CBS’s Margaret Brennan is desperate to secure her role as an established leader of the media resistance; in part, due to her peers losing their jobs, positions and relevance in the aftermath of President Trump’s reelection and the collapse of the business model for multiple media outlets.

Vice President JD Vance is interviewed by Brennan in part due to her intent going in.  Vance was very well prepared in substance and structure to confront the insufferable media narrative represented in the tone, content and construct of Brennan’s activist and contrarian position.

The majority of Americans hate the media; Margaret Brennan showcases why.  However, the interview (or transcript – below) is well worth reviewing, because JD Vance took her narrative talking points, wound them into a tight intellectual cloth and slapped her across the face for almost 20 solid minutes. WATCH: 

The part about Tulsi Gabbard is really good.

…”She recognizes the bureaucrats have gotten out of control, and we need somebody there who’s going to rein them in and return those services to their core mission of identifying information that’s going to keep us safe.“

Not identifying or outlining “action.” Not “actionable priorities.” Not articulating targeted “stakeholder” interests. Not creating action. Simply “identifying information“… Yes. Yes. Yes. Let the executive, the commander in chief, determine outcome. Just provide clear, raw, factual, intelligence information. Full stop. Core mission. Nothing more. He knows.

[TRANSCRIPT] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Mr. Vice President, if you’re ready, we’ll dive right in.

VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: Ready to go.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, both defense secretaries from President Trump’s last term were confirmed overwhelmingly, 90 percent of the vote. Pete Hegseth, it was a tie, bipartisan opposition, smallest margin since the job was created. You had to break that tie. If the nominee can’t unite your party, how is he going to lead three million people?

(more…)

Last week Florida Judge Aileen Cannon outlined her skepticism about the motive and timing of the Biden-Garland DOJ seeking approval to send congressional representatives a volume II report outlining the Jack Smith investigation of President Trump in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.  Today in a 14-page ruling [SEE HERE] Judge Cannon blocked the DOJ effort.

While Jack Smith and the DOJ dropped the case against President Trump, there are still two defendants in the defunct case, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira.  Judge Cannon saw through the political Lawfare motive behind the report and noted there were numerous references to grand jury evidence and other materials that should never reach the public or violate the legal protections still afforded in the case.

WASHINGTON DC – […] In blocking lawmakers from seeing the documents report, Cannon wrote that Congress hadn’t subpoenaed it, requested a confidential review or identified legislation that would be aided by accessing Smith’s findings. Though the department has, in recent years, quickly shared the findings of special counsel investigations with lawmakers, Cannon said doing so in this case would result in a “reasonable likelihood” of “public dissemination.”

Cannon repeatedly slammed Garland and his subordinates, saying their claims about the need to show the report to Congress don’t hold water.

(more…)

Following a well-documented act of journalistic manipulation by CBS where they edited an interview with Kamala Harris to fabricate her response to a question, President Trump sued CBS for $10 billion alleging ‘election interference and demonstrable bias.’

The editorial manipulation by CBS is not debatable, even Trump critics stood jaw-agape at how stunningly obvious the fabrication within the broadcast 60-minutes interview was. CBS didn’t even attempt to defend itself on the matter. {Background Link}

CBS parent company Paramount Global is currently in an acquisition/merger effort with Skydance Media. The FCC is currently reviewing the possibility of the deal. Here’s where it gets interesting.

Skydance Media is run by David Ellison, the son of billionaire Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison. Larry Ellison is the background money behind Twitter, behind Elon Musk and deeply enmeshed with the Tech Bros motives and intents for gains in the new administration. Larry Ellison has a good relationship with Trump supporting his election.

According to the Wall Street Journal, CBS/Paramount are now considering a lawsuit settlement with Donald Trump that would support a more friendly relationship for their merger interests with David Ellison and Skydance Media. It’s a billionaire “big club” analytical decision.

(Via WSJ) – […] It’s become clear to executives at both companies that Trump’s dissatisfaction with CBS News will make the [FCC] review tougher than they anticipated, and that they’ll likely need to offer concessions to win approval, people familiar with the situation said.

Incoming Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr gave Paramount executives a warning to that effect at a reception late last year following the taping of the Kennedy Center honors in Washington, according to people familiar with the exchange, and he has echoed the message in public remarks.

The FCC has the authority over the transaction because it would involve the transfer of broadcast-TV licenses held by local CBS-owned stations.

(more…)

UPDATE: After jury agreed punitive damages were warranted, Zachary Young’s forensic economist, Robert W. Johnson, took the stand to assess CNN’s revenue to determine potential punitive damages and CNN’s ability to pay. Young estimated CNN makes $5 million per day. A 30-day award would be $150 million. Quickly CNN agreed to settle the punitive damage award for an undisclosed amount. The punitive award is secret.

CNN was sued for defamation by plaintiff Navy veteran Zachary Young. Mr. Young sued CNN for defamation after the cable network ran a hit piece against him and his company accusing Young of running a “black-market” rescue operation in the wake of the failed Afghanistan withdrawal. The hit piece ran on Jake Tapper and Jim Acosta’s segments on CNN.

The lawsuit progressed in the trial with the jury ultimately being handed the case for compensatory and punitive damages. Punitive damages were judged as warranted in the case because during the discovery phase of the trial Mr. Young’s lawyers were able to gain emails and internal correspondence within CNN showing intentional malice and willful intent to target and lie about Zachary Young.

Today the jury returned a verdict against CNN, awarding Mr. Young $5,000,000.00 in compensatory damages for his lost reputation, lost security clearance and complete loss of his business and income. The punitive damage award could be substantially higher and is yet determined.

FLORIDA – A Florida jury found that CNN liable of defaming Navy veteran Zachary Young on Friday and awarded him a total of $5 million in addition to finding that punitive damages were warranted against the network.

In his lawsuit against the cable news network, Young sought damages over a November 2021 report in which CNN chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt claimed that bad actors were reportedly running a black market and charging exorbitant fees to Afghans attempting to flee their country after the Taliban retook control of it earlier that year.

(more…)

Sometimes DC is a fishbowl, and they don’t realize the background of what we know, when they are speaking.  Testimony today is a case study of one bubble within that fishbowl.

Former House Impeachment Manager Adam Schiff organized the first impeachment effort against President Donald Trump.  Schiff is now a Senator.  Schiff’s former lead staff in the impeachment investigation was Mary McCord.

Today, during the question session for AG Pam Bondi’s nomination, Adam Schiff asked Mary McCord about whether AG Bondi should recuse herself from investigating Adam Schiff and Mary McCord. It’s a little funny if you understand the background.

I prompted the video to the part at 01:36:14 when Schiff asks McCord, and Mrs. McCord responds with “yes, Pam Bondi should recuse.” WATCH:

Mary McCord says Pam Bondi must recuse herself from any investigative outcome related to the first impeachment effort. Who was the lead staff working for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on the first impeachment effort? Mary McCord.

Now, triggering that first impeachment effort… Who worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to change the CIA whistleblower regulations permitting an anonymous complaint? Yep, that would be the same Mary McCord.

In essence, the woman who organized, structured, led and coordinated the first impeachment effort, says Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating the organization, structure, leadership and coordination of the first impeachment effort.

You just cannot make this stuff up.

(more…)

I am very interested in this, in part due to what Suchir Balaji was working on, and in part due to what many people are now starting to recognize as the most valuable asset in the world of AI creation, MASS DATA COLLECTION.

Tucker Carlson sits down with Poornima Ramarao, the mother of Suchir Balaji, who was an AI engineer working with Sam Altman at OpenAI, and quite likely murdered for his concern about how the mass data was being captured.

The effectiveness of the AI construct is dependent on large scale mass data collection to frame the underlying information network the AI can review. The larger the data capture, the more accurate, effective and valuable the AI outcome is. More inputs equal more reviewable data, equal a more comprehensive outcome; that’s the value. Suchir Balaji became concerned that OpenAI was capturing “copyrighted” material as part of the input data flow. Suchir Balaji soon died under mysterious circumstances. [¹I’ll explain my concern after the video]

Chapters:
0:00 Suchir Balaji’s Career and Alleged Suicide
9:48 The Threat Balaji Posed to OpenAI
13:03 Was This Really a Suicide?
21:59 Evidence of Foul Play
35:27 The Authorities Response
38:47 Was Sam Altman Involved in the Death of Balaji?
46:55 Will Donald Trump Investigate Balaji’s Death?
48:57 AI Safety and Sam Altman’s Firing
55:01 Tucker Demands Action From Congressman Ro Khanna
59:23 Why Hasn’t Any Network Covered This Story?
1:01:00 More Whistleblowers Are Being Killed

(more…)

Despite my reservations about Mike Waltz, this is the best approach.

During an interview with Breitbart News, incoming National Security Advisor Mike Waltz says the entire National Security Council is going to be removed from position and new staff assigned to the NSC. Every member is expected by the Trump administration to willingly resign at 12:01pm on inauguration day.

This is very much needed because the NSC is a petri dish for political manipulation of intelligence and policy depending on the ideological alignment with the NSC member. We have talked about this issue at length. The various silos of the DC intelligence and policy institutions send and embed ideologues in the NSC to represent their interests. The only way to deal with it correctly is to remove all of them and vet their replacements.

BREITBART NEWS – […] The way the NSC works is the National Security Advisor oversees a team of political appointees from the president who oversee a wide range of what are called “detailees”—people who work at the various agencies and departments across the federal government who are assigned, or detailed, to work at the White House for a period of time on the NSC in a portfolio in which they demonstrate expertise.

These career intelligence officials come from places as wide-ranging as the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Pentagon, and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and report up to the political appointees atop each major portfolio in the NSC.

The NSC has various issue-specific portfolios like counterterrorism and cyber policy as well as regional portfolios focused on things like the western hemisphere or the Middle East or Europe or Asia. The detailees then help coordinate back to the various agencies and departments so the whole federal government executes on the decisions that the president makes.

… “[T]he folks that we’re bringing in are 100 percent aligned with the president’s agenda. Hell, the entire world seems to be aligned with his agenda if you just look at the outreach from world leaders and everybody who wants to come to Mar-a-Lago. So, there’s a little bit of a difference in that everybody was reflexively just against him [the first time] just for the sake of it and the Trump Derangement Syndrome was out of control in 2017.

(more…)

Oh boy, if you have an in tune spidey sense you will likely see the necessarily angled presentation by GBNews Pundit Neil Oliver, as he discusses the ‘rape gangs’ which have been operating in the U.K for decades.

After putting the context in its correct, horrific and evil place, Mr. Oliver asks the right question, repeatedly, “why now?” Why is this conversation taking place at this specific moment?

Neil knows that when attention is being focused on such a capacity that it makes those who do not want to pay attention, pay attention; it is at that moment when we need to stand back and look around.  Whose interests are being served within the “now” question.

Elon Musk could have focused attention on the 500,000 missing, presumed exploited, children in the USA; or he could have drawn attention to the scale and scope of North American human trafficking that dwarfs, only in scale – not depravity, the British rape gangs. However, those American domestic horrors are not the attention-grabbing focus of Musk, why not?  Why the ‘look over here’ aspect to the attention.  WATCH:

.

Personally, I always find Oliver’s big picture questions and discussions to be very pertinent.  In the subtext to his narration, Oliver alludes to something even more problematic from the world of politics.  Something so much more consequential inside the question.

The “why now” is almost certainly because those who want the distraction, needs a story of such consequence (‘child rape gang’) in order to provide cover for the issue advancing, but not being discussed.  (1) The total takeover of liberty by an elite group under the guise of digital identity; (2) Artificial Intelligence driven control and surveillance facilitated by the tech industrialists; and (3) the need for war against Iran.

Who stands behind all three points noted?  [SEE HERE]

(more…)

President Trump’s lawyers were allowed to view a preliminary draft of Jack Smith’s report from the documents case in Florida, under strict rules. After a review, the lawyers wrote to the DOJ demanding the political lawfare report not be released [PDF HERE].

Obviously, the report is a political hit job intended to target the transition process.

Because there are still two codefendants in the case, Judge Aileen Cannon has issued an injunction blocking the release of the report until after an appellate court can hear arguments.

FLORIDA – […] Cannon’s order, issued at the request of two Trump allies who were co-defendants in the classified documents case, bars the Justice Department from releasing the report or any portion of it until three days after a federal appeals court rules on the issue.

The order bars Garland, the Justice Department, Smith and “all of their officers, agents, and employees, and all persons acting in active concert or participation with such individuals” from “releasing, sharing, or transmitting the Final Report or any drafts of such Report outside the Department of Justice.”

Cannon’s order does not apply to Trump or his co-defendants, even though Smith contends they inappropriately revealed aspects of the report — which they have reviewed in recent days — in a Monday court filing. In that filing, Trump revealed Smith described him as “engaged in an unprecedented criminal effort,” as “the head of the criminal conspiracies” and said he harbored a “criminal design.” (read more)

(more…)

Recently there has been a lot of media coverage about the meetings between Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Elon Musk. Musk has used his Twitter (X) account to promote the image of PM Meloni as a strong leader for her nation. Now this….

(REUTERS) – Italy is in advanced talks with Elon Musk’s SpaceX over a 1.5 billion euro ($1.55 billion) deal for the company to provide secure telecommunications to the government, Bloomberg News reported on Sunday.

Discussions are ongoing and a final agreement on the five-year contract has not been reached, but the project has already been approved by Italy’s Intelligence Services and Defence Ministry, the report said, citing unnamed sources.

(more…)