While Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin advances the efforts of the Intelligence Community to undermine, isolate, ridicule and marginalize President Trump, ultimately a seditious coup, Virginia Senator Mark Warner now calls for the military to engage in supporting that coup.

As with all things espoused by the professional, the language is worded for plausible deniability; however the expressed intent is clear for those non-pretending.  What else is meant by:

…”I think in many ways the uniformed military may help save us from this president and his lame people like Hegseth. Because I think that their commitment is to the constitution and obviously not to Trump.”

Now put your mindset back about a decade, and ask yourself what would have been the response from media if Senator Jeff Sessions said it was his hope the U.S. military would reject instructions from President Obama, and instead follow the guidelines of his political opposition?

But rather than play ‘whataboutism’, let’s evaluate if Mark Warner was successful. What exactly does that success look like?

A military overthrow of the United States government from within?

A follow up question should be: “Senator Warner, are you asking for a military led overthrow of the United States government?”  If no, then how is your expressed preference any different?  Please explain the distinction.

(more…)

The authority for the United States government to capture the electronic records of all Americans without warrant falls under the auspices of FISA-702.  The current authority expires in April of 2026.

Some administrative state defenders will argue this issue with me. However, having researched almost every aspect to the construct, and the argument, I am confident FISA-702 authority underpins the much bigger, quasi-constitutional justification for the wholesale collection of U.S. citizen metadata.  Without the 702 authority, the legal justification for the apparatus of surveillance no longer exists.  It really is that simple.

That said, there remains ZERO justification for the wholesale capture of U.S. citizen data by the government. It is not the searching of the database that presents the issue; the capture itself violates the Fourth Amendment.

The only way the government can justify the capture of U.S. Citizen data is if there is some quasi-constitutional or national security reason for it.  That’s where FISA-702 comes in.

Take away “702” search authority, and the data collection argument collapses; ANY “incidental” search of the database then loses any plausible legal justification.  702 is the camel’s nose under the tent that forms the baseline for all data records to be intercepted, stored and ultimately available for review.

This is a very key component to fully understand.  Most practical applications of surveillance are contingent upon the capture of electronic records for tracking.  Ex. – if domestic travel records are considered private papers (never argued yet), then government agencies have no right to exploit them without a valid search warrant underpinned by a national security justification.  The government, not private sector – government, tracking people becomes more difficult if privacy rules are applied.

The legal aspect runs through the 4th Amendment, which -while historically undefined in the modern era- likely stirs in the background of the recent TSA decision to provide a $45 opt-out, for the use of REAL ID in domestic transit (interstate commerce application notwithstanding).

The Fourth Amendment aspect to the ‘warrantless’ government capture of American citizen records has never been fully argued in court; the modern definitions are opaque, and the govt has a vested interest in retaining the untested status quo.

(more…)

Two weeks ago, the seditious six congressional members began framing an op against the Trump administration under the auspices of military “defying illegal orders.”  In the past few days, the same “illegal order” narrative has been used against Secretary Pete Hegseth; these two structured and timed sequence events are not disconnected.

The leftists and deep state IC are running a color revolution operation inside the USA.  The first step in all color revolutions is to undermine the legitimacy and authority of the elected national leader; this is exactly what the seditious six are doing.

This version of the color revolution is not dissimilar to the Lawfare approach; however, this is using the Intelligence Community and Det of War as the impetus and target for the destabilization effort.  The objective is the same, to delegitimize the administration of Trump and create purposeful crisis. WATCH:

While it is unnerving to watch this unfold, it is important to remember the #1 way to counteract the efforts of those who participate in the effort is to retain support for the intended target, President Trump.  On the positive side, there is a very large percentage of the American people who can see right through these efforts now.

[Transcript] – KRISTEN WELKER: It’s wonderful to have you back after a really significant week. And I do want to start with the National Guard shooting. You, of course, served in uniform. You know firsthand the impact, the devastation of gun violence. We just heard Secretary Noem defend President Trump’s decision to, quote, “permanently pause migration from all third-world countries.” What is your response to how President Trump is handling this?

SEN. MARK KELLY:

Well, let me start by saying what happened to the two guardsmen, Andrew Wolfe, Sarah Beckstrom, horrific. And it shouldn’t happen. And I’m praying for him and for her family. It was a horrible, horrible thing. And there needs to be an investigation and accountability. But when I heard the secretary say that they’re going to pause immigration from third-world countries, I mean, I take that as a message that they don’t want brown people coming to the United States. And I find that disturbing. We are a country that has always welcomed individuals that are struggling, that are fleeing famine and violence. And it would be a fundamental change to the fabric of our nation to change that.

(more…)

This could potentially be very good news; however, the battle between where we are today and where we would need to be in order to address unlawful sedition criminally is very far apart.  Let’s hope the Pentagon and DOJ can harden up and start to take down these political bad actors.

In a social media post Monday, the Pentagon said it received complaints over former U.S. Navy Captain Mark Kelly’s efforts to undermine President Trump and destabilize the U.S. government.

[SOURCE]

The pentagon saying they received, “serious allegations of misconduct” against him, and “a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.”

(more…)

U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie has dismissed the cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, under the grounds that U.S Attorney Lindsey Halligan was illegally appointed to the role of prosecutor when she secured the grand jury indictments. [SEE RULING HERE]

James Comey was charged with lying to and obstructing Congress, relating to his 2020 Senate testimony about the FBI’s investigation into President Trump and Russia. Letitia James was charged with bank fraud and making false statements.

WASHINGTON – […] U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie concluded that Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia violated laws that limit the ability of the Justice Department to install top prosecutors without Senate confirmation.

“Ms. Halligan has been unlawfully serving in that role since September 22, 2025,” Currie concluded in opinions simultaneously filed Monday in both cases. “All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment … constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside.”

However, Currie dismissed the cases “without prejudice.” That could allow prosecutors to attempt to obtain new grand jury indictments in each case. But Comey’s attorneys have already indicated that they will argue that he cannot be re-indicted because the statute of limitations in his case expired on Sept. 30. And Currie agreed that the deadline had passed without a valid indictment. (more)

(more…)

Senator Elissa Slotkin (Mich), a former CIA analyst who worked in the State Department and Pentagon during the Obama administration, organized a viral video with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado.

The six congressional representatives directed their coordinated communication to members of the military and intelligence community. “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders … you must refuse illegal orders,” they asserted.

However, when questioned about what “illegal orders” President Trump has created, the six members are suddenly very quiet.  White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller responds:

.

Ultimately, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi could easily assign an FBI agent and U.S attorney to question the six members about the “illegal orders” they are telling the military and intelligence community to defy.

If Slotkin, Kelly and the rest cannot present evidence of an illegal order they are referring to, that would be a qualification that should presumably invoke a First Amendment defense claim, then charge them with simple sedition as defined in statute.

(more…)

You’ve seen me share this visible meme a few times; it always comes along when the predictable sunlight seems looming on the near horizon.  Something again to surface that will cause us to question our preconceptions.

Perhaps it started out like this…  This information, this description of events, situations, explanations of the background cannot be as described; yet, these Sundance citations make it difficult to refute, unnerving to dismiss; but it’s all just a little too disconcerting; but we’ll watch and see, making a mental note.

As time progresses, it is just like this; it is factually as presented. This journey toward the truth of the thing is messy, awkward, weird at times and quite strange to participate in.

Your friends and/or family end up in the same place you were.  As you share the information context, they too, just like you before, initially want to dismiss the truth of the thing – because to accept it breaks away from the comfortable places of prior context.  Like you, they too start to notice things.  They too pay attention.

The next time you converse, the prior dismissals are not as strong as before.  The awakening has enlarged as an outcome of rather unusual predictions, and the outcomes, uncomfortably, also seem to reconcile when the context you provide is considered.

The, “but it can’t be” response, is replaced with “how did you know?”  The awakening expands.

Perhaps for you, like me, like most of us, the seemingly uncomfortable place where information is absorbed with totally new contexts for understanding comes best in small digestible doses.  If so, that’s the healthy way.  I believe it is the best way to retain stability amid an increasingly unstable world.

At the end of most revelations of significant impact, there are people with motives and intentions that boil down to two priorities: influence and affluence.  Those who seek power value influence.  Those who seek personal financial gain value affluence.   These are the priorities we find at the heart of most control efforts.

The need for control is always a reaction to fear.

One of the most significant challenges when confronting corruption, is the need to initially ignore motives and stay focused on the demonstrable and proven citations that cannot be refuted.  Stable people are able to absorb consequential information and remain focused; the motives or understanding the ‘why’ factor is not as important as the reality of accepting the outcome.

(more…)

The House version of the Thomas Massie ‘pay attention to me bill’ telling the DOJ to release the information about Jeffrey Epstein, unless it contains material related to national security of investigations, has now passed the Senate by unanimous consent and will now head to President Trump’s desk for his signature.

Trump will sign it, the Epstein ‘shiny thing’ law will go into effect, and the politicians will continue arguing about it and trying to attack the White House because they put the perpetual argument component into THE BILL:

[SOURCE pdf]

The bill is only six pages. I suggest you read it.

As you can see from the highlighted qualifiers above, those of you who enjoy the bread and circus distractions provided by the DC UniParty apparatus, will have at least another year to follow this story.  Have fun with it.

Meanwhile, Congress cannot find time to codify any executive orders that might save taxpayer money, secure the border, protect elections, tighten up immigration laws or expel criminal aliens….

…. But thanks to Ron DeSantis’s biggest supporter, Thomas Massie, you’ll always have Epstein.

(more…)

At this point, anyone who is left thinking James Comey will stand trial in DC is just pretending for their own agenda.  Unfortunately, the dismissal of the case against him is a foregone conclusion.

The DOJ Lawfare embeds purposefully dragged their heels toward the statute of limitations, AG Pam Bondi didn’t respond fast enough to the institutional stonewalling, and that set up Lindsey Halligan for an almost impossible task.

[SOURCE]

Former FBI Director James Comey was leaking information to the media through his friend and FBI Special Government Employee Daniel Richman. When Comey was fired in May 2017, he knew what his risks were. Comey hired Daniel Richman as his personal lawyer and legal counsel. Comey knew this would make targeting him for leaking to media more difficult.

Last month U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, the Biden appointee overseeing the criminal case against Comey, assigned magistrate judge William Fitzpatrick to review the issues surrounding potential violations of attorney-client privilege within the indictment.

Today Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick sides with the Comey defense and blasts the prosecution for violating attorney-client privilege. [SEE RULING HERE] In addition, Judge Fitzpatrick instructs the prosecution, Lindsey Halligan, to give the defense team all of the evidence used in the grand jury indictment.

Fitzpatrick is setting the stage to dismiss the charges. There’s zero doubt about it when you read the 24-page order.

It’s enough to make you blow a blood pressure cuff when you see a judge upholding the Fourth Amendment argument on James Comey’s behalf, considering the blatant Fourth Amendment violations that Comey conspired to violate within his fraudulent investigations of Carter Page and President Trump.

(more…)

The BBC is apologizing again to President Trump after lawyers representing his interests sent a letter threatening legal action on his behalf.

The legal threats are about a spliced edit of Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, that appeared in the network’s program “Trump: A Second Chance?” In the edited clip, the president is framed to say “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you, and we fight. We fight like hell.”

However, in reality, those phrases were delivered almost an hour apart, and the footage omitted the part where President Trump tells supporters “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” The BBC responded to the first public criticism by stating:

BBC – “This programme was reviewed after criticism of how President Donald Trump’s 6th January 2021 speech was edited.

During that sequence, we showed excerpts taken from different parts of the speech. However, we accept that our edit unintentionally created the impression that we were showing a single continuous section of the speech, rather than excerpts from different points in the speech, and that this gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.

The BBC would like to apologise to President Trump for that error of judgement. This programme was not scheduled to be re-broadcast and will not be broadcast again in this form on any BBC platforms.” [SOURCE]

The BBC Media Center then posted a public notification following the letter received from President Trump’s legal team.

(more…)