The New York Times (think DHS embeds) are not concerned about the building of a surveillance state using cross-reference artificial intelligence systems into various government agencies; no, the New York Times (think DHS embeds) are concerned it is President Trump triggering the building of the process, and the parameters therein.

I have outlined this seemingly inevitable construct with great granular detail, that is creating the surveillance state for almost a year. Culminating in a December 2024 recap [SEE HERE] along with my position in January of this year [SEE HERE].  I do not like it, but I understand the arguments behind it.

[New York Times] – In March, President Trump signed an executive order calling for the federal government to share data across agencies, raising questions over whether he might compile a master list of personal information on Americans that could give him untold surveillance power.

Mr. Trump has not publicly talked about the effort since. But behind the scenes, officials have quietly put technological building blocks into place to enable his plan. In particular, they have turned to one company: Palantir, the data analysis and technology firm.

The Trump administration has expanded Palantir’s work across the federal government in recent months. The company has received more than $113 million in federal government spending since Mr. Trump took office, according to public records, including additional funds from existing contracts as well as new contracts with the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon. (This does not include a $795 million contract that the Department of Defense awarded the company last week, which has not been spent.)

(more…)

The President of the United States, representing the executive branch, takes aggressive emergency action on tariffs and trade to protect American fiscal sovereignty and solvency.  Both chambers of the U.S. congress, the house and senate representing the Legislative branch, affirm the action through legislative support.  Yet, a single court in the judicial branch intervenes on behalf of multinational corporate interests to block trade policy.

That is the framework of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s main point in a discussion with Fox News Bret Baier.  WATCH:

On the DOGE issue, listen to how a well-versed professional executive with years of experience in institutional reform discusses taking the DOGE team effort and integrating them into his massive agency as part of an operational efficiency overhaul.

Compare Secretary Bessent’s approach to other cabinet officials who have yet to grasp and execute the efficiency model that has been handed to them by the DOGE effort.  The contrast is remarkable.

(more…)

Pushed far enough, decisions are reached.

[VIA TRUTH SOCIAL] “The U.S. Court of International Trade incredibly ruled against the United States of America on desperately needed Tariffs but, fortunately, the full 11 Judge Panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Court has just stayed the order by the Manhattan-based Court of International Trade. Where do these initial three Judges come from? How is it possible for them to have potentially done such damage to the United States of America? Is it purely a hatred of “TRUMP?” What other reason could it be?

I was new to Washington, and it was suggested that I use The Federalist Society as a recommending source on Judges. I did so, openly and freely, but then realized that they were under the thumb of a real “sleazebag” named Leonard Leo, a bad person who, in his own way, probably hates America, and obviously has his own separate ambitions. He openly brags how he controls Judges, and even Justices of the United States Supreme Court — I hope that is not so, and don’t believe it is! In any event, Leo left The Federalist Society to do his own “thing.” I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous Judicial Nominations. This is something that cannot be forgotten!

With all of that being said, I am very proud of many of our picks, but very disappointed in others. They always must do what’s right for the Country! In this case, it is only because of my successful use of Tariffs that many Trillions of Dollars have already begun pouring into the U.S.A. from other Countries, money that, without these Tariffs, we would not be able to get. It is the difference between having a rich, prosperous, and successful United States of America, and quite the opposite.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade is so wrong, and so political! Hopefully, the Supreme Court will reverse this horrible, Country threatening decision, QUICKLY and DECISIVELY. Backroom “hustlers” must not be allowed to destroy our Nation!

The horrific decision stated that I would have to get the approval of Congress for these Tariffs. In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around D.C. for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other Countries that are treating us unfairly. If allowed to stand, this would completely destroy Presidential Power — The Presidency would never be the same!

This decision is being hailed all over the World by every Country, other than the United States of America. Radical Left Judges, together with some very bad people, are destroying America. Under this decision, Trillions of Dollars would be lost by our Country, money that will, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. It would be the harshest financial ruling ever leveled on us as a Sovereign Nation. The President of the United States must be allowed to protect America against those that are doing it Economic and Financial harm.

Thank you for your attention to this matter!” (source)

(more…)

Shortly before the federal appeals court decision to stay the lower court intervention, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett appeared on Fox Business with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the frustrating trade court decision and the pending legislation on budgets and taxes.

Director Hassett is always a solid analytical mind to follow because his job is to look into the future and see if current alignment of economic policy retains the objective of economic growth, and he does it well.  Within the interview a key point made by Hassett on the trade/tariff conflict with the court is that USTR Jamieson Greer has multiple legal pathways to support the intent of the tariffs as applied.

This is a point CTH will continue to make; both the USTR and the Dept of Commerce Secretary have alternate legal trade tools that support the tariffs.  The bottom line is that whether IEEPA is used or Sec.301/302 are used the tariff outcome remains the same, the only difference is the amount of time for the countervailing duty to trigger; put another way, ‘optimal solutions.’  WATCH:

Despite the noise and media drumbeat, Kevin Hassett continues to carry the maganomic agenda forward with a smile.  He is able to do this because all of the economic policy is grounded in America-first realism.  It can be achieved, and it will be achieved, entirely because it is achievable. Remember that!

When you reach frustration, ask yourself, “is there bread in the kitchen?”  If yes, then focus on solving the immediate non-critical problem; do not allow the dark imaginings to disrupt your focus. It’s the guys like Kevin Hassett who are keeping the bread in the kitchen.

(more…)

Two days ago, Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino sought to address frustration by promising things in the background were taking place and that is why both he and Director Kash Patel were not making media appearances.

Tonight, FBI Director Kash Patel appears on Fox News to affirm confidence in the FBI.  Tomorrow Deputy Director Dan Bongino will appear on Fox and Friends to do the same.

Director Patel rejects the notion that the FBI is institutionally corrupt and fraught with malicious actors.  Director Patel says he has been sharing information from the FBI silo with “partners in congress” and more information is going to be released. The extensive interview is in two segments, presented below:

.

Segment Two Below:

(more…)

We all knew the system would strike back. There are trillions at stake.

UPDATES AT BOTTOM: A federal trade court based out of New York has just ruled in a three-judge decision that President Trump does not have the authority within the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to initiate emergency trade tariffs.  [The Ruling is HERE]

WASHINGTON DC – A federal trade court ruled President Trump didn’t have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs on virtually every nation, voiding the levies that have sparked a global trade war and threatened to upend the world economy.

The decision on Wednesday from the Court of International Trade blocked one of the Trump administration’s most audacious assertions of executive power, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, and sets the stage for a possible appeal by the White House.

“The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder,” a three-judge panel wrote. (link)

“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote.  The court also ordered that the tariffs that the Trump administration has collected so far be “vacated.”

UPDATE #1: I’m tearing through this ruling right now and I can find several structural flaws in the 3-judge panel decision.

[From Page 6, pdf] “…[…] in 1962, Congress delegated to the President the power to take action to adjust imports when the Secretary of Commerce finds that an “article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.” Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Pub. L. No. 87-794, § 232(b), 76 Stat. 872, 877 (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1862(c)(1)(A)). This delegation is conditioned upon an investigation and findings by the Secretary of Commerce, and agreement by the President. See id. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, requires that the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) take action, which may include imposing tariffs, where “the rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being denied” or “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country” is “unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” 19 U.S.C. § 2411(a)(1)(A)–(B). The USTR may impose duties also where the USTR determines that “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country is unreasonable or discriminatory and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” Id. § 2411(b)(1). This power is conditioned on extensive procedural requirements including an investigation that culminates in an affirmative finding that another country imposed unfair trade barriers under § 2411(a)(1)(A) or (B) or § 2411(b), and a public notice and comment period. See id. § 2414(b).”… [source]

I’ve just gotten started, but that citation is just one reason why the ruling can be overturned on appeal.

(more…)

The escalation continues and unfortunately there are few indications the people around President Donald Trump are advising caution.

The U.K, German, French, EU, NATO and ‘western’ intelligence control agents are pushing for expanded conflict with Russia.  The latest development comes as the new leftist German Chancellor Friedrich Merz gives the greenlight for Ukraine to launch long-range Taurus cruise missiles directly into Russia.

(Bloomberg) — German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Ukraine has been given permission to use weapons supplied by its allies to launch strikes deep inside Russia.

“There are absolutely no range limits anymore for weapons delivered to Ukraine, not from Britain, the French or from us — also not from the Americans,” Merz said at a conference in Berlin on Monday. “That means Ukraine can defend itself by attacking military positions also in Russia.”

[…] Ukraine’s Western allies are trying to intensify pressure on the Kremlin after Moscow launched its biggest drone barrage against Ukraine since the full-scale invasion over three years ago. European leaders have condemned what they call Russia’s foot-dragging as efforts to lock in a ceasefire have gone nowhere.

[…] Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that, if confirmed, a decision to allow long-range strikes could undermine efforts toward reaching a political settlement, according to Interfax. He called such a decision “dangerous.” (read more)

The proxy war between the U.S/NATO and Russia is now entering its fourth year.

In some ways these efforts by the ‘coalition of the nervously willing’ only solidify the previous position of Russian President Vladimir Putin that any western move toward a diplomatic handshake was generally duplicitous and not to be trusted.  Hence, Putin has instructed the armed forces of the Russian Federation to continue building out an expanded ‘buffer zone’ between Russian held territory and NATO within Ukraine.

(more…)

President Trump paused to speak to the assembled press pool as he departed New Jersey en route back to the White House.

President Trump noted discussions with Iran were going in a positive direction.  Trump also expects the Senate to make some changes to the Tax Cut and budget bill.  President Trump also outlines a phone call with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, and he has agreed to delay the tariffs against the EU by one week at her request.

On the Russia -vs- Ukraine conflict President Trump says he doesn’t like what Vladimir Putin is doing with continued missile attacks against Ukraine and will be sharing more information shortly.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

Interestingly, just a few days before Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, took control of the National Intelligence Council (NIC) away from the CIA, Gabbard also made a move that is just as consequential and directly related.

It is pretty clear now the NIC was in the middle of a domestic Intelligence Community operation against the Trump administration when Tulsi Gabbard intercepted it (we hope with support from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, but we are not sure).  {GO DEEP} It is clear from the comments by SoS/NSA Rubio, that several media outlets were poised and awaiting leaks from the NIC in anticipation of fulfilling their role to advance the operation. [SEE HERE] DNI Gabbard essentially quashed their plan.

However, I was not aware that it was pushed into the public sphere where DNI Gabbard had taken control of the Presidential Daily Brief simultaneous to her confrontation with the NIC operation. [NYT LINK, Archive]  I am writing this update to inform and also ensure the CTH library has a reference point for future discussions.  Please familiarize yourself with the citations above as well as two very important outlines.

#1 – The unrealized power of the DNI and the possibilities for Trump’s appointed Director of National Intelligence, if a particular process was followed {GO DEEP}. #2 – The actual purpose of the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB), as well as the modern weaponization of it by the CIA. {GO DEEP}.   Those two citations are important context to understand a very visible dynamic taking place.

On the same day that DNI Tulsi Gabbard took control of the PDB away from the CIA, DNI Gabbard also removed the National Intelligence Council from the CIA.  This is very good news and highlights both President Trump and DNI Gabbard understanding the unrealized potential power of the DNI that we have discussed on these pages.

Confronting a weaponized Intelligence Community is a key facet of interest for us because it is a core component battle against the main tools of the Fourth Branch of Government.  The IC influence is in every policy related to Trump’s domestic and foreign agenda. Taking control and neutering the capabilities of the IC and CIA specifically, is a key undertaking.

(more…)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears on NBC Meet the Press to discuss the current status of the trade negotiations, tariffs and pending trade deals. In addition, Secretary Bessent outlines the construct of President Trump’s tax proposals and the intended benefits therein to middle-class working Americans.  WATCH (Transcript Below) 

[Transcript] KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. There are new economic warnings after the credit ratings agency, Moody’s, downgraded the United States’ credit rating one notch from its AAA rating. Moody’s citing concerns over the nation’s rising debt. It comes as President Trump’s tax bill suffered a setback in Congress this past week. Joining me now is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Secretary Bessent, welcome back to Meet the Press.

SEC. SCOTT BESSENT: Kristen, good to see you. Thanks for having me on.

KRISTEN WELKER: It’s wonderful to have you on after a long foreign trip. Thank you for being here. Let’s start right there with Moody’s downgrading the nation’s credit rating. And they do cite the debt. I want to read you a little bit of what Moody’s says. It says, quote, “If the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is extended, which is our base case, it will add around $4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade.” Several Republicans, Mr. Secretary, are citing similar concerns. Does the president’s tax bill need to do more to address the nation’s debt and deficit?

SEC. SCOTT BESSENT: Well, Kristen, first – first of all, I – I think that Moody’s is a lagging indicator. I think that’s what everyone thinks of credit agencies. Larry Summers and I don’t agree on everything, but he said that’s when they – they downgraded the U.S. in 2011. So it’s – it’s a lagging indicator. And just like Sean Duffy said with our air traffic control system, we didn’t get here in the – in the past 100 days. It’s the Biden administration and the spending that we have – have seen over the past four years. We inherited 6.7% deficit to GDP, the highest when we weren’t in a recession, not in a war. And we are determined to bring the spending down and grow the economy.

(more…)