There has been a great deal of increased discussion surrounding the issues of automated Artificial Intelligence, colloquially called “AI.”

At the central core of the AI issues in communication; you inevitably enter a discussion on the issue of definitions and terms.  Who is determining the definitions of what constitutes valid information? Who is determining what types of information are not valid, not approved for communication networks and how are their definitions being applied?

A solid and short-read thread on the assembly of people, groups and institutions surrounding the issue of AI in communication and media is presented HERE.

[Article/Thread LINK]

The topic of AI in general is a very large conversation.  The topic of AI specific to communication is equally large and perhaps even more significant.

AI applied to communication must first establish a need for it to exist.  Within that discussion, government interests and corporate interests take large seats at the table.  Social media platforms, communication outlets, almost the entire technology sector and various special interest groups are also stakeholders in the discussion of how AI can be applied to the filtering of information – or what I would more appropriately call the CONTROL of information.

The predicate of the conversation jumps around a little, but the issue of defining reality is throughout the discussion.  This is where my prior warnings about defining information must be emphasized.  I am losing the current argument, but I retain optimism that eventually the control mechanisms will need to be destroyed by a generation that falls under its influence.

“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.”

(more…)

After a legal debate about standing in the case of Biden v Nebraska, the Supreme Court took up the issue of whether the President could unilaterally forgive student debt without an act of Congress.  In a 6-3 ruling {pdf here}, the court determined the executive authority of the Dept of Education did not permit such action.

Joe Biden campaigned in 2020 on a promise to eliminate student debt unilaterally, without congressional approval.  The court opinion released today affirms that Congress must be involved in their role as decision-makers of federal spending.  Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion.

[SCOTUS BLOG] – […] When the Biden administration announced the program in August 2022, student-loan repayments had already been on hold for over two years. Betsy DeVos, who served as the secretary of education during the Trump administration, suspended both repayments and the accrual of interest on federal student loans at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. She relied on the HEROES Act, a law passed in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks that gives the secretary of education the power to respond to a national emergency by “waiv[ing] or modify[ing] any statutory or regulatory provision” governing the student-loan programs so that borrowers are not worse off financially because of the emergency.

(more…)

In a landmark court ruling released today, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively ended the use of affirmative action in college admissions. {237-page ruling here}

By a vote of 6-3 (UNC) and 6-2 (Harvard) the court ruled the admissions programs used by the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause barring racial discrimination by government entities.

Chief Justice John Roberts writing the opinion of the majority said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a woman of notoriously activist disposition defined by her self-image and race, sat out the Harvard case because she had been a member of an advisory governing board who constructed the rules the Supreme Court now determined were unlawful.

Amy Howe – […] Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that college admissions programs can consider race merely to allow an applicant to explain how their race influenced their character in a way that would have a concrete effect on the university. But a student “must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race,” Roberts wrote. The majority effectively, though not explicitly, overruled its 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, in which the court upheld the University of Michigan Law School’s consideration of race “as one factor among many, in an effort to assemble a student body that is diverse in ways broader than race.”

(more…)

After reading the entire 75-page transcript of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) testimony to congress [READ HERE], a testimonial that almost no one in the mainstream news has written about, issues surrounding the document search against President Trump take on some new context.

The NARA officials are essentially professional DC bureaucrats with a mission to look out for the best interests of the DC system they support.  It is very clear from their opinion; Donald Trump was considered an outsider to the DC system of government – and that baseline established the framework for why and how NARA took such extreme processes with President Trump.

From the transcript, one NARA official says, “I am storing 555,000 cubic feet of classified national security information. To put that in perspective, the white boxes that many of you have seen in your offices, that is a cubic foot. It holds about 2,500 pages. Another way for me to describe it, a typical stack area that we store records in a Federal records center can hold about 100,000 cubic feet. And that is a room that is about roughly the size of a football field. So you are looking at five and a half football fields floor to ceiling shelving.” {Transcript, page 24}

President Trump did not turn over the letter left to him by President Obama, nor did President Trump turn over the 27 letters exchanged between himself and North Korea Chairman Kim Jong-un.  NARA was looking for these along with other documents pertaining to President Trump engaging in discussions with other foreign leaders, and NARA was angry about the perceived lack of respect shown by Trump toward their endeavor.

However, when you take the current DC establishment system, look at the history of the Trump administration engagement in foreign policy, then overlay that dynamic with the gatekeeping responsibilities outlined by NARA, what you may discover is an entirely different prism through which to view the DC motives.

One can easily argue the Deep State per se’ was looking for notes, information, contacts, tips and hints of discussions that took place between Trump and foreign leaders, that may have actually exposed the mechanisms of DC money and policy laundering.

(more…)

Comrades, dissident voice Tucker Carlson continues broadcasting his rebellious monologues on Twitter.  For his latest episode 4, Carlson notes the new American dictatorship. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:

Dear Leader does not appreciate the unauthorized broadcasts from dissident citizens.

(more…)

Whether you believe Fox News intentionally created this opening, or whether it was just a disastrous mistake on behalf of a multi-billion corporation with a full suite of lawyers they chose not to use, Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Corp created a problem in the Dominion settlement that is only going to get worse.

Once you expose yourself to the vulnerabilities of Lawfare, the leftists will pour through the opening like Central American aliens in Texas.  Funded by allies in the cultural and political battle, former DHS Disinformation Czar Nina Jankowicz is now suing Fox News for defamation of her character and reputational harm.

NEW YORK – The head of the short-lived Department of Homeland Security (DHS) disinformation board has launched a defamation suit against Fox News, alleging the network published false reports about her that endangered her life.

Nina Jankowicz was tapped to lead DHS’s Disinformation Governance Board, and though the board never held a meeting, it was heavily criticized by the GOP and was regularly covered by Fox News.

The purpose of the board was to coordinate disinformation efforts at DHS across topics ranging from migration to addressing plots from Russia and Iran.

The Republican National Committee dubbed it the “Ministry of Truth” in a nod to George Orwell’s novel “1984” and couched disinformation as “any speech we don’t like.”

(more…)

If you understand what Samantha Power does via her role in using USAID as the mechanism to advance the color revolutions around the globe, these remarks from Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador are subtle like a brick through a window.

Power has recently been trying to create political turmoil in Hungary [HERE] and Georgia [HERE].

However, after AMLO delivered a speech where he called out Joe Biden, the DEA and the CIA for trying to interfere in Mexico [HERE], many people reading here predicted Samantha Power would now show up in Mexico.

Those of you who made that prediction were correct. You guys are smart!

Keep in mind that nearly a million central American economic migrants can be unleashed by AMLO, and likely will be, as Joe Biden and the Mexican president have faced off for almost two years over North American energy policy.  Stunningly, AMLO has not backed down an inch, and instead went on the offensive against Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau.  This put a target on his back and was likely the impetus for U.S. intelligence agencies to call upon Samantha Power to do her thing.

MEXICO CITY, May 3 (Reuters) – Mexico’s president asked his U.S. counterpart Joe Biden to stop the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) from funding groups hostile to his government, according to a letter presented to journalists on Wednesday, echoing previous Mexican criticism of U.S. interventionism.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador did not specify which Mexican groups the U.S. should stop funding, but he has in the past accused several media organizations of being part of a conservative movement against his government.

(more…)

A follow-up to answer some of the popular questions about my experience with the corrupt administrative state, what I prefer to call the Fourth Branch of Government that operates behind the visible Potemkin Village.

♦Why did you wait a year to outline what took place?  Common question. Lots of reasons, some obvious, some obscure and strategically granular.  First, I know the people who are not in alignment with the principles of freedom also watch our discussion.  If I am engaged with them in conflict, I do not want them to see my path.  Second, I did not want them to shut down our conversation using ‘national security’ as the blanket often deployed.  Third, I wanted to watch and assemble data quietly.

♦Why tell the story now?  AG Garland just quantified publicly what the DOJ was doing.  They just put details on the scope of their unconstitutional activity.  Keep in mind, AG Garland is the Robert Mueller of the DOJ. Garland has no better understanding of what is going on inside that heavily siloed institution of Main Justice than Joe Biden understands what is going on inside his (White House).  The true manager of the apparatus is Lisa Monaco, Obama’s eyes and ears into Main Justice operations.   The Lawfare operatives ultimately report to Monaco, not chairman emeritus Garland.

♦Who benefits from the current information?  If you take the time to fully absorb what is evident, traceable and provable to a demonstrable certainty, the representatives of any target who was/is also facing evidence gained by similar construct benefit.  The source information is all there, free for the taking; following it leads to the same outcome – it is what it is.  Whether it is beneficial or not is unique to the individual, or their rep.  Beyond that, hopefully the general public will take pause and think about the ramifications.  When you change the way you look at something, what you look at changes.   The truth has no agenda.

(more…)

This is a repost of an earlier outline from last week, you’ll soon see why refamiliarizing yourself with the details is important.

Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified April 27, 2023, that more than 3.4 million search queries into the NSA database took place between Dec. 1st, 2020 and Nov. 30th, 2021, by government officials and/or contractors working on behalf of the federal government. These search queries were based on authorizations related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

[OIG Testimony HERE]

Approximately 30% of those 3.4 million search queries were outside the rules and regulations that govern warrantless searches, what the politically correct government calls “non-compliant searches.”  That means more than 1 million searches of private documents and communication of Americans were illegal and outside the rules.

Additionally, IG Horowitz also admitted that somewhere north of 10,000 federal employees have access to conduct these searches of the NSA database; a database which contains the electronic data of every single American, including emails, text messages, social media posts, instant messages, direct messages, phone calls, geolocation identifiers, purchases by electronic funds, banking records and any keystroke any American person puts into any electronic device for any reason.

If we were in a functioning system of government everything would be stopped right now, and no conversation would be taking place that was not about this issue. This is the total and complete surveillance state being talked about as if we were discussing what’s for dinner.

This is beyond jaw-dropping.

(more…)

For his daily podcast and discussion segment, UK pundit Neil Oliver puts the firing of Tucker Carlson into a unique context of human behavior.  Tucker is taken down like a trophy in the psychology of those who weaponize power.  Additionally, Oliver hits on a few points that are very accurate – albeit with some who would disagree – about the need for control being a reaction to fear.

The decisionmakers in the Carlson issue removed his voice from a position of weakness, not strength.  The decisionmakers, namely the Ruper Murdoch team, fear Carlson.  Lastly, as Oliver accurately notes, history is a wheel – and during travel there are times in the orbit of the wheel when the component part is traveling backwards. WATCH:

.

As you listen to the outline, remember the position of Barack Obama’s former campaign manager, David Plouffe, “it is not enough to simply beat Trump. He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.”…  There is a ring of historical human brutality to it.

(more…)