I will be as generous in explanation as brutal honesty permits.  This is hopefully the last I will write about the internecine network of California GOPe manipulative politics and the latest episode of republican fraud within in.

Fibber Mike Davis (below left) gave an interview {Rumble Segment Here} which now provides some clarity on his character and the issues of his defense of Harmeet Dhillon (below right), in an effort to protect her from the outcome of Dhillon’s own creation.   Within the interview Davis notes that in addition to her RNC and California GOP professional relationships, Dhillon also represents the Trump campaign as a lawyer.

Within the interview we discover who and why Davis was protecting when he made claims about the Trump campaign seemingly being okay with a California GOP scheme to allocate proportional delegates to Ron DeSantis.  In essence, the “Trump campaign official” who didn’t raise objections to the CA rule change, the one Mike Davis was protecting from scrutiny, was actually Harmeet Dhillon herself. The same Harmeet who signed off on the 6/17/23 email proposal, then reversed after sunlight.

Mr. Davis also admits he and Mrs. Dhillon have a professional working relationship with the Article III Project organization that forms the basis of Mr. Davis’ affluence and influence.  Davis and Dhillon swim in, and benefit from, the same financial ocean.   Here’s the result:

Within Harmeet Dhillon’s lengthy explanation of her backtracking [SEE HERE], in the second segment {SEE HERE} she uses carefully constructed lawyer speak to highlight that she was duped by the other two California GOP officials, Jessica Patterson and Shawn Steel.  Mrs. Dhillon will not and cannot say she was lied to, for two reasons.

Mrs. Dhillon carefully says, “I was told by the state party” and “I accepted these representations” in the customary way a lawyer would obfuscate their choice not to say I was lied to.  Indeed, against the inaccuracy of the original justifications by Dhillon, and if we are to take Mrs. Dhillon at her word, she says in her reversal of position that she was misled and mistaken in her opinion by materially false representations of Jessica Patterson and Shawn Steel.

Unfortunately, Harmeet Dhillon cannot be more deliberate in her statement because she has a professional role to maintain, and the admission that she was duped is against her brand image.

(more…)

A federal judge chose the 4th of July to deliver a key ruling blocking Biden administration agencies and officials from meeting and communicating with social media companies.  [Read 7-page Injunction HERE]

The temporary injunction targets an ongoing legal battle brought by the state of Louisiana and Missouri against federal agencies for collaborating with social media to censor speech content against the interests of the federal government.  The final ruling on govt involved censorship could have profound effects on the First Amendment.

Judge Terry A. Doughty, has not made a final ruling in the case, but he wrote that the Republican attorneys general “have produced evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.”  The ruling may have implications for tech companies, which have been exposed in recent months/years for regular communication with government officials.

“This Preliminary Injunction precludes said named Defendants, their agents, officers, employees, contractors, and all acting in concert with them from the aforementioned conduct. This Preliminary Injunction also precludes said named Defendants, their agents, officers, employees, and contractors from acting in concert with others who are engaged in said conduct.” (link)

Obviously, trying to stop the government from coordinating with social media groups to suppress information adverse to both their interests is a little like squeezing Jello in a closed fist; they will find an angle out of the limitations.

(more…)

This post has just turned into another daily political thread, which we already had. Comments are now closed.

The colonies had been in conflict with England for over a year in June of 1776. A Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia on June 7 of that year. Richard Henry Lee from Virginia offered up a resolution with these now famous words:

“Resolved: That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.”

Lee’s words spurred the drafting of the Declaration of Independence. A committee of five was appointed to draft a statement making the case for the colonies, a statement to the world of the intent and the reason behind that intent.

Members of the Committee were John Adams of Massachusetts, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania, Robert R. Livingston of New York and Thomas Jefferson of Virginia. Jefferson took on the task of actually drafting the document as we know it today.

(more…)

I added a NOTE about Musk’s nonsense justification.

If the lessons of COVID-19 have taught us anything, it should be that each step the totalitarian dictatorships take -under the guise of protecting new democratic norms- must be viewed through the prism of future targeting.

We should pay attention, lest we find ourselves on the alternate side of populist uprisings under state targeting.

I sent the prior warning message around the collaboration between private industry and western government surrounding financial restrictions placed on Russia. When VISA, Mastercard and other payment mechanisms willingly and willfully supported the intentions of the Western Government coalition, few people thought about the Rubicon this new merge and partnership was establishing. {SEE HERE} In essence, private industry determining the lifestyle of Russian citizens in an effort to target their political leadership. Few people were paying attention, fewer still think long term.

With France now pledging to shut down internet communication in an effort to control organizing through social media, there is a bigger picture that must be considered.

[SOURCE – Translated from French]

Let me take you back to 2010 and 2011 when the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, CIA Director Leon Panetta and French President Nicholas Sarkozy wanted to support the Islamist Spring uprisings in Tunis, Libya, Egypt and Yemen.

What happened then is very much related to what we are seeing right now in Europe, specifically France; only this time we are seeing the inverse of the government interests regarding social media on display.

(more…)

Neil Oliver’s monologues each week are even more critical in the intellectual pushback as the thoughts and monologues of Tucker Carlson.  Neil articulates the issues and reaches an audience thirsting to understand just how corrupt the systems are that flow from the globalist and corporatist constructs.

Behind all the disparate institutional machinations, the larger objective of globalism and nationalism continue to present the most direct reference point of the conflict.  Just as Donald Trump represents this dynamic clearly in the United States, within Europe UK political figure Nigel Farage has been the tip of the spear confronting globalism and representing the face of British nationalism.

As a result of this dynamic almost every multinational and corporate EU institution has attempted to destroy Nigel Farage.  The latest example comes from the banking system in the U.K which has told Mr. Farage he will not be permitted to engage in banking, finance or commerce.  Neil Oliver takes this example and puts the larger context into his monologue.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

New analysis of the long-term impact from Section 301 tariffs triggered by President Trump against China, shows just how consequential economic nationalism can become.

Our own analysis of U.S. consumer prices in 2019 showed that prices of imported goods actually declined despite the tariffs. A recent report from CPA takes a look at the impact to Chinese exports to the U.S.  [SEE DATA HERE] Bottom line, the tariffs worked to reduce Chinese imports.

CPA – […] Since the Section 301 tariffs were imposed, the share of imports from China has steadily declined from 21.6% in 2017 the year prior to the tariffs to 16.5%, a decline of 5.1%. No other country has lost as much share of total U.S. import penetration over the past five years.

In terms of total import value, Mexico gained the most from the tariffs, adding $110.8 billion. Vietnam gained the second most in import value by $78.4 billion and by far gained the most of total share of U.S. imports. In 2017, Vietnam accounted for about 2% of U.S. imports at $46.5 billion. In 2022, the U.S. imported $127.5 billion in goods from Vietnam, and the share of the total nearly doubled to 3.9%. Other countries in Southeast Asia such as Thailand, Cambodia, and Indonesia all saw significant increases in their value of imports by the U.S. (read more)

With the leading opponent to President Trump, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, not supporting tariffs on behalf of the multinationals and Club for Growth donors who stand behind him, it’s worth revisiting the actual outcome to American consumers to dispel the popular myths about tariffs raising prices here at home.

(more…)

On Thursday morning House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer appeared on Fox News for an interview where he described the evidence of the FBI and U.S. Dept of Justice interfering in investigations about Biden family money laundering. {Direct Rumble Link}

Within the interview Comer outlines that the Biden family received over $20 million in funds from foreign government funds to influence policy. The Biden family then used limited liability corporations (LLC’s) to launder the money into non-existent family businesses.  The DOJ and FBI then blocked any inquiry and investigation into the process by the IRS and others.

Comer outlines the intent of congress to subpoena all of the people who were involved in the network.  When asked if congress “has the goods” to show proof behind the accusations against Biden, Comer responds with “yes.”   James Comer also states that Attorney General Bill Barr was told by the FBI that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.

(more…)

Presidential candidate Mike Pence made a pilgrimage to Ukraine to meet with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and affirm Pence’s position that the unilateral power of the Ukraine government needs to be supported.

Mike Pence then presents himself as the arbiter of what it means to be a Republican with a Twitter message saying, “I know the difference between a genius and a war criminal, and I know who needs to win this war in Ukraine, and it’s the people fighting for their freedom and fighting to restore their national sovereignty. There is no room in our party for apologists for Putin. There is only room for champions of freedom.”

Americans must sacrifice to support the magnanimous interests of the industrial military complex. Failure to adhere to the dictates and fiats of Republican power will not be tolerated in his party.

(more…)

As if on cue, here comes another billionaire group by well-established political control agents in yet another multimillion effort to block President Trump.   This time it’s Koch and his Americans for Prosperity network.

The Koch groups are planning to spend $70 million in their effort to eliminate the support of Donald Trump in 2024.

However, what will be interesting will be to watch how the downstream media networks attack Trump in order to get a piece of the spending allotment.  That’s where knowing where the Koch money flows comes in handy.

First the article:

(New York Times) – The political network established by the conservative industrialists Charles and David Koch has raised more than $70 million for political races as it looks to help Republicans move past Donald J. Trump, according to an official with the group.

With some of this large sum to start, the network, Americans for Prosperity Action, plans to throw its weight into the G.O.P. presidential nominating contest for the first time in its nearly 20-year history. The network spent nearly $500 million supporting Republican candidates and conservative policies in the 2020 election cycle alone.

Two groups closely affiliated with Charles Koch contributed $50 million of the more than $70 million that has been raised. Mr. Koch is a major shareholder in Koch Industries, which contributed $25 million to Americans for Prosperity Action, according to a preliminary draft of Federal Election Commission filings. Another $25 million was donated by Stand Together, a nonprofit he founded.

(more…)

In a landmark court ruling released today, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively ended the use of affirmative action in college admissions. {237-page ruling here}

By a vote of 6-3 (UNC) and 6-2 (Harvard) the court ruled the admissions programs used by the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause barring racial discrimination by government entities.

Chief Justice John Roberts writing the opinion of the majority said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a woman of notoriously activist disposition defined by her self-image and race, sat out the Harvard case because she had been a member of an advisory governing board who constructed the rules the Supreme Court now determined were unlawful.

Amy Howe – […] Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that college admissions programs can consider race merely to allow an applicant to explain how their race influenced their character in a way that would have a concrete effect on the university. But a student “must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race,” Roberts wrote. The majority effectively, though not explicitly, overruled its 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, in which the court upheld the University of Michigan Law School’s consideration of race “as one factor among many, in an effort to assemble a student body that is diverse in ways broader than race.”

(more…)