Sunlight is the best disinfectant; this core and essential truism will never be defeated.

People have asked for a summary of the current status of Special Counsel Jack Smith and the background of what is happening within the investigation as it takes place in the shadows of the DC schemes.  So here’s an analysis and review of: (a) the corrupt endeavor that Jack Smith represents; and (b) the problem he will never overcome in his quest to use lawfare tactics against President Donald Trump.

Two points, at the outset of this outline.  First, if you know anyone better acquainted with the granular issues at the core of this investigation than me; or if you know someone who has a documented day-by-day research library of the events discussed as they unfolded; let me know who they are, and I will talk to them.  Second, if you think John Durham is on some quest to provide justice where the landscape is filled with injustice, you need to reevaluate your position, it’s wrong.

To the second point, stop kidding yourself with false doses of hopium.  Special Counsel John Durham exists for the exact same reason the Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann special counsel existed.  The goal of the silo defenses is to protect Washington DC from the disinfecting sunlight you are about to read.  However, in the bigger picture there is nothing these Machiavellian conscripts can do to change the substantive truth.

In the most recent development the New York Times is reporting, “Boris Epshteyn, a top adviser to former President Donald J. Trump, is scheduled to be interviewed on Thursday by prosecutors in the office of the special counsel Jack Smith.” {link} Let me write the remainder of this summary from the perspective that Jack Smith has a big problem; his problem is the truth of events that protects Donald Trump.

In 2016 and 2017 the combined corrupt weight of multiple DC institutions, that includes the intelligence community, DOJ, FBI, Obama White House, legislative leadership, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the political apparatchiks around the Democrat machinery, all colluded to illegally and unconstitutionally spy on the presidential campaign of Donald J Trump.  Their activity culminated in the fraudulent Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy and fake 2016 election Russian interference claims.

Everything created as an outcome of this spying, surveillance and ultimately the Trump-Russia narrative, was built on fraud.  Even the casual observers now admit it was political weaponization of government institutions to illegally target political opposition.  In May of 2017 Robert Mueller was installed to cover up this operation.  The lawfare team put into place by the system operators who were at greatest risk from discovery, was headed by Andrew Weissmann.  Mueller represented the face, but Weissmann was the lead operative constructing the coverup operation.

(more…)

Jason Whitlock appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight to give his thoughts and opinions of the indictment of President Trump. {Direct Rumble Link}

Mr. Whitlock, speaking from Nashville Tennessee, puts the context as a Godless society running amuck, and describes his current status upon hearing the news as “emotional.”
Whitlock then says it’s time to get right with our mindset and prepare to “get it on”… Enough is just enough, “this is bullshit”.  WATCH:

(more…)

Breaking moments ago, the New York Times is reporting that President Trump has been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury, the sealed indictment will be released in the next few days and the surrender of President Trump to law enforcement in New York City is being worked out.

(NEW YORK TIMES) – A Manhattan grand jury voted to indict Donald J. Trump on Thursday for his role in paying hush money to a porn star, according to four people with knowledge of the matter, a historic development that will shake up the 2024 presidential race and forever mark him as the nation’s first former president to face criminal charges.

The felony indictment, filed under seal by the Manhattan district attorney’s office, will likely be announced in the coming days. By then, prosecutors working for the district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, will have asked Mr. Trump to surrender and to face arraignment on charges that remain unknown for now.

[..] Mr. Trump has consistently denied all wrongdoing and attacked Mr. Bragg, a Democrat, accusing him of leading a politically motivated prosecution. He has also denied any affair with the porn star, Stormy Daniels, who had been looking to sell her story of a tryst with Mr. Trump during the campaign.

Here’s what else you need to know:

(more…)

The Ring of Truth – “I am too well accustomed to the taking of evidence not to detect the ring of truth.” 1908, Edith Wharton

Much has been made of the events of January 6, 2021, and with the latest broadcast of CCTV video from inside the Capitol Hill complex, more questions have been raised.

Within the questions: the FBI and government apparatus had advanced knowledge of the scale of the J6 mall assembly yet doing nothing?  Why were the Capitol Hill police never informed of the FBI concerns?  Why didn’t House Speaker Nancy Pelosi secure the Capitol Hill complex, and why did she deny the request by President Trump to call up the national guard for security support?  Why did the FBI have agent provocateurs in the crowd, seemingly stimulating rage within a peaceful crowd to enter the Capitol building?  There have always been these nagging questions around ‘why’?

Long time CTH reader “Regitiger” has spent a great deal of time reviewing the entire process, looking at the granular timeline and then overlaying the bigger picture of the constitutional and parliamentary process itself.  What follows below is a brilliant analysis of the federal government motive to create a J6 crisis that permitted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to trigger an emergency session and avoid the 2020 election certification challenges.

Those congressional floor challenges, known and anticipated well in advance of the morning of January 6, 2021, would have formed a legal and constitutional basis for ‘standing’ in judicial challenges that would have eventually reached the Supreme Court.  The certification during “emergency session” eliminated the problem for Washington DC.

Regitiger explains below, only edited by me for clarity and context:

I think most, not all, but a large number of people, are totally missing what happened; and why this happened on Jan 6th.  I am going to try my best to outline the events that day, blast past the commonly held assumptions and get right down to the core corruption.

I will present this as a series of questions and answers.

(more…)

Journalist Matt Taibbi released another Twitter File review today [#18 Available Here] showcasing how the opinion of government interests was pushed toward content censorship regardless of the truth within it.

File #18 release is a walk through all of government interests from COVID-19, Vaccination Compliance and maintenance of the Trump-Russia narrative.

I strongly suggest everyone to review the citations Taibbi presents from the documents contained within Twitter’s internal communication.  SEE HERE.

One aspect that draws particular interest to those who spent years deconstructing the false Trump-Russia narrative, appears in the section beginning in Tweet #34 where Taibbi again visits the influence of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).

At the epicenter of the SSCI effort we have always found then Vice-Chair Mark Warner manipulating events. Taibbi pulls this thread a little further with his review of how the SSCI contracted with outside government agencies to maintain the false premise of Russian interference in the 2016 election. A name that might be familiar to those who read the SSCI report on “Russian Active Measures and Disinformation in the 2016 Campaign” might be familiar to you.  Taibbi notes:

Profiles portray [Renee] DiResta as a warrior against Russian bots and misinformation, but reporters never inquire about work with DARPA, GEC, and other agencies. In the video below from @MikeBenzCyber, Stamos introduces [Renee DiResta] as having “worked for the CIA.”

DiResta has become the public face of the Censorship-Industrial Complex, a name promoted everywhere as an unquestioned authority on truth, fact, and Internet hygiene, even though her former firm, New Knowledge, has been embroiled in two major disinformation scandals.

(more…)

The Washington Post is framing this as a potential Ronna McDaniel requirement, however given the RNC under Reince Preibus ended up having the same 2016 pre-debate loyalty demand, the requirement is more likely an institutional Big Club proposal and not the idea of the chair.  The board and RNC charter members of the professionally Republican apparatus are the ones creating the litmus tests.

Essentially, you will remember in 2015 and 2016 the RNC demanded that all of the candidates swear an oath to whomever won the GOP nomination.  In the first Fox News debate of August 2015, the candidates were told to raise their hand if they were not willing to swear or affirm their intent to support the eventual nominee.  Everyone except Donald Trump (and Ben Carson) lied.  WATCH:

The construct of the loyalty oath was predicated around the fact the RNC institution did not support an outsider like Donald Trump using their club system to achieve the office of the presidency.  Trump was independent minded and held his own platform positions on trade, economics, border security and immigration that ran counter to the approved policy positions of professionally Republican members.

The RNC, as an institution of life-long tenured club members, viewed Donald Trump as not an acceptable RNC candidate, and therefore were worried he would mount an independent run if the RNC effort to remove him from their party was successful. The alternative fifteen candidates were all previously approved by the RNC establishment, except Donald Trump.

As a consequence, in the 2016 contest the RNC sought to portray Donald Trump as unapproved, yet they simultaneously needed to keep up the false pretense that U.S. politics was not subject to the whims and approvals of two monopolistic private corporations (RNC and DNC).  In the decade that preceded the 2016 election, CTH was one of the few places not pretending about this dynamic.

(more…)

Just a quick post to draw attention to the latest Twitter File #14 drop by Matt Taibbi [REVIEW HERE].  Thankfully, Taibbi is using the Twitter files to provide historical context against events that were happening at the time the documents are now revealing in hindsight.  Cheers to Taibbi.

[Twitter File #14 HERE]

Essentially, as Taibbi is pointing out, various DC politicians were working feverishly in early 2018 to maintain the fraudulent narrative around the Trump-Russia investigation.

Why is this timeline important, because retention of the fraudulent Trump-Russia narrative was critical to support the predicate of the Robert Mueller (Andrew Weissmann) Special Counsel.  As Taibbi notes, “On January 18th, 2018, Republican Devin Nunes submitted a classified memo to the House Intel Committee detailing abuses by the FBI in obtaining FISA surveillance authority against Trump-connected figures, including the crucial role played by the infamous “Steele Dossier.”  The entire DC apparatus was going bananas about the Nunes memo because it undermined the predicate assumptions of the Trump-Russia probe.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) was the specific stakeholder institution intent on retaining the Trump-Russia fraud, because the SSCI was one of the institutions who helped construct it.  Again Taibbi, “On January 23rd, 2018, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) published an open letter saying the hashtag [#ReleaseTheMemo] “gained the immediate attention and assistance of social media accounts linked to Russian influence operations.” The intelligence community politicians were furious that various Twitter accounts were tearing apart their precious, and false, story.

(more…)

The fifth installment of the Twitter Files release drops today courtesy of Ms. Bari Weiss [READ HERE]. The focus of Ms Weiss was on the decision to ban President Donald Trump from the platform, and her outline walks through the events leading up to the decision to remove him.

After a review of internal discussions, slacks and conversations within the social media platform, ultimately the officers within the company decided to protect their view of democracy by removing their biggest ideological opponent.

The Twitter executives justified their actions by echo-chambering a belief that President Trump was tweeting “coded messages,” the secret transmission of thoughts that can only be received by those wearing red hats, tuned to a specific psychological frequency.  As Weiss notes: “Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be “coded incitement to further violence.”

President Trump tweeted the term “American Patriots,” which would be viewed by the Twitter ideologues as something akin to “the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.”

It did not take long for the narrative to embed as the most senior Twitter regulatory officers assembled. “One hour later, Twitter announces Trump’s permanent suspension “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

(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…)

In a recent court filing [Document Here] President Trump through his legal counsel has requested Judge Cannon to unredact and unseal the search warrant affidavit used as the predicate for the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.  Apparently, the DOJ have yet to provide President Trump with the constitutionally required predicate documents to support their search.

Additionally, the DOJ previously leaked to media about “empty folders with classified banners” as part of the evidence cache they collected.  According to the filing the DOJ has since presented three different versions of their evidence collection list, with the most recent list dropping any claims of “two empty folders with classified banners.”

[Source, page 4]

While asking the court to provide the affidavit to the defense team, the lawyers for President Trump are noting the fourth amendment protects everyone against warrantless searches and seizures, and that same protection also guarantees the target the right to receive and review the claimed justification for the warrant.

The unredacted affidavit is obligated to be supplied so that it can be determined if the search warrant was legally valid and predicated.  General search warrants are not legally permitted.  The warrant must specify what is being searched and why.  The DOJ is fighting against this affidavit release.  The Trump lawyers are asking the judge to make a decision.

(more…)