The timing of stuff and the context of the historic reference points matter when looking at any story involving the DOJ.  Failing to understand the background context leads to mistaken impressions, false assumptions, corrupt hidden actors getting away with prior misconduct and generally flawed analysis.  That is the accurate takeaway from a story that seems to have gained attention amid the professionally republican class of punditry.

Here at CTH we have dropped the pretending, focus on the evidence and call the baby ugly when warranted.

Today’s outrage du jour surrounds Kash Patel sharing documents with John Solomon about a subpoena dated November 20, 2017, targeting investigative staff from the House Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).  [Article Here] Dates matter. Redactions matter.

[Document Source]

Who redacted this document?…  Kash Patel?  John Solomon? or the DOJ?  It matters.

In November of 2017, everything related to the Trump-Russia operation was being handled at the Dept of Justice by lead DOJ Special Counsel official Andrew Weissmann under the auspices of what is commonly called the Mueller probe or ‘Mueller investigation‘.  On November 20, 2017, the main focus of Weissmann was the guilty plea of Michael Flynn which was at its apex and was later signed November 30, 2017.

The public battle on Capitol Hill November 2017, was between HPSCI and Main Justice.  Nunes -vs- Schiff -vs- FBI -vs- Main Justice -vs- White House -vs- Special Counsel.  Each entity competing for the public and political narrative.

In his later (June 2020) Senate testimony, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein testified that Weissmann/Mueller were in charge of everything at Main Justice and he was used as a go-between liaison between congress, the White House and the DOJ.  Rosenstein gave Weissmann/Mueller full autonomy, full authority, and never once questioned a request from them.  Put simply, Rosenstein said Mueller and Weissmann called every shot in the DOJ that had anything even remotely associated with Trump-Russia, which was essentially everything at Main Justice for two years.

(more…)

Tucker Carlson and Tulsi Gabbard had an interesting discussion on her podcast today [LINK] which included Carlson retelling the story of the NSA conducting surveillance on him during a prior attempt to gain an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

After recounting the NSA story, Tucker then went on to outline a conversation with representative Mike McCaul after the Texas republican and incoming Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee described Carlson as an agent of Russia.  When Carlson got into an argument with McCaul over the accusation, McCaul went on to tell Carlson his intelligence community briefers were the ones who provided the information.

Overall, if you have an understanding of our prior CTH outline of The Fourth Branch of Government, this interview fits into that aspect perfectly.  Additionally, expand your perspective as you listen to Carlson outline the details; remind yourself of the stakes within the domestic surveillance network from their perspective; then overlay the current headlines surrounding Twitter.  Tucker Carlson is coming darn close to the center of the target.  WATCH (prompted to 40:05):

.

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) has a vested interest in keeping the public unaware of the details behind the U.S. surveillance state.  All of the institutions that were created after 9/11/01, specifically including the Dept of Homeland Security, the DOJ National Security Division and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), would go to extreme lengths -under the auspices of national security- to maintain the framework of the surveillance state they represent.

Penetrating this matrix is almost impossible as you are seeing from the Executive Branch (DOJ) and Judicial Branch (federal courts), as the institutions have an umbrella of protection by shouting for a ‘national security’ shield.   There are trillions at stake, and the system of utilizing social media to conduct internal domestic surveillance is part of the process.

Barack Obama specifically enveloped the social media sphere by recruiting Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google, Microsoft and Apple into the DHS system.  Essentially what formed as an outcome of the mutually beneficial agreements was a Big Tech oligarchy (a monopoly of sorts).   The construct was intentional, because within an oligarchical system no rogue oligarch will be permitted to put the group at risk.

(more…)

Arguably, Glenn Greenwald has been the most critical voice about the rise of the U.S. surveillance state and generational shift of the U.S. intelligence apparatus to conduct domestic surveillance on American citizens.  There’s a reason Greenwald lives in Brazil where no extradition treaties with the U.S. government exist.

Curiously, when it came time to release information about DHS connections to Twitter, Glenn Greenwald was not considered as an acceptable outlet for the information.  Instead, Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss were selected by Elon Musk to represent his sunlight and transparency interests.  However, in this brief video Greenwald gets to interview Taibbi about his findings. {Direct Rumble Link}

Interested viewers will note Taibbi’s #1 takeaway from his review of the Twitter Files data is that evidence of the DHS connection to Twitter exists.  Taibbi speaks of the “instructions” coming into Twitter from U.S. government officials.  Yet, curiously missing from the documented evidence provided by Taibbi was anything showing a paper trail of this instruction pathway he is describing.  WATCH:

.

Greenwald is smart, strategically smart; Greenwald also knows why he was not selected to review the files.  Glenn artfully guides Taibbi to discuss elements of the story that perhaps Taibbi himself doesn’t recognize are being shaped for his reporting.   Note: “we don’t know how the ‘ask’ works yet.”

(more…)

Former House Intelligence Committee lead investigator Kash Patel appeared on Steve Bannon’s podcast to discuss the Twitter Files. {Direct Rumble Link} Within the interview Mr. Patel asks the obvious question: Why are we not seeing the document trail where the FBI is making contact with Twitter?

The contacts are noted within the Twitter File release, but the specific methods, people and documents or email requests from the U.S. government into Twitter are not being released. Kash Patel asks Elon Musk to release these documents and asks why are we not seeing them? WATCH:

.

Patel’s point is well taken because insofar as the U.S. government contacts around the 2020 election would be important, the volume of contact and documents surrounding the COVID-19 control issues will be exponentially more intense and larger.

Release the government 2020 election contact information now, and then do the same thing when Twitter releases the substantive files about censorship related to COVID-19 and the vaccines.   Let the American people see who, what and how this DHS-Twitter ‘trusted partnership‘ portal was exploited.

(more…)

I’m not going to write extensively about this because I respect your intellectual ability to see the obvious.  Questions have been raised about why the Twitter File releases appear to have been structured in a fashion to protect government interests.

Well, the new Bari Weiss website that was set up to launch as an exclusive outcome of the Twitter File release, includes a current contributor and former 2020 control officer of the DOJ who would have facilitated the DHS/FBI contact with social media; the stuff that is transparently missing from the Twitter File releases.

[ SOURCE ]

Yes, former AG Bill Barr is a content partner with Twitter File narrative engineer Bari Weiss.  Gee, I wonder how that happens?

Oh look, and what a coincidence… they are both promoting Ron DeSantis.

Wait… Elon Musk is also promoting Ron Desantis… and Mr Musk is simultaneously promoting the Bari Weiss website that promotes Ron DeSantis… and contains Twitter File releases that are conspicuously missing the discussion angle of FBI influence in the 2020 election… Almost as if… wait, nah, that would be conspiracy talk.  Just ordinary coincidences everywhere, for sure.

(more…)

When various doctors and professionals in the healthcare industry were kicked off Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and social media platforms for holding a contrary view of the COVID-19 mitigation efforts, their voices found a way to alternate platforms including TikTok.  At the heart of the government argument about TikTock as a national security threat, you will find this dynamic.

The claims of data insecurity as a reason for government action against TikTok is a false justification.  The reason the U.S. govt is defining TikTok as a national security threat is not because a Chinese firm controls it, the threat is because the U.S. government does not control it.  Thus, DHS involvement in Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Google, Apple, Microsoft and more takes on a more accurate perspective.  TikTok is not under DHS control, therefore TikTok’s ability to transmit information without DHS filter controls is a threat.

Bread and circuses.  In this interview with California Congressman Ro Khanna, Maria Bartiromo notes he was one of the only Democrats in congress who wrote a warning to Twitter about the censorship issue.  However, even then, a key sentence in the letter from Khanna to Yoel Roth is ignored.  He’s no hero. WATCH:

The DHS Portal – […] discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February. (link)

It’s not just the First amendment being compromised by this collaboration, it’s also the Fourth Amendment against unwarranted searches of private papers (communication).

(more…)

Twitter File Release #3 come from Matt Taibbi – SEE HERE – and includes a review of some internal documents and internal communication in the lead up to the 2020 election.

As noted by Taibbi, “as the election approached, senior executives – perhaps under pressure from federal agencies, with whom they met more as time progressed – increasingly struggled with rules and began to speak of “vios” as pretexts to do what they’d likely have done anyway.”

“Vios” is a short-hand term for violations.

Internal Slacks, communication chats within the organization, show Twitter executives discussing various relationships with federal agencies, specifically the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS), various elements of the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI.  Twitter’s main censor Yoel Roth plays a key role in the discussion.  Mr. Roth organized many of the communication chats that surrounded the election.

The slacks (communication chats) contain channels to create sub-sets of topics with smaller groups of internal officers assembled to prioritize the discussion.

The reports being cited by Taibbi are, “based on searches for docs linked to prominent executives, whose names are already public. They include Roth, former trust and policy chief Vijaya Gadde, and recently plank-walked Deputy General Counsel (and former top FBI lawyer) Jim Baker.” … “On October 8th, 2020, executives opened a channel called “us2020_xfn_enforcement.” Through J6, this would be home for discussions about election-related removals, especially ones that involved “high-profile” accounts (often called “VITs” or “Very Important Tweeters”).”

There was internal discussion about how they should describe their contact with federal agencies who were involved in the process of filtering the public discussion.  Essentially, what were these Twitter executives going to say about how they are coordinating with DHS, FBI and ODNI?  Policy Director Nick Pickles, eventually led a discussion to label the government contacts in the generalized term “partnerships.”

(more…)

Thesis: Begin with The End in Mind – The U.S. Government control over social media though DHS was going to surface eventually.  The people who constructed the systems knew exposure would eventually come.  Two CENSORSHIP lawsuits, one filed by Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai in 2020 [LINK], and another filed by Missouri Attorney General in May 2022 [STATE OF MISSOURI ET AL VERSUS JOSEPH R BIDEN JR ET AL], were going to push the relationship between DHS and social media into the public consciousness; mitigation efforts would be needed.

The timing of the Twitter purchase by Elon Musk, initially triggered via major stock purchase in April 2022, must be considered with the overlay of these two sunlight lawsuits.  Regardless of who owned Twitter, the nature of DHS controlling a backdoor portal into the content of social media was going to surface – as it has been unfolding from the two referenced censorship lawsuits.

The Twitter Files represent a gateway of discovery into how government assisted creating “Oligarchical Systems.” Surveillance systems delivering mutual benefits called public-private partnerships were formed.  Readers here are months ahead of where the arc of this story is destined.  However, oligarchical beneficiaries will always defend the system against rogue oligarchs who become a threat.

There are major inconsistencies in the public narrative as it swirls around Elon Musk and Twitter.

How could a businessman, an entrepreneur like Elon Musk, spend $44 billion, that’s BILLION, on an enterprise without knowing the basic outline of how that enterprise was operating.  In a world of financial due diligence, on a scale of this size, the contradictions do not make sense.

Yet if we are to take Elon Musk at his word, he had no idea that DHS operated a portal into the network. He also had no idea about James Baker working as Twitter legal counsel and carrying such a massive conflict of interest.  Additionally, via his announcement last night, Musk had no idea that Perkins Coie was legally representing Twitter.

How does an owner/operator take ownership of an organization and not know these senior executive issues?  Reconcile these questions, and we begin to reconcile a background of activity that Mr. Musk may not know about.  The alternative explanation is much more nefarious and involves Musk as a willing participant.

Regardless, before going further I cannot emphasize this point enough.   We cannot fight our way through these puzzling issues until we all approach the big questions from the same baseline, the root of what created the system.

(more…)

The latest release of information behind the controversial “Twitter Files”, comes from Bari Weiss complete with the strategic promotion of a new website [The Free Press] launching via the booster provided by their access to the internal Twitter documents.

Curiously intelligent people will note the Weiss website is structured to support the 2024 presidential bid of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who is, not coincidentally, riding atop a multi-staged booster guided by Elon Musk and fueled by Wall Street billionaires.

For the moment, just note and I digress – but please do not miss the connections.

As noted by the former New York Times journalist, Ms. Weiss states, “the [website] authors have broad and expanding access to Twitter’s files. The only condition we agreed to was that the material would first be published on Twitter.”  You can read the entire Twitter Thread Here, and with that, we look at what the current narrative consists of.

Overall, the story as released walks through the process that Twitter used to control users and as a consequence control the flow of information on the platform.  Accounts were subject to restrictions, manipulations and other inorganic engagement controls depending on the ideology of the content being provided.

Twitter had teams set up to attach limiting flags within the Twitter platform that would essentially hide content the platform control officers did not want to see reaching a wider audience. As noted by Twitter employees Weiss writes, “we control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.”

What I find interesting is in segment/tweet #12 where Ms. Weiss reveals the existence of the top tier of Twitter control officers.  “The group that decided whether to limit the reach of certain users was the Strategic Response Team – Global Escalation Team, or SRT-GET. It often handled up to 200 “cases” a day.”

I find it curious that Ms Bari Weiss mentioned several names in her expose’ yet failed to mention the name or curriculum vitae of the head for the Strategic Response Team, a fellow named Jeff Carlton.

(more…)

Yesterday, we speculated publicly the first set of “Twitter Files” released was heavily pre-filtered by internal stakeholders connected to DHS who hold a vested interest in controlling any evidence of Twitter’s former political activity.

Knowing there are multiple executives remaining within the company who previously aligned with the intents of government, specifically DHS officials, to control the platform, the prediction was not a stretch. Indeed, it just made common sense.

Former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker, a man of notoriously corrupt disposition, was one of those former government officials who started working for Twitter as general counsel.  James Baker (pictured below left) working as a government mechanism for filtration of damaging information was not a leap. Again, just common sense.

Today, as an outcome of internal discoveries that indeed Jim Baker did prefilter internal documents in order to mitigate sunlight and exposure [outline here], Twitter CEO Elon Musk fired legal counsel James Baker.

Mr Musk said through his Twitter account, “In light of concerns about Baker’s possible role in suppression of information important to the public dialogue, he was exited from Twitter today.”  Mr. Musk followed up a question about James Baker being asked to explain himself by saying, “His explanation was …unconvincing.”

Matt Taibbi provides the context:

Taibbi – On Friday, the first installment of the Twitter files was published here. We expected to publish more over the weekend. Many wondered why there was a delay.

We can now tell you part of the reason why. On Tuesday, Twitter Deputy General Counsel (and former FBI General Counsel) Jim Baker was fired. Among the reasons? Vetting the first batch of “Twitter Files” – without knowledge of new management.

(more…)