Boy, is there ever a loaded dump truck of potential discussion points in this subject area.

First, Google via YouTube is reversing its position and allowing content that challenges the results of the 2020 election.

[Per Axios] “In a reversal of its election integrity policy, YouTube will leave up content that says fraud, errors or glitches occurred in the 2020 presidential election and other U.S. elections, the company confirmed to Axios Friday.”

After removing “tens of thousands of videos” (their admission) previously containing content that challenged the 2020 election results, suddenly that conversation is permitted.

“Two years, tens of thousands of video removals, and one election cycle later, we recognized it was time to reevaluate the effects of this policy in today’s changed landscape,” YouTube said in a statement.

So, according to the script, the “threat to democracy” has suddenly diminished as the 2024 election cycle starts to become a topic of increased discussion? Yeah, right.

I read this Google change two ways: (1) This reads like a “mission accomplished and we don’t need this anymore” kind of policy switch; and (2) There’s that probability of Donald Trump winning the 2024 election and they need to be able to question election results again.

(more…)

Let us be clear and non-pretending.  The RNC, a private corporation run by U.S. multinational corporations, billionaires and donors who control it, is a private club – who construct the rules of affiliation according to the interests and demands of the benefactors.

The RNC club, the right side of the UniParty corporate structure, has zero consideration or interest in the opinion of voters forced to register in their affiliation.

The people who fund the RNC have established the rules for participation in the club debate.  The first club debate is scheduled for August 23, 2023, on Fox News with the approved process through the prism of Rupert Murdoch and Paul Ryan.  Those club rules include:

♦ A qualifying candidate must poll support at least 1% in three national polls, OR 1% in two national polls and 1% in one early state poll from two separate “carve out” states (Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina) as conducted by polling recognized and approved by the RNC club. 

This rule will elevate all the purposeful idiot club members the voters do not like onto the stage.  After all, what good is a plan to split the vote if the club cannot give the optics needed for the operation.  In essence, and in fact, in order for Chris Christie and Nikki Haley to attack Trump on behalf of DeSantis, they must be on the stage.

♦ Each candidate must meet this polling requirement no later than 48 hours prior to the first scheduled debate and must originate from polling conducted on or after July 1, 2023.  

(more…)

There is a strong divergence within the May jobs report as released by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) [DATA HERE].  Payrolls increased 339,000 in May from April and previous months were revised up by 93,000. That is good news.  However, the household survey, from which the unemployment rate is derived, showed employment down 310,000 jobs and the unemployment rate increased to 3.7%.

One of the aspects driving higher payroll starts are the number of people taking on additional part-time jobs.  This aspect is noted in a decline for the number of hours in the average workweek. As more PT jobs are added, the number of hours in a workweek declines. As noted in the BLS data, “the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged down by 0.1 hour to 34.3 hours in May.”

There were 161.0 million people working in April.  There are 160.7 million people working in May.

There were 5.7 million people unemployed in April.  There are 6.1 million unemployed people in May.

The unemployment rate increased from 3.4% to 3.7%.

There are 310,000 fewer people working in May than were working in April.  However, payrolls increased by 339,000 over the same timeframe. See graph above for where those jobs were gained.

(more…)

Last night on Sean Hannity television show, House Oversight Chairman James Comer made the first admission that both he and Senator Chuck Grassley had seen the FD-1023 form filled out by an FBI agent based on allegations of Joe Biden taking bribes as outlined by an FBI CHS (Confidential Human Source).  {Backstory HERE}

FBI Director Christopher Wray refused to admit the document existed until Comer and Grassley informed Wray they had already seen it.  However, the FBI is still refusing the release the document to congress. During a Fox News interview today, Senator Chuck Grassley gives his opinion of what is contained within the six-page document {Direct Rumble Link}.  The comments about the FD-1023 happen after the 02:00 mark. WATCH:

.

(more…)

A few people like us predicted that once people realized the 2022 reelection bid of Ron DeSantis was a con, there was a strong probability he would lose support. According to polling taken after his launch, that’s exactly what happened.

There are two different YouGov polls. One that shows opinion of the DeSantis launch [Economist – SEE HERE] and one that shows the results of the head-to-head Trump -v- DeSantis matchup [Yahoo – SEE HERE]. The bottom line is that DeSantis has lost ground with voters AFTER his launch.

WASHINGTON – Ron DeSantis was surely hoping for a bump from his presidential campaign launch last week. But a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows no sign of improvement.

In fact, the survey of 1,520 U.S. adults, which was conducted from May 25-30, suggests that the Florida governor may have actually lost ground against frontrunner and former President Donald Trump since officially entering the race for the 2024 GOP nomination during a glitchy Twitter Spaces event with the platform’s billionaire owner Elon Musk.

Among potential Republican primary voters — registered voters who identify as Republicans or GOP-leaning independents — Trump now leads the full field of seven declared candidates with 53%. That’s up from 48% in early May, before DeSantis threw his hat in the ring. And DeSantis now lags further behind than he did just a few weeks ago; his 25% is down from 28% in early May. (read more)

(more…)

Joe Biden was attending the USAF Academy graduation ceremony today, when he tripped on stage and took a hard fall.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

Twitter CEO Elon Musk has provided some convincing commentary about his willingness to forgo revenue in order to retain “free speech.” However, more recently he has qualified that outlook by saying, “Freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of reach.”  Musk noting Twitter will block, remove, censor, shadow ban, deboost, downrank and stop content from amplifying based on the determination of those in charge of Twitter content.

This controlled “freedom of reach” perspective, which is really shadow-banning in practice, is generally accepted and now admitted.  Against this backdrop, it becomes important to understand the priorities of the platform to understand the guidelines of the platform.  Within this context the financials are key to understanding what elements are included within “approved content.” {GO DEEP}

Twitter is now a private company, therefore understanding the financials of Twitter is a little more challenging than when they were required to post their financial statements publicly.  However, Elon Musk gave an interview with the Babylon Bee yesterday and revealed some of the internal financial challenges. [VIDEO HERE]  I am going to summarize the status of the Twitter financial position according to what Musk himself revealed.

♦ Twitter was initially purchased by Musk and his investors for around $44 billion.  The company now estimates its value around $20 billion.  Musk overpaid.

♦ Musk put roughly $30 billions of his own net worth into the purchase and financed the rest.

♦ Current outstanding debt on the financing for the purchase is around $12.5 billion. Per Musk statement.

♦ Current debt service, interest on the loans (from investors), is roughly $1.5 billion/yr.  $120.5 million per month for debt service.  Per Musk statement.

(more…)

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…)