Congressman George Santos was indicted on thirteen counts of wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and lying on financial disclosure forms during his short period in Congress.  He was taken into custody Wednesday in New York [DETAILS].

By most accounts and even his own words, Santos is a generally sketchy person, and I doubt there will be too many defenders of his character or the issues at stake.  However, all of that said, this Tweet from a staffer in his office is wild:

The casual nature of this is quite alarming.  It was not that long ago when the EXECUTIVE branch, using confidential human sources to investigate the LEGISLATIVE branch, would have been a matter of incredible controversy reserved for only the most serious of criminal possibilities.

An FBI informant penetrating the congressional office to relay information back to the FBI is quite remarkable.  However, it appears we are in an era of justice administration where anything is just flippantly asserted inside the mechanisms of government.

In the big picture, beyond the selfish issues of George Santos, when we consider the Fourth Branch of Government operating to protect itself against sunlight and scrutiny, this example of the FBI operating in the shadows of congress should start to make everyone uncomfortable.  How can there be “checks” and balances, when the enforcement mechanisms can be deployed against any entity who threatens the system itself?

Extend this approach to legislative committee oversight, and you start to see how the system protects itself.  A reminder below of what they are ultimately protecting.

(more…)

Read this as many times as needed to contemplate the nature of our problem.

Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, how the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for over a year without informing Congress [the Gang of Eight]. When asked the question, Comey winced, then justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “um, because of the sensitivity of the matter?”

Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance of Comey was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become. In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight…. and Congress just brushed it off.

This event, and everything in the background as outlined within the James Comey admission, factually happened.  It is on the record, admitted and nothing about the reality of what took place is subject to conjecture or refute.

Yet somehow, we, specifically our Congress, just moved on as if what FBI Director James Comey outlined and admitted wasn’t a total usurpation of the U.S. Constitution and a collapse in the structure of our coequal branches of government.

We cannot fight our way through the issues until we first realize what lies at the root of the problem.

(more…)

On March 2, 2023, the people in control of the Joe Biden administration officially announced that government control of internet content was now officially a part of the national security apparatus. [White House Link] If you have followed the history of how the Fourth Branch of Government has been created, you will immediately recognize the intent of this new framework.

The “National Cybersecurity Strategy” aligns with, supports, and works in concert with a total U.S. surveillance system, where definitions of information are then applied to “cybersecurity” and communication vectors.  This policy is both a surveillance system and an information filtration prism where the government will decide what is information, disinformation, misinformation and malinformation, then act upon it.

In part, this appears to be a response to the revelations around government influence of social media, the Twitter Files.  Now we see the formalization of the intent. The government will be the arbiter of truth and cyber security, not the communication platforms or private companies.  This announcement puts the government in control.

All of the control systems previously assembled under the guise of the Dept of Homeland Security now become part of the online, digital national security apparatus. I simply cannot emphasis enough how dangerous this is, and the unspoken motive behind it; however, to the latter, you are part of a small select group who are capable of understanding what is in this announcement without me spelling it out.

(more…)

The website Just Security, author former CIA operative Douglas Johnson, is very concerned about the House Subcommittee on Federal Government Weaponization. [SEE ARTICLE HERE} The concern is clouded under the auspices of fearing politicization by questioning the intelligence community about weaponized government.

The article is a mainstream bureaucratic outlook where the professional intelligence apparatus views themselves as beyond being accountable to the elected public officials, specifically the House members of the committee. The permanent unelected officials have a self-perception above the reach of the elected officials.

In essence, there is no public accountability model within their view of their operation. There can only be concealment, secret briefings, darkness and ‘trust us’ type reviews of their authorities. It’s quite a remarkable thing to read.

Just Security […] that’s oversight, a bipartisan endeavor conducted in the interest of all Americans, regardless of political affiliation. The oversight structure that came from the Church Committee investigations adopted legal and sensible rules of the road and protections for all stakeholders. Such supervision is conducted in controlled settings, shielded from public exposure, in a way that promotes candor and trust among both the auditors and the audited, facilitating transparency.

Note: How has that worked out for the American people?

(more…)

During my trip to DC in the summer of 2020 there were a myriad of disconcerting datapoints assembled; revelations that made sense of the madness and disappointments found everywhere. However, one of the key notations for future reference was to watch the political evolution of Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and spot the jump where the ideological outlook turns into specific government action.

With that in mind, this recent discovery of a 2010 to 2015 DHS contract to a very well-known USG defense contractor, General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems Inc., surfaces.

As many are now becoming aware, DHS is the lead agency behind all of the engagements with Twitter and other social media.

[SOURCE HERE]

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), specifically created as an outcome of the post-911 Patriot Act, is the pivot point on the surveillance radar sweep.

Prior to the DNI the general Intelligence Community (IC) surveillance faced offshore and swept foreign adversaries. If any threat was picked up that included the potential for domestic terrorism, the identified contact transferred from the CIA, NSA, DoD into the DOJ and FBI.  The DOJ then used the FISA Court to request transfer of targeting from foreign to domestic.

However, after 911 it was determined the national security surveillance radar needed to sweep a full 360° to include domestic surveillance.  The ODNI was the office created to manage the pivot point.  As a specific outcome of the Patriot Act, American citizens were now under the same surveillance as foreign adversaries.  The new definition of American citizens being threats to the national security state is ultimately what led to our taking off shoes at TSA checkpoints in airports.   TSA is a subsidiary agency of DHS.

(more…)

The issues surrounding Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop are still very opaque and seemingly clouded; however, there does seem to be some clarity surfacing in the bigger picture operation of the social media platform.  Perhaps, just perhaps, we are starting to get a better understanding of how the public opinion control operation was being handled.

(Source Link)

Readers here are very familiar with our researched suspicions of how this interconnected technology system, this weird public-private partnership was being conducted. For quite it has been obvious the various systems to control discussion would need connectivity.

Perhaps Twitter 2.0 is starting to recognize the industrial operation was evolved into a weird system of interconnected networks, necessitated by the larger government need. Whatever the outcome, the basic elements all seem to be aligning in the direction we discussed long ago and, if accurate, the ramifications should soon surface.

With that in mind and accepting that I genuinely do not want to be correct in this because the solution is even more troubling, perhaps it’s worthwhile going back to the original metaphor and see if things continue to make sense.

(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…)

I am ONE Hour into listening to the Three-Hour broadcast that Elon Musk joined tonight {YouTube Here}, and the amount of cognitive dissonance and circular discussion is off the proverbial charts.

Elon Musk joins the “Twitter Stages” conversation at 01:03:00 of the VIDEO HERE.  Musk noted that in addition to Matt Taibbi he has given the Twitter files to Bari Weiss. However, the debate over what DC bureaucrats did -and are doing- from within the Biden administration, to censor speech, take down social media content and stop information adverse to their political interests, is a futile conversation without the full understanding of the current U.S. surveillance state.

Some of the stage participants on the call with Mr. Musk have self-identified as targeted by the intelligence community, some are under active and ongoing investigation, yet they do not seem to have an understanding of what this U.S. social media surveillance system is.

We cannot fight our way through the issues until we first realize what lies at the root of the problem.

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.

Elevator Speech:

(1) The Patriot Act turned the intel surveillance radar from foreign searches for terrorists to domestic searches for terrorists.

(2) Obama/Biden then redefined what is a “terrorist” to include their political opposition.

DEEP DIVE:

(more…)

This is very weedy but also very interesting to me, perhaps you.  Completely unrelated to my own years of research into “Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop,” aka Twitter, and the intelligence community use of the platform to shape public opinion, another research group has looked at the tentacles & data points and come to the exact same conclusion.

For years CTH has outlined how the Obama administration leveraged social media networks as part of a larger objective to shape public opinion, ultimately leading to the shaping of U.S. elections.

It’s a long arc of modern assembly, but the bottom line reached by EDIFY, an independent research group, is that the ‘Arab Spring’ was the beta test for deploying the same system to shape U.S. elections.

Remarkably, that is the exact same conclusion reached by CTH several years ago as highlighted in the story of how Obama shifted the mission of new agencies (ODNI, DHS, DOJ-NSD) and assembled the fourth branch of government.

Writing in his Substack [SEE HERE], Dr Robert Malone draws attention to the EDIFY research.

EDIFY – […] “”At the time, Egyptians and Tunisians were rising up, facilitated by technology, in what the media dubbed a Twitter Revolution. “It was a no-brainer for me, because I wanted to be part of a company that was really dramatically changing the world,” Gadde says. She credits her boss at Juniper, General Counsel Mitchell Gaynor, for being supportive.”   – NYU Law Magazine [1] 

What are the chances that then President Obama did nothing to promote and ensure success for the Arab Spring because its true purpose was to serve as a beta-test for the use of the Twitter platform in future censorship and color revolution applications in the U.S.?

The application of Occam’s reveals that this is likely the case and Vadde’s testimony here is evidence suggestive of this position.

(more…)

As the DOJ-NSD originally threatened, they have filed an appeal of the ruling by Judge Cannon in the Trump Mar-a-Lago document case. [Pdf Here]

The DOJ is requesting the 11th Circuit Court to intervene and “stay” or block a part of the ruling allowing the Special Master, Judge Raymond J Dearie, to review the “classified documents” and make an independent determination as to the validity of the DOJ-NSD claims.

Having read all the motions in the case, you can get a sense of the authorship from the motion.  From my perspective this effort appears to have been written by the Lawfare group and filed by their allies in Main Justice at the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).  The bottom line is they really don’t want any outside party making a determination as to the status of the 100 “classified documents,” and/or consider if President Trump had previously declassified them.

The crux of their position is outlined in this part of the motion, which appears to hold a logical fallacy [pdf link Here]:

The framework of the appeal appears to be built on a false premise.  The DOJ argument is contingent upon the government not having the original documents, and the claim is made *AS IF* there is only one copy.  Even if this appeal is within the framework of a valid issue for an appellate court review (not a guarantee), when you apply commonsense the motion fails on its face.

The original documents are always retained by the originating agency.  No one, not even the President, sees original intelligence documents from within any agency creating the product.  Everything, including what President Trump would have seen while in office, and including any “read and return” version of the intelligence product, is a copy that stems from the originals.  As a result, the executive branch (DOJ) has access to the originals regardless of what copies they may have retrieved from Mar-a-Lago.

(more…)