Sarkozy wanted to support the Islamist Spring uprisings in Tunis, Libya, Egypt and Yemen.

What happened then is very much related to what we are seeing right now in Europe, specifically France; only this time we are seeing the inverse of the government interests regarding social media on display.

(more…)

Former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, appears on Fox News to point out the obvious inconsistencies with the claims by the DOJ in their effort to protect Hunter Biden and the Biden family from investigations.

.

(more…)

Representative Byron Donalds (MAGA – SWFL) brings an important point to the audience at a local townhall.  The issue of institutional corruption, and the total lack of faith and confidence in the institutions of our government, are at the forefront of the electorate.  Representative Donalds is challenged about the intent of the MAGA republican legislators and what must be done about the transparency of corruption we all witness and know to exist.

During his response, Donalds notes a key distinction.  The MAGA coalition saw what the 2010 Tea Party conservatives went through. The MAGA coalition saw and sees what President Trump has gone through.  The MAGA coalition is delivering a message to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and others, that those who stand on the principles of anti-corrupt influence are not concerned with the perks, benefits, affluence and legislative influence that DC uses to diminish their opposition.

As noted by Donalds sharing his discussions with Kevin McCarthy, the MAGA coalition is in place -in their face- to effect change and remove the corruption, not participate in the process to give the illusion of change.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

Neil Oliver’s monologues each week are even more critical in the intellectual pushback as the thoughts and monologues of Tucker Carlson.  Neil articulates the issues and reaches an audience thirsting to understand just how corrupt the systems are that flow from the globalist and corporatist constructs.

Behind all the disparate institutional machinations, the larger objective of globalism and nationalism continue to present the most direct reference point of the conflict.  Just as Donald Trump represents this dynamic clearly in the United States, within Europe UK political figure Nigel Farage has been the tip of the spear confronting globalism and representing the face of British nationalism.

As a result of this dynamic almost every multinational and corporate EU institution has attempted to destroy Nigel Farage.  The latest example comes from the banking system in the U.K which has told Mr. Farage he will not be permitted to engage in banking, finance or commerce.  Neil Oliver takes this example and puts the larger context into his monologue.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

We tend to forget but prior to candidate Donald J. Trump, in 2015, it was very rare to see presidential rallies with more than a few thousand attendees.

Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders each had sporadic big venue rallies at mostly schools and universities where attendance would top 10,000; however, no one consistently has rallies anywhere near the scale of Trump rallies.

According to the Greenville News, citing the police chief in South Carolina today, over 50,000 people showed up to support President Donald Trump in Pickens.  That is a massive crowd of people traveling to one town venue.

[Greenville News] – […] Pickens Police Chief Randall Beach estimated a crowd of 50,000 showed up on a day when afternoon temperatures soared into the mid-90s, causing dozens of people suffer from heat-related illness. … “No way it was less than 50,000,” Beach said. (link)

(more…)

New analysis of the long-term impact from Section 301 tariffs triggered by President Trump against China, shows just how consequential economic nationalism can become.

Our own analysis of U.S. consumer prices in 2019 showed that prices of imported goods actually declined despite the tariffs. A recent report from CPA takes a look at the impact to Chinese exports to the U.S.  [SEE DATA HERE] Bottom line, the tariffs worked to reduce Chinese imports.

CPA – […] Since the Section 301 tariffs were imposed, the share of imports from China has steadily declined from 21.6% in 2017 the year prior to the tariffs to 16.5%, a decline of 5.1%. No other country has lost as much share of total U.S. import penetration over the past five years.

In terms of total import value, Mexico gained the most from the tariffs, adding $110.8 billion. Vietnam gained the second most in import value by $78.4 billion and by far gained the most of total share of U.S. imports. In 2017, Vietnam accounted for about 2% of U.S. imports at $46.5 billion. In 2022, the U.S. imported $127.5 billion in goods from Vietnam, and the share of the total nearly doubled to 3.9%. Other countries in Southeast Asia such as Thailand, Cambodia, and Indonesia all saw significant increases in their value of imports by the U.S. (read more)

With the leading opponent to President Trump, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, not supporting tariffs on behalf of the multinationals and Club for Growth donors who stand behind him, it’s worth revisiting the actual outcome to American consumers to dispel the popular myths about tariffs raising prices here at home.

(more…)