As oft repeated, in order for severe ideologues to retain their insufferably bad policy they must pretend not to know things.  However, in the case of food shortages, the pretending about the origin of the problem has severe consequences.

Vladimir Putin’s military action against eastern Ukraine had nothing to do with the severe food shortages and inflation in Sri Lanka {link}.  Nor does Putin have any influence over the Dutch government trying to stop food production {link}.  Additionally, Putin has no control over Justin Trudeau’s decision to limit harvest yields by blocking the use of nitrogen-based fertilizer {link}. More importantly, it was not Vladimir Putin who forced all the western politicians to sign up for a new ‘climate friendly’ energy program that is destroying the ability of western farms to generate higher yield crops.

You do not need to be a farmer to understand that nitrogen/phosphorus-based industrial fertilizer has been the reason why farm yields have generated massive amounts of food on a global basis.  The United States, Canada, the U.K. and places like the Netherlands have massively increased their ability to generate food for export, in large part due to the success of improved fertilizer and crop saving modern pesticides.  Take those farming advancements away under the guise of climate change and you get a global Sri Lanka.

Those western climate and energy policies create downstream consequences.  The decision to chase a new global energy policy under the name “Build Back Better,” in combination with short-sighted EU sanctions against Russia, and you get food shortages. And boy howdy are they trying to avoid taking responsibility for it.

It was not Vladimir Putin who told British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz their proactive recommendation to switch from crop-based biofuels to human food would be blocked.  That G7 decision was made by Justin Trudeau and Joe Biden. {link} Even more significantly, it was not Russia who threatened the multinational energy companies about investing in Africa for expanded natural gas supplies for their fertilizer needs. That threat came from the same western government alliance, per their instructions from the World Economic Forum group {link}.

(more…)

Let me say from the outset, with a degree of specific assurance we generally reserve for other matters, Russia had nothing to do with the targeting of a grain facility in the port city of Odesa.  Geopolitically and strategically, such an action would be against their interests.  These events have the smell of the U.S. State Dept and CIA all over them.

Start by first reviewing the agreement between Russia and Ukraine that was announced yesterday. July 22 (Reuters) – Russia and Ukraine signed a landmark deal on Friday to reopen Ukrainian Black Sea ports for grain exports, raising hopes that an international food crisis … can be eased.”   NATO country Turkey, specifically Recep Erdogan, brokered the deal between Russia and Ukraine.  Ignore the narrative engineering and WATCH:

Russia was particularly a geopolitical beneficiary from the agreement itself.  No longer could NATO and the western alliance blame Russia for the void in gobal food markets associated with the conflict in Ukraine.

From the perspective of Russian President Putin, the grain movement through the port city of Odesa was a net benefit.  “Russia has taken on the obligations that are clearly spelled out in this document. We will not take advantage of the fact that the ports will be cleared and opened. We have made this commitment,” said Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.

However, from the perspective of the Western alliance, the agreement mooted one of their biggest justifications for the upcoming global food shortage.   If Ukraine and Russia are exporting food, and yet food costs are still rising…. well, the food shortage impact from western energy disruption, the Build Back Better agenda, starts to become increasingly visible.

Suddenly, within hours of the trade agreement, the grain transportation system and the port city of Odesa come under fire from mysterious cruise missiles.

(more…)

From the CTH perspective, if we accept the scale of the approaching U.S. economic pain that is clearly visible on the horizon, this narrative shift from the Associated Press and NPR, about a balancing act for U.S. policy and a corrupt Ukraine government, seems very predictable.

The average U.S. worker, and the middle class in general, is in trouble.  The visible reference of bailing out the people of Ukraine to the tune of $60+ billion is legislative salt in an open economic wound caused by Biden policy.  A shift is needed.

Pivoting away from Ukraine to focus on financial subsidies for Americans requires using a particular arm-distancing toward Zelenskyy from the politicians.   Look, corruption.

Here we go:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s dismissal of senior officials is casting an inconvenient light on an issue that the Biden administration has largely ignored since the outbreak of war with Russia: Ukraine’s history of rampant corruption and shaky governance.

As it presses ahead with providing tens of billions of dollars in military, economic and direct financial support aid to Ukraine and encourages its allies to do the same, the Biden administration is now once again grappling with longstanding worries about Ukraine’s suitability as a recipient of massive infusions of American aid.

(more…)

On May 31st, Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL) made an explosive announcement as an outcome of a whistleblower providing information to him and Jim Jordan.  The claim was the FBI held a collaborative relationship with the Clinton/DNC law firm Perkins Coie. {Go Deep} Specifically, the explosive element surrounded the FBI having a workspace within the DNC law firm that would give Democrats an open portal into FBI databases for political opposition research.

Additionally, formerly indicted Clinton campaign lawyer, Michael Sussmann, was reportedly in charge of this arrangement within Perkins Coie for the past year.  Obviously, the potential ramifications from this joint collaboration are vast.  However, have you noticed that not a single media outlet has followed up on the claim?

Generally, in Washington DC when the media ignores an issue, especially a major issue with large consequences; and doesn’t even attempt to snarkily debunk an explosive claim or belittle the person bringing the information; it’s usually because the claim itself has merit and the DC defenders do not want to give it any fuel for further discussion or awareness. {Direct Rumble Link}

So, what happened?

Essentially, what is being claimed is that a portal exists into FBI databases within the law firm that represents democrats.  This means access to FBI database searches exists inside the office of the DNC and Clinton legal group.  Think about the ramifications here.

(more…)

CBS pretentious pretender Margaret Brennan interviews Joe Biden’s Energy Security Coordinator Amos Hochstein about the trip to the Gulf Arab States and subsequent energy policy developments.  [CBS Transcript Here] Hochstein spins the non-existing benefits of the trip by attributing the pre-existing Saudi cease-fire in Yemen as an outcome of Biden talking to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Quite a stretch.

Hochstein still thinks there is going to be a way for ‘western governments‘ to place price caps on Russian oil exports by getting the entire planet to agree only to pay Russia a set price for oil.  With Russia an OPEC+ member, and the members of OPEC not in ideological alignment with the Biden administration on a host of geopolitical issues, good luck with that.  The producers (OPEC) have control over what prices the consumers (Non OPEC) pay; they are not going to give up that mechanism just to please the Biden administration.

On the domestic front, while there is little possibility of a global oil production increase from OPEC, Hochstein claims to have assurances from U.S. oil producers they will increase their production capacity by November.  At the same time the institutions in charge of Biden energy policy are going to keep targeting the oil producers to destroy them. Quite a weird dynamic.   Hochstein finishes by saying solar and windmills are the future of U.S. energy production and if we invest more, well, we can save the planet. WATCH:

It is worth remembering what MbS said about the meeting: “We agree on many things, but we differ on a few others. Every country has its own culture and circumstances. I respect yours, you respect mine. Do not impose your culture on us. Do not impose your beliefs on us.” … “We agree we need to do more for climate change, but you guys are doing it wrong by favoring certain energy sources over others. The world needs energy security. We need all energy sources including oil & gas. We are doing our part on both fronts: climate change & energy security.” … “The stage of a country’s economic & social development must be considered in climate change negotiations.” … “We are increasing our production capacity to 13 million barrels per day (from 12 mb/d), but that is it. We cannot do more.”

The message here is: You guys do your part and invest more if you want to avoid energy crises, recessions and unemployment. Do NOT blame us!

(more…)

Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; the institutions were already weaponized by the Patriot Act.  What Obama and Holder did was take the preexisting system and retool it, so the weapons of government only targeted one side of the political continuum.

This point is where many people understandably get confused.

In the era shortly after 9/11 the DC national security apparatus, instructed by Vice President Dick Cheney, was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

After 9/11/01 the electronic surveillance system that was originally created to monitor threats from abroad was retooled to monitor threats inside our country.  That is when all of our electronic ‘metadata’ came under federal surveillance.

That inflection point, and the process that followed, was exactly what Edward Snowden tried to point out.

What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their political opposition became the target of this new national security system.

The problems we face now as a country are directly an outcome of two very distinct points that were merged by Barack Obama. (1) The post 9/11 monitoring of electronic communication of American citizens; and (2) Obama’s team creating a fine-tuning knob that it focused on the politics of the targets.  This is very important to understand as you dig deeper into this research outline.

(more…)

The January 6th Committee in Washington DC has a much bigger bipartisan motive than most Americans understand.  The elimination of Donald John Trump from the political landscape is an exercise in protecting a surveillance state from the threat that Trump represents.

That said, I’m not sure that even Donald Trump himself realizes and/or appreciates the scale of threat he is considered to a system created in the aftermath of 9/11/01.  However, consider this a precursor to the next post on this website that will hopefully show exactly what the scale of the problem is.

Wyoming congressional representative Liz Cheney gets a lot of attention for her opposition to Trump; but what most people do not yet fully grasp is the direct and consequential nature of her opposition.  Liz Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, has a vested interest in removing the threat of Trump because the real issue comes back to what her father created in the aftermath of 9/11, the domestic political surveillance state.

There are two defensive operations currently underway in Washington DC to protect the biggest issue that few people talk about.  The first is the objective of Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, the former Obama White House senior national security advisor and legal liaison from the executive branch.  The second objective is the J6 committee trying to stop Donald Trump from ever holding political office again.

(more…)

A quietly released study from the U.N. Human Rights Commissioner [See Here pdf] looking into allegations of war crimes conducted during the Ukraine -vs- Russia conflict, specifically looked into allegations of Russian military targeting a nursing home facility in the eastern region of Luhansk.

What the UN investigation revealed was that Ukraine military soldiers had intentionally used the nursing home as an active base to launch military strikes against Russian forces. The Associated Press was forced to reveal, “Ukraine’s armed forces bear a large, and perhaps equal, share of the blame for what happened in Stara Krasnyanka, which is about 580 kilometers (360 miles) southeast of Kyiv. A few days before the attack, Ukrainian soldiers took up positions inside the nursing home, effectively making the building a target.”

The issue of the Ukraine military, intentionally and with purposeful forethought, using civilian locations to embed their military units, highlights the inherent dangers associated with western propaganda during the conflict.  In fact, the effort to create civilian casualties seems more purposeful as a strategy to gain western media support and create stories that can be used to advance sympathy toward Ukraine, even if it means putting their own civilians in harm’s way.

(more…)

During his opening monologue Friday evening, Fox News host Tucker Carlson went into great detail outlining the current evidence of how the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated.

As a direct consequence of the COVID-19’s global impact, a geopolitical reset has taken place.  Carlson asks the questions of whether this reset was done purposefully, and why is there no one looking at how the virus originated?   WATCH:

(more…)

[Hat Tip Mailroom] This is a very interesting little bureaucratic energy issue with big downstream ramifications.

Almost every transportation and manufacturing company uses the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) “weekly publication of average diesel prices” in order to calculate shipping costs.  According to people in the industry, “this national average is what almost every trucking and logistics company bases their fuel surcharges on.”

However, on June 13th the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, stopped reporting the average weekly diesel price.  For almost a month companies have been using an outdated average price in order to calculate shipping costs and fuel surcharges. [See Screengrab]

Originally the EIA said, “We are implementing new methodology to estimate weekly on-highway diesel fuel prices. On June 13, we started conducting the On-Highway Diesel Fuel Price Survey using new statistical methodologies.” {LINK} However, the EIA has not updated anything since that announcement.

As a result, all of the transportation charges and fuel surcharges have been underestimated and priced for almost a full month.  The political motive for this move is transparent, it stops higher diesel prices from being passed along in the supply chain… which gives an artificial pause on inflation that comes as an outcome of higher diesel transportation costs (specifically trucking).  As explained to CTH:

(more…)