The frustrating issue with the Supreme Court ruling [SEE HERE] is not simply the legal logic applied, which essentially boils down to actionable definitions surrounding the word “regulate,” but also the high court’s seeming blindness to the “emergency” part of the reason IEEPA was used.

Economic security is national security, and the hollowing out of our ability to independently sustain our national economic system posed a real and substantive threat to our nation.  The court never evaluated the ‘urgency’ behind the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as used by President Donald Trump.

Instead, the court began their legal analysis by seeking to define the word “regulate” as it applies to IEEPA.  Part II–B, concluding: (a) IEEPA authorizes the President to “investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit . . . importation or exportation.” §1702(a)(1)(B) under the Act.

The majority of the court decided presidential ability to levy countervailing duties is not part of the ability to “regulate” importation.

In the opinion of the court, the President can block imports, nullify imports and prohibit imports, but the president cannot “regulate” imports through the use of tariffs.  This is the representative logic of a John Roberts court, the voice of Bush Inc.

It is what it is – and many of us saw this nonsense as a likely outcome, but it is still frustrating to see such a detached parseltongue approach to legal opinions when the national security of our nation is at stake.  These are the judicial minds who will watch the nation burn to the ground, just so they can remain in power ruling over the ashes.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s three liberals in the majority.  Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.

(more…)

The U.S. mediating team met with Ukraine and Russia negotiators for the second day in Geneva, Switzerland.  Unfortunately, despite the high praise and customary diplomatic niceties spoken, there was not much progress.

There was, however, a rather remarkable accusation hurled by Russian media about uninvited British officials going to Geneva in order to conduct surveillance of the negotiations. Apparently, this is part of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s efforts to retain maximum involvement and influence.

STEVE WITKOFF – “Today, at President Trump’s direction, the United States moderated a third set of trilateral discussions with Ukraine and Russia. Thank you to the Swiss Confederation for being gracious hosts for today’s meetings.

President Trump’s success in bringing both sides of this war together has brought about meaningful progress, and we are proud to work under his leadership to stop the killing in this terrible conflict. Both parties agreed to update their respective leaders and continue working towards a deal.” (source)

RUSTEM UMEROV (UKRAINE) – “In Geneva, the second day of trilateral negotiations has begun.

Consultations are taking place in working groups by areas within the political and military tracks. We are working on clarifying the parameters and mechanisms of the decisions discussed yesterday.

We are focused on substantive work. We will provide additional information on the results.” (source)

(more…)

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt gives the ¹official statements from the White House on a variety of topics and matters of great interest.  The video below is prompted to the beginning of the media question segment.

Around the 10:00 minute mark Leavitt notes the likelihood of President Trump taking military action against Iran. WATCH:

¹There is a tremendous amount of false or manipulated information from media sources, allies and critics of the administration. We are at a critical juncture where it is a best practice to listen directly to President Trump or his specifically assigned spokespeople.

(more…)

Through the years I didn’t really have much of an opinion of Steve Bannon, I approached any story of interest that surrounded him by simply looking at the factual details of the current event in question.

CTH well understood that Bannon, and subsequently his expressed opinion and objective, was simply an outcome of his position – downstream from the billionaire of the moment who paid him.

In essence, Steve Bannon always seemed to be, much like Kellyanne Conway, an advocate for whoever was financing him. From Robert/Rebekah Mercer at Breitbart forward to any endeavor thereafter, it always just appeared the same.

That said, with the release of the Epstein files, the relationship between Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein is something CTH did not expect. {HERE} Bannon and Epstein were very close and talked to each other about seemingly everything.

I can never unsee what I have read.  Nor will CTH ever entertain the possibility that Bannon was ever a good element within the MAGA effort.  There is a solid argument to be made that the Bannon War Room was funded, or organized in the funding mechanisms, by Jeffrey Epstein. {HERE}

The files of messages between them contain some shocking stuff happening in the background while Steve Bannon was in very close proximity to candidate and President Trump.  The level of disdain Bannon had for Donald Trump’s family and for Donald Trump himself is really something CTH did not expect to see. {examples: HERE and HERE}

I am left to wonder now how much of the vitriol against Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, ie. “Javanka hatred”, actually originated from the Braintrust behind Bannon and the assembly of people in his immediate orbit. {HERE}

Initially, I saw some Twitter accounts attempt to defend Steve Bannon by saying Epstein did all the talking in their text exchanges and Bannon was less communicative. However, that only applied to the first batches of files reviewed.  As a few days went along and people started citing files, reading them gives a much more fulsome picture of the relationship.

Steve Bannon may have been focused on the financial gains and perhaps networks of people in his association with Epstein; but he certainly got deep into it and expressed extreme praise for Epstein, even going so far as to call him a god. {LINK} These were two men in a very close friendship. There is no political or ideological distance between Bannon and Epstein.

(more…)

I find this statement by Andrew Wilson to be generally accurate: “The Epstein files create so much emotional charge that having rational discourse about them is basically impossible. People want arrests but don’t know who they want arrested. They want justice but don’t know who they want justice for. Totally Incoherent outrage. Mob panic.”

A mass formation psychosis has fallen upon the Epstein matters and clouded the judgement of reasonable people.

It’s the “reasonable people” facet that became the challenge that Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna needed to control.

Led by financing from the anti-Trump administrative state allies, they created a controversy.  Thomas Massie needed to create a political crisis he could manufacture, exploit and manage. Something his political paymasters could benefit from and simultaneously use as a pivot issue maximize his income capacity.  His wife is dead; this is the payday opportunity to relaunch his mid-life masculinity and gain Instagram celebrity status to align with his physical makeover.

Together with Ro Khanna, Massie thirsts for the viral dopamine hit of “fighting the deep state.” They mounted a full-court press: public letters, hearing grandstanding, coordinated X and TikTok outrage campaigns, the whole performative circus. Algorithmically boosted appearances via social media allies, then promoted by content creators and influencers who adhere to the financial control dials within the algorithm.

Visibility looks organic, but it’s not.  The consuming public, the mob, are mice with their head in a vice, gaze affixed to the content of a screen with images on a repeat pattern they do not control. Swipe – swipe, there it is again. Why, this must be trending or something.

“Release EVERYTHING immediately!” the mob shrieked.  Implying that any delay, any careful review, was proof of a cover-up protecting whichever boogeyman the algorithmic boosters hated that week.  Trump, Clinton, Gates, Trump, Musk, Bannon, Trump, Lutnick, take your pick. Psychologically, the screenplay is textbook narcissistic projection fused with political opportunism.

Institutional caution must be defined as corrupt, because institutional credibility has been shattered. Like classic narcissists they weaponized a crisis they created because their motives are impure: sway, clout, money – influence and affluence – and the delicious thrill of wielding moral superiority over faceless bureaucrats. Even Ted Cruz and Casey DeSantis blush at the scale they never attempted.

Yes, they whipped the social media mob into a frothing “transparency or treason” frenzy, leaving the DOJ with two choices: take the time to do it right and be accused of obstruction, or just dump it all and tell Massie to FU.

Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche just gave Thomas Massie the middle finger.

(more…)

It’s a strange time within the Intelligence Community. You can tell it’s all in flux when you see the New York Times giving a version of the story that is positive toward DNI Tulsi Gabbard, and the Wall Street Journal continuing with debunked/fake information still trying to get DNI Tulsi Gabbard removed.

The New York Times version appears to be the most truthful, factual and cited. It also makes the most sense.

In essence, two foreign nationals were having a phone call about Iran and discussing Jared Kushner’s role and influence in the policy of Trump toward Iran. The phone call was intercepted by a foreign intelligence agency, who then relayed their interpretation of the discussion to the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

NEW YORK TIMES – […] It was a discussion last year between two foreign nationals about Iran, not an unusual topic for American spies to study. But an intercept of that communication, collected by a foreign spy service and given to the United States.

[…] Mr. Kushner’s name was redacted in the original report from the National Security Agency, but people reading it, including the whistle-blower, were able to determine that the reference was to him.

[…] The foreign nationals, they said, were commenting on Mr. Kushner’s influence with the Trump administration. At a time last year when Mr. Kushner’s role in Middle East peace talks was less public than it is now, the foreign officials were recorded saying that he was the person to speak to in order to influence the talks.

[…] The intercept also included what officials described as “gossip” or speculation about Mr. Kushner that was not supported by other intelligence.

(more…)

Former White House legal counsel/fixer to Barack Obama, and former personal lawyer/fixer of Susan Rice, Kathryn Ruemmler was Chief Legal Counsel for Goldman Sachs for the past six years.

Throughout those jobs and networked professional relationships, Kathryn Ruemmler was also a personal friend and advisor to Jeffrey Epstein.

Yesterday it was reported that Kathryn Ruemmler has resigned from Goldman Sachs.

NEW YORK – Goldman Sachs’s top lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, resigned on Thursday in the wake of the Justice Department’s release of emails and other material that revealed her extensive relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier.

Ms. Ruemmler and representatives for Goldman said for years that she had a strictly professional relationship with Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender. But emails, text messages and photographs released late last month upended that narrative, leading to Ms. Ruemmler’s sudden resignation, which surprised many inside the firm.

Before joining Goldman in 2020, Ms. Ruemmler was a counselor, confidante and friend to Mr. Epstein, the documents showed. She advised him on how to respond to tough questions about his sex crimes, discussed her dating life, advised him on how to avoid unflattering media scrutiny and addressed him as “sweetie” and “Uncle Jeffrey.”

(more…)

I said Monday on Twitter: “Seriously. Correct me if I’m wrong. For more than a decade we have known that billionaire Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the originating money man behind Jeffrey Epstein.

This should not be some kind of revelation, as it was widely discussed by those who researched Epstein over a decade ago. Wexner’s money was the originating capital for what would later become Epstein’s influence empire.

Additionally, and again, stop me if this old news is incorrect, well over a decade ago it became openly known that the “PINK” brand of Victoria’s Secret was specifically created due to the sexuality of young girls becoming part of the marketing influence of Epstein.

Wexner created the original VS girls, and the influence of Epstein (underage sexual perversions) then led to the adding of the VS “PINK” sub-brand.

Are we supposed to understand this is all new information? Honest question. No snark. I’m just confused by this sudden newness of it. We been knew.”

Full 2001 VH1 segment, glorifying Jeffrey Epstein while showing Epstein’s allegiance with Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey.

They also point out he has his own chemistry lab in the basement and world class scientists which he pays “20 Million dollars a year to perform WHATEVER… pic.twitter.com/JVXVrdubo0

— Bridgett Fertig (@LightOnLiberty) February 10, 2026

The above VH1 segment was from 2007; however, even ten years prior to that it was commonly known that Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the source of most of Jeffrey Epstein’s start-up finances. The resulting social network was fraught with sexual weirdos, and the VS brand alignment just fit with the club.

Suddenly, Representative Thomas Massie, a Sea Island asset if ever there was one, is proclaiming the Epstein file information outlining the relationship with Wexner is new information, stunning in scope and worthy of extraordinary time to explore.  It’s all weird.

(more…)

Apparently, Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein had a considerable relationship together.  Bannon is cited frequently in the 3 million+ Epstein files that were released by the DOJ.

Unfortunately, part of the document production includes text messages between Steve Bannon and an unknown individual.  Within a segment of the text messages Bannon calls Jared Kusher “the idiot son-in-law,” and frames himself as more important that President Donald Trump who Bannon sees as “transitory.”

[DOJ Source File]

STEVE BANNON (SB) – “To do that shows that [Trump] is center of gravity of this movement and not me — will never do — they are transitory figures — the dc game is to succumb to that — it’s why I never did before joining campaign — I could have been the trump whisperer years ago — avoided on purpose”

This rather elevated sense of self-importance likely explains why Bannon was the source for Michael Wolf via leaks, and why President Trump seems to have kept distance from Mr. Bannon.  However, people who walk the deep weeds of U.S. politics will also remember when Steve Bannon was the editor of Breitbart and together with financial owner Robert Mercer in 2015/2016 was backing Ted Cruz in the run-up to the 2016 election.

(more…)

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice-Chairman, Mark Warner, a man of exceptionally dubious intelligence, appears on Face the Nation for a pre-scripted interview with CBS’s Margaret Brennan.  The video and transcript are below.

From his position on the SSCI, Senator Warner was one of the key players in the deployment of the Intelligence Community against President Trump’s first term in office, including his background conversations with Chris Steele and his leaking of the Carter Page FISA warrant to promote the Trump-Russia conspiracy claim and stimulate the appointment of a DOJ special counsel.

Within President Trump’s second term in office, Warner’s primary concern is having a Director of National Intelligence (DNI) who doesn’t conform to the goals and objectives of the Fourth Branch of government, the intelligence apparatus.  In reality, DNI Tulsi Gabbard appears to be methodically taking apart the intelligence community weaponization system.  This, when combined with Gabbard’s review of election integrity issues, has triggered the deep concern of Warner, one of the IC’s primary enablers. WATCH:

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to ‘Face the Nation.’ We begin this morning with the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia’s Mark Warner. Good to have you here.

SEN. MARK WARNER: Thank you, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to talk about elections and security. Back on January 28, the FBI went to Fulton County, Georgia and seized ballots and 2020 voting records linked to the presidential election. The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, then was spotted outside the elections office, and she argued that her presence there had been personally requested by the president of the United States, and she had broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate and analyze intelligence related to election security. What would justify her involvement? Is there any foreign nexus that you have been informed of?

(more…)