After writing the lengthy outline about the problem faced by Joseph diGenova, a Reagan-era former U.S. attorney and longtime Trump ally who served as counselor to Attorney General Todd Blanche and exited over strategic differences {GO DEEP}, several people provided feedback, generally expressing understanding and agreement.

A few asked for suggestions.

Having looked at the challenges from every direction, and having a deep understanding of the complications within any prosecutorial effort on this highly complex ‘conspiracy’ case, I am going to outline my best advice.

This is how you arrange the case.

In any successful endeavor like this, you need the hook.  You need a central point of focus that brings the entire operation into a clearer view.  Stories like this are not told in a linear fashion; you need a central point of focus and then you build out the storyline from there.

So, what it that inflection?  What is that moment that establishes the point from which everything else falls into place?

First, look at the requirements.  The central event needs to encompass the foundational unlawful activity.  The event needs to be clearly unlawful in nature and highlight the mindset that existed within each of the participants.  The evidence must have a clear, distinct and actionable set of facts that can be directly proven beyond doubt.

The event needs to have been previously investigated, so that time is not wasted repeating a lengthy and exhaustive investigation around the fact pattern.  The event needs a specific set of witnesses, who cannot escape being truthful about the preexisting irrefutable facts. And the event needs to highlight a conspiracy by every participant who cannot deflect their participation by claiming they were unaware of the intent of every action within the process.

Those are the predicate requirements that establish the value of the central point of focus.  This is what makes a grand jury or criminal case jury have a consistent reference point.  If this fact pattern is demonstrably true, then that action or outcome is incontrovertibly self-evident.

(more…)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney left the United Nations General Assembly and went directly to the New York Times for a pre-scheduled interview with fellow leftist travelers intent on influencing the U.S midterm election.

Carney having previously appointed Clinton/Obama Democratic operative Maia Johnson as his Chief Operating Officer within his office, obviously had one agenda in mind as he strolled into the Times office for his pre-planned operation.

Within the hour-long conversation, the Canadian Prime Minister had several key points of emphasis in his objective. The top-line hook to draw in the audience was his first statement about having prepared for military combat operations against the United States.  [ARTICLE HERE] Key points below:

(1) Carney developed contingency plans to use military combat operations against the United States.  Yes, it is transparently obvious this is a political statement.  His mentioning of this is meant to create the traditional leftist victimhood position used in all psychological operations.  Carney follows this outlandish statement by saying these military plans are no longer needed because he now feels he has “a good relationship” with President Trump.

[…] “Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada said that he had prepared over the past year for the “extreme tail risk” that President Trump might order military action against Canada but disclosed that the two men have spoken “frequently,” even since trade talks collapsed last month, describing a tense, evolving relationship.

Mr. Carney suggested that he had carefully examined the possibility of U.S.-led military action, but declined to discuss in detail what that involved. “I think you have a responsibility in these roles to look at extreme tail risk,” said Mr. Carney, a former central banker for Britain and Canada. … “That’s just risk management. That’s not a base case, but it would be irresponsible not to” prepare.”

(2) Carney outlines how he intends to build a closer economic relationship with China as a hedge against Canadian dependency on the United States.  Given the statements made by Carney in Beijing, this does not come as a surprise; however, it is the expressed open intent to further attach Canada to China that should raise eyebrows.

(more…)

I know these are two people that we generally don’t care to know much about. However, given the 15-year sentence handed down upon Harvey Weinstein today, an ancillary story deserves a slight mention.

This story makes sense, because back in 2025 Candace Owens suddenly became an advocate for Weinstein.  According to the New York Post, there was an apparent financial arrangement:

NYP – […] Prosecutors alleged during the hearing that they had recordings of Weinstein offering a podcaster $1.75 million in a jailhouse phone call to release videos to help his defense by “contaminating the jury pool and reaching the seated jurors before and after the trials.”

Weinstein engaged in a “scheme to disrupt the trial and instill fear in his victims,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Nicole Blumberg alleged.

Blumberg did not identify the podcaster, but Candace Owens released a podcast series in 2025 called “Harvey Speaks,” which featured videos of Weinstein at the notorious city lockup. She didn’t return requests for comment Wednesday. (more)

(more…)

Speaking to a forum hosted by the Economist in New York, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright explained that banning the export of diesel fuel will do nothing to impact the price of diesel fuel and would, eventually, raise the price.

The reasoning is simple.

“The blunt tool ​of banning diesel exports definitely doesn’t work,” Wright said. “If you can’t ⁠export the diesel that comes out of our refineries, you run out of places to store it, and you have to reduce US refining, which would ​put upward pressure on gasoline prices and jet fuel prices,” Wright said.

The part that Wright didn’t say is the component of price that is entirely detached from supply/demand.  The pump price is determined by market speculators, commodity traders and multinational financial interests.  That “market price” has nothing to do with the amount of diesel in the inventory.

Restricting exports, a process that ends with restricting production, only gives the speculators and traders a justification to project higher prices.   The USA ends up swimming in diesel fuel as the pump price climbs to $15/gal.

If you want to end the disconnection of supply to price, you have to do what Russia does. Sell outside the “market price” at the production cost + profit margin.

In the “west” it’s a rigged game; but be careful. The DSA crowd wants to change the game’s outcome by changing the referees who can then ban/control the players.

Trump’s MAGAnomic approach changes the rulebook of the game completely and is more in line with Putin (BRICS).

George Carlin previously explained it.

(more…)

European defense industries have been expanding the production of missiles and drones for use in Ukraine. For years, Moscow has watched and seemingly tolerated the use of British, German and Polish military warehouses to manufacture drones and weapons which are then used to target Russia and kill Russian civilians.

It is these targets which Europe has placed on high alert, while simultaneously mixing in false flag alerts and events to scare the European population and rally them for increased spending and expanded conflict.  However, a large part of the European citizenry can see the EU operations clearly (see recent German examples).

Against this backdrop, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers the following remarks (transcript):

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, colleagues,

Today, we will talk about the new draft State Armament Programme and the defence industry development programme. They will become the backbone for designing and serial production of modern weapons systems and hardware for our army and other defence and law enforcement agencies for them to be ready for a rapid and effective response to potential external threats.

As you know, such threats are not abating. NATO is “swelling” and expanding and has now extended its reach to other regions of the world. Certain European leaders are openly declaring that they are preparing for war with Russia. In my view, they are merely trying to salvage their plummeting approval ratings by concealing the failures of their economic and social policies. This approach is clearly ineffective – it does not produce results.

Instead of listening to their citizens – who have made it abundantly clear through elections that they do not want war with Russia – these leaders continue to escalate tensions. They are exploiting the situation in Ukraine to exacerbate the crisis, using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder.

(more…)

**Bumped By Request**

I have written, deleted, remained quiet and also absorbed frustration likely similar to many of you.  Now, perhaps, it is worth presenting the brutal truth of the matter; or, as was said in my family, it’s time to call the baby ugly.

Since the resignation of Joe diGenova as counsel to U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche there have been many opinions shared. diGenova himself has given statements to some media outlets {NBC, non-paywall}. Other outlets have encapsulated with their customary spin {Citation}, and diGenova has also talked to others we might consider closer allied to a presentation of truth {source}.

As with all matters of significance, there are points missed, context missing, structural understandings that go beyond quick articles or soundbites. This is one of those examples.  It’s highly likely the White House and Main Justice had a strong opinion about the pace of the South Florida effort and the lack of substantive action; I mean, aren’t we all?  However, the root of the issue is one I am very familiar with, and with that in mind here’s the part that very few really understand.

If I had to give you the cliff notes version it would sound like this:  Yes, the slowness is the problem, but the context is not entirely accurate. One of diGenova (and anyone else’s) problems, is that they don’t know the background material well enough.  I have personally encountered this so much I no longer get frustrated; it just is what it is. 

The investigators, prosecutors, inquisitors et al, spend too much time trying to figure out the storyline, and it is the storyline that is critical.  Because, well, in brutal honesty, they don’t know it. They know it in a cursory fashion, at a high level; at a level of political talking points, media hits, clickbait headline discussion; but unfortunately, that’s not good enough for this case.

A granular level working knowledge of the specifics of Spygate and Russiagate are needed. That level of learning, understanding takes up so much time that it becomes almost impossible for them to act decisively and quickly. It is the complexity of the matter that becomes a self-fulfilling defense. Joseph diGenova was/is no exception. This is the central problem with all of these guys; they just don’t know the material well enough.

I’m not making excuses, I’m stating facts.  Facts that are based upon my personal experience after almost a decade deep inside this issue.

That’s the cliff notes.  If you want the full understanding, keep reading.

(more…)

That’s ultimately the question at the heart of the matter.  What will come first, the AI false flag event that will trigger support for government regulation that includes liability protection; or the lawsuits against the AI developers for stealing intellectual property?

How you place your bet will likely determine your investment decision.

On one hand you have the AI frontier groups, developers who have stolen corporate secrets, extracted proprietary intellectual property, engaged in widespread copyright violations and built their AI models with mass unauthorized data collection.  On the other hand, you have massive corporations, individuals and groups who have seen their intellectual property rights infringed by data harvesting to run the models.

The AI developers are requesting “regulation” which includes liability protection for outcomes as a result of users running their models.  The investors into those AI developers also want regulation and liability immunity to protect their investments. This is the group now positioning for government regulation and selling the voices who control that decision (politicians) based on a pitch that includes government control over AI information.  This is the group that will trigger the false flag to generate public support for AI safety.

The ordinary individuals & businesses who have seen their intellectual property stolen by the AI groups, the individuals who have watched their copyright protections violated, the corporations who benefit from increased AI efficiency but also see the downside from publicly exposed trade secrets now being widely available, would be the plaintiff group in a series of predictable lawsuits against the AI developers.

This is the core of the matter.  Control/Immunity or Risk/Lawsuits.  Mike Steger outlines the last two weeks:

.

Two years ago, I said we would reach an inflection point where the interests of Silicon Valley would conflict with the interests of MAGA.  We are on the cusp of that moment.  Will the Silicon Valley/Leftist-Govt win through regulatory control under the guise of ‘trust and safety’.  Or will the larger population see through the scheme and align with liberty, freedom and the free-market approach.

Place your bets.

(more…)

Readers here have significant knowledge of how the overall western intelligence apparatus works to control the activity of their respective governments. Factually, the intelligence apparatus never really changes with each election within each of the respective nations that makes up the “Five Eyes” assembly.

The U.K, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the United States make up the intelligence control group.  Together with the U.K., four of the five eyes are British Commonwealth nations, so it doesn’t seem odd to see the intelligence assembly follow the geopolitical shift underway.

Great Britain has previously outlined how despite their Brexit the institutional intelligence remained connected to the European Union.  With Canada now taking on “Associate Member” status within the EU, Carney is just bringing them into alignment.  Now, reports are surfacing that Australia and New Zealand are also open to remaining attached to their British cousins.

(AUSTRALIA) – The Albanese government is open to considering associate member status with the European Union despite threats issued by US President Donald Trump.

EU Parliament President Roberta Metsola put the idea on the table following an address by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney where he welcomed the possibility of becoming an “associate member” of the Union.

Ms Metsola said Australia and New Zealand were among the countries “with which we want to deepen our relationship”. Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Matt Thistlethwaite told News24 the government would “consider” the proposal. (read more)

(more…)

As the story is told, a 40-year-old British intelligence officer named Major Paul Wilks was killed in an “automobile accident” while traveling in Ukraine. The British media frame the incident as a car crash “away from the front lines” of the conflict.

One has to wonder how many British intelligence military officers are just innocuously traveling around Ukraine.  Who knows, maybe it’s just a great place for a holiday. However, common sense would seem to indicate that Major Wilks was probably not on vacation.

Sky News – […] Remembered as a “man of great intellect”, Major Wilks was deployed on multiple tours, including to Afghanistan, and was recognised with two Operational Service Medals. And he was awarded the Long Service and Good Conduct Medal in May.

He was commissioned from Sandhurst in 2012 and joined the Intelligence Corps, where he remained throughout his career. (source)

In related news:

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned on Thursday that Russia is planning hybrid strikes with drones or rockets on European countries supporting Ukraine, among them Poland.

Russia will pretend the attacks are “accidental” in order to “paralyze or at least weaken the motivation of NATO countries” to rush to the defense of the member state coming under attack, Tusk said in a speech to the Polish parliament.

(more…)

Palantir CEO Alex Karp is a little quirky but, on this issue, I tend to agree with him.

According to Karp in the interview below the request by OpenAI and Anthropic AI labs for government regulation is related to a legal issue within their business model.  Right now, massive multinational corporations are working with AI groups under contract. As part of those contracts the leaders of the corporations are discovering their individual business plans, what they call their intellectual property (IP) has been uploaded into the dataset of the AI models themselves.

These corporations have spent billions of dollars on their detailed business plans, marketing plans, logistics and revenue systems that are now part of the AI dataset.  These CEOs are not happy and talking about lawsuits against the AI developers for stealing their corporate intellectual property.  However, at the same time the CEOs are furious at the loss of proprietary information, they are simultaneously bound to the AI developers for forward revenue.  This is creating a problem.

Example: By some analyst’s estimations, Amazon’s forward revenue projection is approximately 51% dependent on further technological capability through the use of AI.  However, Jeff Bezos likely does not appreciate his business model, which includes a massive dataset that he makes money from, being taken and uploaded to the AI database.  Bezos could sue Anthropic for ip theft.

All of the AI labs are exposed to this litigation if it was to unfold.  Additionally, all of the investors into the AI frontier labs would be at risk if the AI developer were sued by these corporations.  Both the AI developers and their investors would/are demanding protection from these lawsuits.

Here’s where it gets complicated.

(more…)