Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) recently questioned FBI Director Chris Wray about the nature of how the FBI is receiving or retrieving surveillance information on domestic U.S. citizens, through the use of social media and electronic data collection.  {Direct Rumble Link}

At the core of the issue is a system created in the last 14 years where private social media companies and the intelligence apparatus, to include the FBI, have formed partnerships in the larger surveillance network.  The fact that FBI Director Chris Wray cannot and will not answer specific questions about the issues, only exemplifies the nature of the issue as it relates to unconstitutional violations of privacy.

There is ample & overwhelming evidence, much of it open-sourced, highlighting how federal law enforcement and social media companies are working together to assemble, filter and investigate data based on a collaborative agreement.  Legal protections for privacy are being destroyed in this assembly of constructs.  WATCH:

Paul: “Are you purchasing what is said to be anonymous data through the marketplace and then piercing the anonymous nature to attach individual names to that data?“

Wray: “I think it’s a more complicated answer than I could give here.”

(more…)

Okay, first things first.  CTH will not play the pretending game or structure the discussion of the special counsel appointment through the prism of MSM references.  Instead, we will stick to the facts as they are presented, explain the events as they are factually reflected within the actual documents, and avoid the pretending constructs.

DATA Links:  (1) Merrick Garland DOJ Statement on Appointment of Special Counsel ~ (2) pdf of Legal Appointment ~ (3) Statement of Jack Smith upon Appointment ~ (4) Transcript of AG Merrick Garland Public Announcement.

The overarching Lawfare framework has been transparently created by President Obama’s former White House Legal Counsel and current U.S. Asst Attorney General Lisa Monaco.  To wit, earlier this afternoon Joe Biden’s Attorney General, Merrick Garland, announced the appointment of DOJ Attorney Jack Smith as special counsel to investigate two specific areas:

♦ First, to investigate current republican members of congress (House and Senate), former President and current candidate Donald J Trump, former Trump administration officials, former White House staff, and other individuals, groups and organizations for their role in supporting an insurrection on January 6, 2021, against the incoming administration of President-Elect Joe Biden.  In essence, the J6 investigation – with an emphasis on congress – transfers to Special Counsel Jack Smith:

The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021, as well as any matters that arose or might arise directly from this investigation or that are within the scope of [Special Counsel Regulations 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)]. (pdf)

This is an extension of the January 6th Committee special investigation that transfers the committee’s investigative findings, ie phone records, text messages, transcripts, emails, prior testimony and all evidentiary records, into the newly appointed Special Counsel.

However, all prior and current DOJ prosecutions against citizen individuals will remain within the control and direction of Main Justice.  This structure frees up Jack Smith to target the new republican controlled congressional members, their staff, families and/or communication network.   Main Justice keeps focus on the citizen insurrectionists, Jack Smith now appointed to go after the public officials.

J6 Committee staff, committee investigators, FBI agents and DOJ lawyers will now transfer from the committee to the special counsel office. Watch. (More on why later)

(more…)

Go figure.  If you read between the lines of the Washington Post’s current description of the “classified” documents, as noted by anonymous federal officials connected to the investigation, the ‘classified‘ documents in context were personal correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un about the need to chill out on the nuclear stuff.

President Trump considered these types of papers personal mementos, while the administrative state -seeking to weaponize the DOJ/FBI for maximum political damage and narrative engineering- considered them top secret national security documents.

The election is over, so the narrative is no longer needed. Narrative dropped…

(Via WaPo) – Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.

As part of the investigation, federal authorities reviewed the classified documents that were recovered from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home and private club, looking to see if the types of information contained in them pointed to any kind of pattern or similarities, according to these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.

(more…)

This is a great example of two dangerous dynamics. First, the intellectual dishonesty that is needed to believe that Russia would attack Poland. Second, the insufferable immediate response from U.S. and international media stenographers lusting for war, and the danger they represent.

After the media initially proclaimed a “pentagon spokesperson” reported that Russia fired two missiles into Poland, and then ran with that narrative with such ferocity that Polish President Duda requested an article-4 convention in preparation for a NATO war,… 24 hours later the NATO alliance says ‘whoops‘ it wasn’t a Russian missile, it was a Ukraine missile that landed in Poland.

(Politico) NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg chaired an emergency meeting of alliance ambassadors on Wednesday in Brussels to discuss the incident.

After the session, he said information so far suggests the missile that landed in Poland came from Ukrainian air defenses fighting off a massive Russian attack on Tuesday that saw the country pummelled by dozens of missiles that caused blackouts across Ukraine.

“We have no indication that this was the result of a deliberate attack,” he said. “And we have no indication that Russia is preparing offensive military actions against NATO. Our preliminary analysis suggests that the incident was likely caused by a Ukrainian air defense missile fired to defend Ukrainian territory against Russian cruise missile attacks.”

(more…)

During a press conference earlier today, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis was asked about the potential for conflict between him and President Donald Trump as cast against the 2024 election.

I’m not going to inject too much opinion into the answers as presented, because the Florida Governor is remaining coy with his 2024 intention.  While all of the indicators are clearly visible that DeSantis has been participating on the 2024 operation since July this year, it would be against his management team interests for Floridians to see him admitting to an early exit.  WATCH:

.

The management team around DeSantis need him to remain cloistered, while the media and advocacy machinery they have constructed (and continue to finance) does the attacking against MAGA leader Donald Trump.  If the Big Club discussions were to surface publicly, the bloom would quickly fall from the ruse.

Just keep watching, and we will keep pointing out the connections.

(more…)

I’m going to skip noting that Elon Musk Twitter is essentially unchanged, regarding the relationship between Twitter, the Dept of Homeland Security and the disinformation police, as many keep saying Musk Twitter has not had time to reformat.

That said, five days after our post-election review of the difference between ballots and votes, and within minutes of the controversial Arizona governor contest being announced by DHS media outlets, suddenly any discussion about “Ballots -vs- Votes” is considered a risk to democracy. [LINK}

The need for control is a reaction to fear.

Twitter specifically, and Big Tech writ large, has now placed a warning on the CTH article where we draw attention to the general difference between ballots and votes. The timing of the intervention, as related to the content discussed, is transparent. Sunlight is a great disinfectant and must be controlled at all costs.

In one sense this effort to block discussion is irrelevant, the discussion is now taking place; attentions are being paid; the horse is out of the barn; millions are now expanding the discussion and applying Occam’s Razor to the simple reality. This is why information providers and independent researchers must work with urgency and diligence to control their own platforms.

CTH is never going to stop discussing the uncomfortable stuff because Truth Has No Agenda, regardless of our personal feelings or opinions on the matter.

Yes, in this discussion there is a clear difference between two electioneering priorities, one focused on ballot assembly and the other focused on winning votes.  However, in the broader sense this censorship effort to control discussion of these distinctions shows just how far and fast we are collapsing into a totalitarian and Orwellian nightmare.

(more…)

Katie Hobbs, the valley girl uptalker who refused to debate, has been declared the winner of the Arizona Governor race against candidate Kari Lake.

I’m not going to try and impart some great wisdom over this, I am likely more disappointed than most, other than to point out the brutally and painfully obvious.  Any electioneering process that takes six days to determine the winner and permits weeks of ballot collection within the construct, is no longer an election based on votes.

I’m not sure what to call these multi-week ballot collection contests, but they do not resemble any election that I can reference in any other western nation.  Kari Lake was clearly the superior candidate, and Katie Hobbs is genuinely -no snark- a doofus.  However, in this new ballot collection electioneering process, you can make the argument that candidate quality is essentially irrelevant.

Here’s my question.  We know from the ground reporting and flawed election systems that thousands of ballots were moved into adjudication because they could not be tabulated by broken machinery and flawed election technology infrastructure.  Simple question:  Of the ballots that were moved into the “adjudication process”, what percentage of those ballots were for Kari Lake and what percentage were for Katie Hobbs?  Start there.

(more…)

FTX crypto currency exchange CEO Sam Bankman-Fried is a major donor to multiple progressive causes and politicians. This week as FTX starts to collapse, the financial system underneath the exchange looks more like a Ponzi scheme falling apart.

The CEO had been a major donor to regulators on Capitol Hill, and the tentacles of FTX extend to Ukraine where Sam Bankman-Fried was operating to support the Ukraine government with crypto currency collections and donations. The FTX corporation and CEO Sam Bankman-Fried is now under multiple investigations.  Here’s the 90-second recap of the current dynamic. WATCH:

.

(Via Daily Caller) Sam Bankman-Fried, prolific Democratic donor and ex-CEO of now-bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX, funded the campaigns of members of Congress overseeing the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), one of the key bodies tasked with regulating the crypto industry and the subject of Bankman-Fried’s aggressive lobbying.

Bankman-Fried’s FTX is currently under investigation by the CFTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) after Bankman-Fried allegedly moved $10 billion in client assets from his crypto exchange to his trading firm Alameda Research, and a liquidity crisis at his exchange which prompted the company to file for bankruptcy. However, prior to the agency’s probe, Bankman-Fried aggressively courted the CFTC – and funded several key lawmakers charged with overseeing the agency, pouring cash into their campaign coffers. (read more)

(more…)

CNN’s Bob Costa reports about explosive reports from sources who have heard anonymous reports from those who might have some familiarity with reports from others who have a connection to the matter.   Things sound super cereal (source):

Also, Bob Costa 2017:

They are not even trying any more.

(more…)

They have proposed and refined so many of the carbon trading schemes, it becomes difficult to remember which iteration each new formula replaces.  Heck, I’ve lost track of how many of the individual components of the larger plan are already in place.  However, John Kerry has introduced the western elites at COP27 to the latest acceptable proposal surrounding coal fired energy.

Against the backdrop of sped-up Build Back Better urgency, this coal-based carbon trading platform is called the Energy Transition Accelerator (ETA).

When you stay elevated to the larger way the Energy Transition Accelerator works you can clearly see the transferring of wealth from your bank account to the global control mechanism that will eventually determine your energy allotment.  The companies that provide energy are simply the collectors for the fees you will pay to the World Economic Forum income disbursement group.

(Reuters) – […] The scheme, known as the Energy Transition Accelerator (ETA), was launched at the United Nations’ COP27 conference this week by John Kerry, the United States’ climate envoy, in collaboration with the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bezos Earth Fund.

[…] Voluntary carbon markets, in which companies get emissions credits in return for channeling cash to poor countries that cut their carbon output, have often been riddled with fraud and double-counting. Many critics think rich countries should just fork out the cash themselves to close coal plants – or tax fossil fuel companies to get the money. (read more)

There’s the system in a nutshell.  Energy providers must purchase emission credits from the ‘carbon market’ (govt); in the U.S. likely the EPA as they do with RIN credits.  The electricity provider puts the carbon purchase credit fee in your electricity bill.

(more…)