An interesting series of updates to the FBI whistleblower case of Joe Biden taking a $5 million bribe payment which now looks to have originated in Ukraine.

The background claim is pretty basic. A whistleblower approached congress stating the FBI had a report, an unclassified FD-1023, detailing a conversation with a ‘confidential human source’ (CHS) that outlined Vice President Joe Biden taking a $5 million payment from a foreign national to affect a U.S. policy decision.  The FBI agent responsible for investigating the CHS claim was FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten, a sketchy character from the Trump-Russia probe.

The investigative events took place in June and July 2020 during the presidential election year.  The claim is that FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Auten reportedly buried the CHS allegation saying it could not be corroborated, and then wrote an assessment that it was Russian disinformation.  However, the FBI investigative team didn’t see any effort by any FBI member to substantiate it.  Hence a whistleblower, with specific knowledge of the details in the allegation, surfaces and tells congress the FBI is hiding the FD-1023 that outlines the confidential human source allegation of bribery.

Congress requested the FD-1023, the FBI refused to provide it.  House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer then set a compliance deadline while he coordinated with Senator Chuck Grassley.  The FBI still refused to turn it over, saying they would neither confirm nor deny the FD-1023 existence, and said releasing any information like that would potentially compromise Confidential Human Sources (CHS’s).  The proverbial sources and methods excuse.

(more…)

Apparently, when the Project Veritas board of directors fired founder and CEO James O’Keefe, they didn’t expect the result to be a collapse in their operational business model.  As the kids would say, Veritas f**ked around and found out.

Stunningly, Project Veritas is now suing James O’Keefe, the man they fired, for having the audacity to launch O’Keefe Media Group (OMG), and they are demanding a court order to stop O’Keefe from earning a living. [FULL pdf HERE]

According to the lawsuit, O’Keefe will not stop doing the expose’ journalism and activism that O’Keefe is known for.  Project Veritas is not happy, because many of the donors and supporters have left PV to follow James O’Keefe at OMG.

Veritas demands an injunction against O’Keefe, which may stop people -workers and donors- from leaving PV to join him. The lawsuit is a little extreme in the way it is written as an effort to convince a civil jury to find in their favor. [READ HERE]

(more…)

One of the key aspects to noticing a controlled candidate is the speech, cadence and distinct linguistics used during prepared remarks.

When a candidate is authentic in delivery of advocacy points, their speech is a natural flow of thoughts and ideas they create in verbal delivery.  However, when a politician is delivering a speech constructed for them, using the thoughts of others, you will notice a cadence constructed around a series of soundbites that are strung together.

Ron DeSantis kicked-off his official Iowa campaign today literally reading prepared remarks that did not come from his own thought processes.  When delivering a speech from the thoughts of others, there is an emphasis on the reading of it; in the example we highlight today with DeSantis the reading is extreme.  You can see below.

This is not to say that speech writers are not useful, they are. Almost all politicians use speech writers to assist them in putting their thoughts into words to assist communication.  The key is to use the candidates’ thoughts. However, when the thoughts themselves are not from the candidate, there is a very different outcome in delivery.

This is what becomes very visible with Ron DeSantis.

As candidates, Dr. Ben Carson and Newt Gingrich wrote most of their speech scripts and delivered their own thoughts on points of policy and advocacy.  President Trump also communicates his own thoughts through speeches written from them.  When the thoughts are from the candidate, you will notice a tone of authenticity in the delivery. Speeches delivered by people like Tucker Carlson and Jordan Peterson also communicate with authenticity because the thoughts conveyed are their own.

Conversely, in traditional politics there are candidates who do not convey their own thoughts and end up reading speeches that are disjointed with emphasis misplaced, syllables in wrong context, and carrying an odd syntax and cadence.  The more disconnected from the thoughts of the reader, the odder the delivery.

(more…)

In the annals of Freudian graphic design, this apropos logo is one for the history books.

As one of the qualified Diversity Equity and Inclusion spokepeople for Mitch McConnell’s DeceptiCon group, Joni Ernst has always had a very specific role to play.  Today she announces Ron DeSantis is joining the porkulous parade, an apropos name for a pork-filled United States budgetary process that has replaced regular order since fiscal year 2008.

That is correct folks.  All of these debt ceiling arguments, continuing resolutions, stop-gap spending bills, and generally corrupt UniParty spending outcomes, are the result of congress dropping the budget process after fiscal year 2008.  For the past fifteen years in a row, specifically as part of the Obama ‘fundamental change’ process, the budgetary order in the U.S. government has been eliminated.

[SOURCE]

Everything associated with federal spending is a corrupt and arguably unconstitutional system of base-line budget growth, continuing resolutions, no budget constraints and debt ceiling increases.  The media like to play the budget narrative game without ever mentioning the source of the issue.

(more…)

It always puzzles me when I come across an obscure data point that comes directly from the mouths of people who follow politics, and yet watch them not ask the obvious question.  In this video segment, the first 20 seconds by podcaster Patrick Bet-David are interesting.

The video was recorded on Monday May 22nd, two days before Ron DeSantis officially launched his campaign (May 24).  The meeting being described by Bet-David is on Thursday May 18, approximately four days before the interview, and six days before the campaign launch.

PBD notes he was invited with 10 to 15 other people to “watch Governor Ron DeSantis, work” in the governor’s mansion.  In essence, it seems like someone from the DeSantis campaign was continuing to reach out to ‘influencers’ in advance of the announcement the following week.

QUESTION:  Why do none of these influencers ask why they are being invited to “watch” DeSantis?  It just seems odd.   The podcast segment is a pretty good discussion with Sebastian Gorka, but watch the first 20 seconds.

.

What PBD outlines rather casually is exactly what I drew attention to last year.  The DeSantis operation was clearly working in the latter part of 2021 to seed the landscape for the 2024 election, including the January 6, 2022, influencer meetup.  Yet for some odd reason, none of the participants questioned what the purpose of the unsolicited engagement request was.

I first wrote about this last July and August, it’s all just weird.

(more…)

Everything I have outlined about Twitter is going to surface as accurate over time.  There are two major elements: (1) DHS govt influence, now evidenced in the Twitter Files, and (2) the Twitter financial issues, which explain the recent hiring of Linda Yaccarino, which are soon to surface.

Yesterday, Elon Musk responded to criticism of Twitter censorship, vis-a-vis government demands, with this Tweet: “Please point out where we had an actual choice and we will reverse it.”

The Musk supporters are saying Musk has to comply with government demands if their national laws require it. However, that angle doesn’t take into consideration the choice that Musk/Twitter always have.

If the platform content is not approved by a government, and that govt then demands removal or censorship of that content, Twitter always has two options. One, to comply with the demand and block or restrict the user content (which is the direction they have taken) – or two, stop allowing the platform to operate in the country demanding the censorship. It is the latter option that everyone always avoids mentioning.

However, the issue appears to be bigger and goes to the heart of the second aspect of Twitter we have noted.

(more…)

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy appears on Fox News Sunday to defend his deal with Joe Biden for a debt ceiling increase.

In the past 24 hours many fiscal conservatives have criticized McCarthy for the terms of the agreement. In this interview, McCarthy walks through the details of the terms as he constructed them and pushes back against some of the criticism.  WATCH:

As soon as the bill is in written form, we will be able to make a better determination.  At this moment this is all hearsay based on what people think the legislation says.

(more…)

The Texas State House voted to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton, effectively suspending him from legal authority within the state until an impeachment trial can be held in the State Senate.  There are 20 articles of impeachment [READ HERE].  The vote to adopt the 20 articles of impeachment was 121-23, with most of the Texas state republicans voting in alignment with the Texas democrats.

People are shocked when I share the opinion that Texas is not near the top of the Republican states considered deep red “conservative” or freedom/values based.   Of the mostly visible 30 states you might consider ‘conservative’ or ‘freedom balanced’, Texas wouldn’t appear in the top five; today’s vote in the Texas state house is just another datapoint in that direction.

TEXAS – In a history-making late-afternoon vote, a divided Texas House chose Saturday to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton, temporarily removing him from office over allegations of misconduct that included bribery and abuse of office.

The vote to adopt the 20 articles of impeachment was 121-23, with three members absent.

Attention next shifts to the Texas Senate, which will conduct a trial with senators acting as jurors and designated House members presenting their case as impeachment managers.  Permanently removing Paxton from office and barring him from holding future elected office in Texas would require the support of two-thirds of senators. (read more)

The Texas Republicans who voted to remove the conservative AG, are the typical Texas RINO, Bush and DeSantis support group.  Understanding the dynamic, President Trump has promised to fight the Texas Republicans as they attack Ken Paxton.

(more…)

Last night I participated in a conversation. This article is written as an outcome of that conversation, as requested by those who participated.

Essentially, the framework of the conversation, as I initially listened, is best described as a series of questions amid a group of smart intellectual types who are very understanding of the nature of our current situation.

In various forms they were asking each other the same question.  What happened in the last several years that caused Democrats, leftists and the traditional political left to switch positions on their advocacy?

Liberalism literally went from railing against Big Govt, to embracing corrupt Big Govt. Why and how did this happen?

In short, it was the same line of questioning I have seen asked by Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald, Tulsi Gabbard and various traditionally liberal people as well as people on the right side of the continuum.

Why and how did traditional liberalism so suddenly flip from being, big picture – ‘anti-government’, to suddenly embracing corrupt government enterprise, and supporting the intelligence apparatus, federal govt (writ large), institutional oppressive law enforcement and FBI etc.?  What happened?

After listening to this conversation quietly, as I am prone to do, my remarks -with citations and examples- silenced the room.

At the conclusion of my remarks, everyone asked me if I had ever written about this, and if not – why not?   I did not have an answer, so consider this a promise fulfilled.  Perhaps you might find value.

(more…)

As the geography narrows before us, it is important to remember the stakes and avoid the distractions.  As a consequence, the baseline must be reaffirmed. It is critical to understand that both the DNC and RNC are private corporations with no affiliation to government.

It is a difficult shift in thinking, but the party system in U.S. politics revolves around two distinct private corporations – two clubs that feed from the same corporate trough and position for influence and affluence within a political dynamic they control.

The priority for both clubs, Republican and Democrat, is NOT politically or culturally ideological.  In the modern era, the corporate priority first begins with a battle over who controls each corporation.

As long as there is no challenge, the clubs operate without issue.  However, when there is a battle for control of the corporation, a battle that will ultimately determine the financial outcome, the internal battle becomes the priority.

2024 is going to be the election season when we see this corporate battle explode inside in the Republican group.  Decades of entrenched power are at stake, and there has been four years of counter positioning and backroom discussion leading up to this moment.

As a consequence, and I know this might sound odd to many people – but winning and/or losing elections becomes a secondary issue.  The RNC is not focused on winning elections. The RNC corporation is focused on retaining control.

The RNC want to give the illusion of support for MAGA conservatism because they need the base voter, and they need to maintain the illusion of choice. However, every move they make on an operational level is exactly in line with their previous outlook toward cocktail class republicanism.  The MAGA base of support cannot trust this corporate group, and we must not be blind or unguarded about the Machiavellian schemes they construct.

When you hear the influence group saying the two priorities for control of the Republican Club involve, (1) eliminating populism in the ranks; and (2) realigning with multinational corporate objectives (vis a vis Wall Street), what they are publicly expressing is their RNC corporate need to get rid of the America First economic agenda – to get rid of the MAGA influence.

How has this historically surfaced?

(more…)