Unfortunately, Tucker Carlson has chosen the Twitter platform as the outlet for his monologue broadcasts. Twitter is now restricting viewers of the platform to only registered user accounts. As a result, Carlson’s message is now restricted by DHS monitors as the audience is filtered.

However, if you enjoy the Carlson discussions, several people are transferring the content onto shareable platforms that do not have Homeland Security restrictive oversight and direct FBI and Intelligence Community control mechanisms. {Direct Rumble Link}

[NOTE: Disclaimer – CTH remains inside the DHS system to throw sand into the machinery, because “NUTS”!]

(more…)

On Thursday morning House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer appeared on Fox News for an interview where he described the evidence of the FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice interfering in investigations about Biden family money laundering. {Direct Rumble Link}

Within the interview Comer outlines that the Biden family received over $20 million in funds from foreign government funds to influence policy. The Biden family then used limited liability corporations (LLC’s) to launder the money into non-existent family businesses.  The DOJ and FBI then blocked any inquiry and investigation into the process by the IRS and others.

Comer outlines the intent of congress to subpoena all of the people who were involved in the network.  When asked if congress “has the goods” to show proof behind the accusations against Biden, Comer responds with “yes.”   James Comer also states that Attorney General Bill Barr was told by the FBI that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.

(more…)

Joe Biden reads his response to the Supreme Court decision that blocked the executive branch from permanently eliminating student debt without an act of Congress.

In his defense of the smackdown by SCOTUS, Biden conflates his unilateral student loan giveaway with the legislatively authorized PPP program.  One is from executive fiat, the other from legislative assembly; see the difference?   Yes Joe, if you wanted it to be legit, you needed an act of Congress.

Additionally, notice how Biden lies about what the PPP program was. PPP was a program to subsidize and support the payroll expenses of shut down small businesses – keeping small business workers with a paycheck -not replacing the business’s operational income.  Video and Transcript Below – WATCH:

[Transcript] … This program was all set to begin.  The website had been set up.  The applications had been simplified so that it took less than five minutes to complete.  Notices had been sent out to people about the relief they were eligible for.  Sixteen million people — sixteen million people had already been approved.  The money was literally about to go out the door. 

And then, Republican elected officials and special interests stepped in.  They said no — “no” — literally snatching from the hands of millions of Americans thousands of dollars in student debt relief that was about to change their lives. 

(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…)

As if on cue, here comes another billionaire group by well-established political control agents in yet another multimillion effort to block President Trump.   This time it’s Koch and his Americans for Prosperity network.

The Koch groups are planning to spend $70 million in their effort to eliminate the support of Donald Trump in 2024.

However, what will be interesting will be to watch how the downstream media networks attack Trump in order to get a piece of the spending allotment.  That’s where knowing where the Koch money flows comes in handy.

First the article:

(New York Times) – The political network established by the conservative industrialists Charles and David Koch has raised more than $70 million for political races as it looks to help Republicans move past Donald J. Trump, according to an official with the group.

With some of this large sum to start, the network, Americans for Prosperity Action, plans to throw its weight into the G.O.P. presidential nominating contest for the first time in its nearly 20-year history. The network spent nearly $500 million supporting Republican candidates and conservative policies in the 2020 election cycle alone.

Two groups closely affiliated with Charles Koch contributed $50 million of the more than $70 million that has been raised. Mr. Koch is a major shareholder in Koch Industries, which contributed $25 million to Americans for Prosperity Action, according to a preliminary draft of Federal Election Commission filings. Another $25 million was donated by Stand Together, a nonprofit he founded.

(more…)

The larger story behind this recent Intercept Article is the headline you just read. Let’s talk….

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a representative organization in the United States that lobbies Congress.

The CoC represent the interests of the multinational corporations who use K-Street and J-Street in DC to write rules, regulations, policies and laws as part of their corporate control over U.S. wealth.  That’s what the CoC does.  That’s the entire purpose of the Chamber of Commerce.

For a long time, the CoC has been in the background of multiple political discussions.

During the Obama administration, the federal Dept of Commerce permitted the private sector U.S. Chamber of Commerce to write U.S. trade language; that is to physically write the words that go into U.S. trade deals with other countries.  This was the era of maximum value for the CoC that saw their coffers swell as massive multinational corps realized the CoC was in the business of literally controlling the U.S. capitalist economy.

The arch nemesis of the CoC was President Donald Trump, who threw the CoC out of the room when decisions were being made about trade and economic policy.  This was the era of minimum value for the CoC, when corporations were no longer getting to influence the policy.

In desperate response the CoC turned to their purchased politicians in Congress, specifically to their #1 ally Mitch McConnell, and asked or help in overcoming the problem that Trump and his America First agenda represented.

As MAGA (America First) economic and trade influence in Congress increased, the CoC had trouble because President Trump could target any Republican CoC beneficiaries that undermined the economic policy.  That could result in a career ending primary challenge.  For the first time in decades, the Republican wing of the UniParty had a tough time supporting Chamber President Tom Donohue in his demands for influence.

What happened next was stunning.

(more…)

For his Twitter monologue episode 7, Tucker Carlson walks through the post COVID new authoritarian model of ‘western democracy’, a system of dictatorial fiat and unilateral power intent on retention of control. {Direct Rumble Link}

Within our new system of “western democratic norms” authoritarianism is embraced by both wings of the UniParty vulture as it ensures power for those who benefit. From the dual system of U.S. justice to the dictatorship now present in Ukraine, the common thread is power by a select group of system operators with large control mechanisms.

The retention of this power structure requires the passing of the baton to the next loyalist of the regime. In the case of Joe Biden, Tucker foresees the rise of California Governor Gavin Newsom. I predicted a very specific flow for this transition a year ago and fully agree with Carlson’s prediction. WATCH:

[NOTE: I find it interesting [at 06:29] that Carlson notes the Ukraine war is only opposed by “one opponent”, yet he never mentions the man’s name, Donald Trump.  It is a small datapoint, but an omission datapoint nonetheless enhanced by the chosen platform of the Carlson broadcast.  I notice nuance. Keep watching.]

(more…)

At the heart of the IRS whistleblower statements, is a meeting that took place on October 7, 2022, where U.S. Attorney David Weiss told six witnesses that he was not able to pursue a full case against Hunter Biden due to Dept of Justice roadblocks.

Notes and a contemporaneous email in regard to the explosive meeting were taken by IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley, who then testified to Congress and delivered the evidence which contradicts the statements by Attorney General Merrick Garland and Deputy AG Lisa Monaco.  Shapley’s lawyers documented some of the participants from the meeting on behalf of their client, as they refute the claims of Main Justice (Garland & Monaco):

Today, buried 21 paragraphs deep in their own reporting, the New York Times now confirms the content of the meeting and the statement by USAO David Weiss.

[New York Times] – […] in mid-2022, Mr. Weiss reached out to the top federal prosecutor in Washington, Matthew Graves, to ask his office to pursue charges and was rebuffed, according to Mr. Shapley’s testimony.

A similar request to prosecutors in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles, was also rejected, Mr. Shapley testified. A second former I.R.S. official, who has not been identified, told House Republicans the same story. That episode was confirmed independently to The New York Times by a person with knowledge of the situation.

(more…)

I’m not going to say I toldyaso; I’m just smiling.

After a full media cycle of apoplexy and pearl-clutching, which included Andrew Weissmann appearing on MSNBC to declare “It’s the end of Trump,” CBS is now reporting there is no Defense Department memo about attacking Iran – the foundation of the media claims surrounding the leaked audio tapes from Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Worse still, and exactly as CTH previously outlined, despite the claims by CNN about how this audio would be used as the “central element” by the prosecution of Trump, the audio and mysterious memo are not part of the Special Counsel case.

So, why was the transcript of the audio recording used by Jack Smith in the indictment if the audio and nonexistent memo were never going to be used?  Because it’s Lawfare, that’s why.  Everything, yes including the specific language being deployed (ie “documents containing classification markings“), is hype for public consumption.

(Via CBS) – The Defense Department memo on Iran — at the heart of the now-public audio recording that captured a July 2021 meeting with former President Donald Trump — is not part of the 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information charged in special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of the former president, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to CBS News. 

[…] The document and recording are described in the indictment Smith’s team secured against Trump earlier this month, recounted as an alleged meeting with “a writer, a publisher, and two members of” Trump’s staff, “none of whom possessed a security clearance.”  But according to a source familiar with the matter, Trump was not charged with unlawfully holding onto the Iran-related document discussed in the recording.

(more…)

This stuff is really so silly, and lawfare is so entirely predictable, it is difficult for me to remain serious when discussing it.  This is also why serious litigation expert Eric Dublier was so funny in his Concord case briefings against the DOJ and their insufferable Lawfare efforts.

CNN gets a leak of audio from Special Prosecutor Jack Smith, presumably presenting audio of President Trump talking in Bedminster, New Jersey, about the background of Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley lying about Trump wanting to invade Iran. [VIDEO HERE] Essentially, Trump refutes Milley and has papers to back up his side of the story.

CNN claims this audio will be the “Central Focus” of the case against President Trump that eventually “all jurors in the case will hear.” At this point, my laughter is almost unbearable for a multitude of reasons.  Remember, this is a Lawfare operation, which is constructed for one primary purpose, influencing the public.

Putting aside the fact that CNN, and the entire media apparatus already reporting on this nonsense before and putting aside the ridiculous nature of the top-line claims, the audio proves nothing.  It is the sound of President Trump talking about presidential papers that are claimed by the DOJ to be “classified” or “secret.”  Except, beyond the absurdity, there’s a problem that explains why Jack Smith gave CNN the audio.

Despite the grand pontifications and breathless pearl-clutching by the CNN narrative engineers, the audio will NEVER be used at trial – if there is even a trial – which is highly unlikely, because it cannot be admitted into evidence. That’s why Jack Smith gave it to them.  The audio is useless, except for the value in promoting the lawfare narrative engineering effort.

Why?  Because the documents that are claimed to be heard in the audio are nowhere to be found.  That’s right, the DOJ and FBI never found any “classified” or “super-secret” documents as described in the audio.  As a result, the audio represents nothing, a literal nothingburger, because without the documents the audio is inadmissible.

You cannot submit evidence in court of a person talking about documents without the documents the audio is supposedly talking about.  Can you see the issue now?  As a result, the audio is nothing more than President Trump talking about something the prosecution cannot identify or prove.  It’s inadmissible, hence no value, hence the leak.

(more…)