A “conflict of interest” (COI) is a situation in which a person or organization is involved in multiple interests, financial interests, personal or other interests, one or more of which could possibly influence the motivation of the individual or organization.

A person or entity avoids a conflict of interest by:

• a.) not engaging in activity that might be conflicted by a duality of interest, or
• b.) disclosing the potential conflict – allowing associated parties to be aware and decide independently if the conflict is influencing behavior.

In essence, when presented with a potential conflict of interest, be truthful and provide full disclosure.
If unsure, err on the side of full transparency, and do so as soon as the conflict presents – don’t wait.
This becomes the generally accepted best ethical practice to avoid potential issues that may arise as a consequence of conflicted interest; especially financial conflicts.
♦ Recently, the financial payments by political entities upon media personalities has created quite a stir.  When CTH revealed (from FEC filings) financial payments by Political Action Committees to media pundit Erick Erickson (and others), the response was to besmirch CTH for revealing the payments. (more…)

Candidate Donald Trump was interviewed by Fox and Friends this morning to include perspectives on the Colorado delegate selection and current events:

(more…)

Michigander Charlie LeDuff has produced an amazingly good boots-on-the-ground video which shows how insufferably connected the chattering class of Vichy Republicans have become.
LeDuff showcases the disconnect by highlighting a series of articles in National Review, and then actually going to the locales belittled by the NRO staff and talking to the ordinary, hard-working middle class people who live within them.
Driving to New York – LeDuff actually interviews the people that NRO is figuratively writing about, the resulting contrast speaks volumes:
“Shocked by their support of Donald Trump, some elitist conservative thinkers are calling places like Garbutt, NY pockets of misery, welfare fraud and dope addiction. They say let these towns die. Turns out Garbutt is not like that at all”.
LeDuff masterfully tells a real life short story and simultaneously contrasts the pontificating arrogance of the Charles Cooke, Kevin Williamson, Rich Lowry and Johan Goldberg types at National Review.  The resulting work is brilliant:

The latest polling (full pdf below) released today positions candidate Donald Trump for a full delegate sweep of all congressional districts:

“It’s not just the statewide results that offer bad news for Cruz. Even outside of New York City and its suburbs, he’s running way behind Trump and even a tad behind Kasich. That means Trump could sweep nearly all of the state’s delegates.” (link)

There are 95 total delegates at stake.  14 delegates awarded to the state winner, and 81 district delegates (27 districts x 3 delegates each).  Any candidate who gets 50% +1 of the vote in each of the congressional districts wins all three of the district’s delegates.  In addition, there is a minimum threshold of 20% for any 2nd place candidate to gain one delegate (if winner below 50%).
Candidate Donald Trump is currently positioned to win all 95 of the state delegates in New York.  In addition, candidate Trump is leading in every demo.
(more…)

Those of us who have thoroughly researched candidate Ted Cruz (took office in January ’13 and announced his presidential bid in March ’15) have an inherent belief the key issue which will eliminate Ted Cruz, is Ted Cruz himself.
The reasoning is simple: He’s a fraud.
Throughout his life, and in ever circumstance of consequence, the more people get to know Cruz the less they like him.  This is a fundamental truth amid personalities of low character.   Candidate Cruz, a man of very few friends, has a life-reputation -not just in politics- as a self-serving manipulator, liar and schemer.
The more attention is placed on him by the media and political followers the less favorable his position is within any circle of association.  Paul Manafort understands this basic truism; he also knows how to allow Cruz’s phony persona to display itself organically:

(more…)

In the latest poll from the Keystone state (full pdf below), Donald Trump holds a commanding lead -amid every single demographic- across all Pennsylvania voters.  If the peoples voice in Pennsylvania is represented by their delegates candidate Donald Trump is very well positioned.

Based on the polling cross-tabs, the voters in Pennsylvania appear to have a solid grasp on the false-presentations of Senator Ted Cruz, as he is widely rejected by similar percentages of Men, Women, Young voters and voters across the entire spectrum.
This becomes more evident when you dig beneath the top-line results and look at the cross-tab demographics of the electorate polled. (more…)

Sometimes when you find yourself in a disconcerting and unfamiliar place, it can be beneficial to stop, look back and understand just how we ended up in this terrain.  The professional DC consultant class are benefiting from the current climate of chaos, and they certainly don’t want anyone to review the consequential and intentional steps it took to get here.
When the Tea Party rose up in opposition to President Obama’s indulgent spending programs in 2009 many were under the mistaken assumption the opposing party, the republicans, were against the progressive agenda based on principle.

However, there were a few voices on our side saying be wary of the UniParty nature of DC, the republican party is not our friend.  Money always fuels their motives; so long as there are millions available to the ‘loyal opposition’, the republican political intentions should not be regarded as altruistic.
At the time those concerns were dispatched by a louder voices demanding strategic unity and instructions to work within the DC-based GOPe system.  However, ultimately what benefit lies within unity if the end result is just a destructive?   The awakened electorate was just as much a risk to the republican side of the UniParty as it was the Democrat side.
It was from this basic framework of acceptance the Conservative Tree House was born. A “last refuge” where common sense approaches still mattered.
(more…)

An interesting article within the Washington Post outlines some of the challenges with unbound delegates and delegates available for purchase…
(Washington Post) West Virginia looks perfect for Donald Trump: a struggling working-class state filled with the types of voters who have backed him elsewhere and could deliver one of his biggest victories.
But a sweep there might not matter. That’s because as many as 34 delegates — the entire contingent — may be free to back whomever they want at the Republican National Convention.

Much the same is true in Pennsylvania, home to a hotly contested April 26 primary, where there are 54 uncommitted delegates. Other states and territories, from Colorado to Wyoming to Guam, will also send squads of unbound representatives.
These are the swing voters of the GOP nominating contest, nearly 200 activists and elected leaders beholden to nothing except their personal judgment and empowered to make or break candidacies. (more…)

Senator Ted Cruz has at least eight Super-PAC’s assisting his presidential campaign; and according to a recording obtained by Politico a Cruz’s campaign bundler was directing large donors toward one PAC specifically.  The “Stand for Truth” PAC.

However, the campaign appears to have, yet again, gone into the land of illegality with the following statement (via audio recording):

“If you hit your max then we have a table for you that is the unlimited table,” Keet Lewis, a bundler for the campaign and co-host of a Dec. 30 fundraiser in Dallas, says on the recording provided to POLITICO. “It can take corporate dollars, it can take partnership dollars, and that’s the super PAC, Stand for Truth, so pick up some of that information.” (link)

The politico article goes on to share how and why the fundraising instructions are illegal – read here– but that’s not the part that might stick out to anyone who has been following the 2015/2016 shady campaign finances.
(more…)

Having spent the larger amount of two years digging through innocuous reports, FOIA documents, and media reports (mostly foreign), the Gowdy announcement today is more than a little bit disingenuous.
We’ve previously predicted, long before the select committee was announced, that the Benghazi investigation would amount to all hat and no cattle.
The reasoning is very simple:
Both sides of the UniParty were charged with intelligence oversight of the joint CIA/State Department operations in Libya (2011) and Syria (2012) through the Congressional Intelligence Gang-of-Eight.
At the time the “Intelligence Gang-of-Eight” was:

♦ Speaker – John Boehner, ♦ Minority Leader – Nancy Pelosi; ♦ House Permanent Select Committee on Intel Chairman – Mike Rogers, and his ♦ Democrat counterpart Charles Ruppersberger; ♦ Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and ♦ Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid; along with ♦ Senate Intel Chair Diane Feinstein and her ♦ Republican counterpart, Saxby Chambliss.

Together with Hillary Clinton and President Obama the “Gang-of-Eight” was duplicitous in everything that took place.  Therefore there is no independent motive for the Gowdy committee to find any responsibility – the entire investigation is for public appearances only.
Further evidence therein can be found in this latest press release.  Note the specific wording and the specific emphasis we provide:  (more…)