Something’s Buggin’ Tucker Carlson, Food Production is a National Security Issue

Something’s Buggin’ Tucker Carlson, Food Production is a National Security Issue

This is a topic we have covered extensively, and it is great to see Tucker Carlson questioning the sudden alignment of various elements that are creating a very real food insecurity problem.

The #1 factor in the shortage of food production is the newly emboldened ‘western energy policy‘ and the impact energy has on everything from field (fertilizer) to fork (distribution).  Other factors include government policy that blocks food development (Dutch, Irish and Sri Lanka Farmers), a sudden uptick in food facilities having major fires and damage, and a series of issues with the feed that goes into the production of proteins.

This is all happening as the advancement of insects as a more “sustainable” protein replacement is being advanced by the same western governments.  However, if you happen to notice that all of the issues travel in the same direction, you are a conspiracy theorist, or something.  WATCH:

We have been watching the predictable outcomes surrounding the western government shift to change energy policy for almost two years.  Approximately a year ago we first said, “the absence of food will change things.”

As energy resources like natural gas were curtailed the resulting price increase and subsequent shortage of fertilizer was discussed in great detail well in advance.

Now, we are starting to see exactly what those warning voices were talking about.

An interesting article in ZeroHedge Saturday [SEE HERE] draws attention to how the media can no longer try to ignore the created global food crisis.

ZeroHedge – People on the other side of the planet are dropping dead from starvation right now, but most people don’t even realize that this is happening.  Unfortunately, most people just assume that everything is fine and dandy.  If you are one of those people that believe that everything is just wonderful, I would encourage you to pay close attention to the details that I am about to share with you.  Global hunger is rapidly spreading, and that is because global food supplies have been getting tighter and tighter. 

If current trends continue, we could potentially be facing a nightmare scenario before this calendar year is over. (read more)

The article then goes on to detail the issues and food shortages in Pakistan, India and the entire African continent.  Factually, according to media reports on the region, the worst food crisis in history is happening – yet most U.S. and European Union media are avoiding it.  The famine is happening in almost complete western silence.

Keep in mind, none of this is unexpected.  In fact, the G7 countries discussed the pending problem in mid 2022, yet no one took any steps to avoid it.

Vladimir Putin’s military action against eastern Ukraine had nothing to do with the severe food shortages and inflation in Sri Lanka {link}.  Nor did Russia have any influence over the Dutch government trying to stop food production {link}.  Additionally, Putin had 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 Sri Lanka, Pakistan and now the African Continent.

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.

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}.

It was predictable {JUNE 21st} {June 30th} and {July 6th} that western government leaders would seek to avoid responsibility for the food crisis they created, and throughout the latter part of 2022 we saw western media trying, desperately, to frame Russia for global food shortages in order to protect western politicians.

I said this in July of last year and as the consequences now surface it is even more critical to understand.

Joe Biden, NATO, the G7, the European Union, the World Bank, USAID, and every western leader in the United States and Europe stated in early and mid 2022 there will be food shortages in 2023.

They did not say there might be shortages; their statements were emphatic, there will be shortages.

Accept this basic cornerstone.  Then ask why not a single proactive step has been taken by any of the aforementioned institutions or governments to alleviate what they declare is a certainty.  Why?

Simple question, “why?”

If all of the western nations, non-govt organizations and heads of state, are aware of a coming food crisis, why is there no proactive response?

It is a question that even the most hardcore leftists will not answer, because there is only one answer.  No action is being taken because they do not want to take action.  No effort to avoid the crisis is being done, because they do not want the crisis avoided.

Peel all the layers of obfuscation and causation away, and what we find is the epicenter of the food shortage is directly the result of the Build Back Better agenda.  A post-pandemic western government deliberate decision to radically change global energy development.  In succinct terms, the climate change agenda.

However, regardless of how you feel about the validity of “climate change,” the cause of diminished food supplies is purposeful.  It is not climate change causing food shortages. It is the purposeful action taken under the guise of mitigating climate change that is causing the shortage of food.

The collective Build Back Better energy policy of western governments’ is the reason for massive increases in energy costs, massive oil price jumps, gasoline price increases, significant increases in chemical costs, increases in diesel fuel costs, shortages of fertilizer created using natural gas, and the end result is lower crop yields, higher farming costs and eventually, food shortages.  They knew this.

All of the organizations and government who have been decrying the future shortage of food, know it is the radical shift in energy resource development that is creating the crisis.  This acceptance of reality begins the framework to understand just how entrenched and committed these western leaders are toward their beloved climate change agenda.

We are only just now beginning to see the first aspects of the food shortage.  However, once the issue becomes unavoidable the western leaders will not and cannot accept the blame for what they have done.  They will blame-cast, excuse and justify what is surfacing.

Food shortages will be blamed on the Ukraine conflict, Russian aggression, climate change and any various iteration of justification that does not identify the true cause, their energy ideology.

I’m not so sure that people fully understand what the entire system of western government would be willing to do to avoid being blamed for avoidable death on a potential scale that is quite alarming.  All of the western leaders, institutions and governments are on the same boat.   They are all in this together.

(June 22, 2022) – (Reuters) – The European Union is divided on how to help poorer nations fight a growing food crisis and address shortages of fertilizers caused by the war in Ukraine, with some fearing a plan to invest in plants in Africa would clash with EU green goals.

The need for food “clashes with EU green goals.”…  Let that sink in.


Nothing to see here comrade, nothing to see….


Tremor in Dark Force – While Davos Ongoing, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern Announces She’s Quitting – Before Getting Crushed in Election

Tremor in Dark Force – While Davos Ongoing, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern Announces She’s Quitting – Before Getting Crushed in Election

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacina Ardern was only exceeded in the leftist hierarchy by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel.   Ardern is to the Australian continent what Barack Obama was to North America and Angela Merkel was to Europe.  Stunningly, Jacinda Ardern has announced she will not seek reelection and is resigning from her position.  Ironically on the timing, her political career was an outcome of Davos recruitment.

Ardern’s extreme COVID-19 dictates and fiats to include isolation, quarantine camps, severe regimented social lockdowns, forced and mandatory vaccinations and subsequent passports etc, made her the visible face of government COVID-19 extremes.  Keeping with her apt description as a smiley-faced fascist, she did not care about the backlash from her totalitarian dictates and fiats.  The government owned the media, and the concerns of Kiwi’s about the government extremes were dispatched without regard.

Struggling to come to grips with the looming defeat she would likely face; an emotional Jacinda Ardern made her resignation announcement to the media.  She exits on February 7th. WATCH:

(Via Daily Mail) – Jacinda Ardern has choked back tears as she announced her resignation as New Zealand Prime Minister in an emotional press conference.

Her resignation comes into effect on Sunday if the Labour Party can elect her replacement, or on February 7 if the process was drawn out. ‘I am human. Politicians are human. We give all we can for as long as we can – and then it’s time. And for me, it’s time,’ she said. ‘I know what this job takes. And I know that I no longer have enough in the tank to do it justice.’

Ms Ardern resigns at just 42 after becoming leader just over five years ago on October 26, 2017, and was New Zealand’s youngest-ever PM.

She insisted her party trailing in the polls the the rival National Party ahead of the upcoming election had nothing to do with her decision to step down.

‘I am not leaving because I believe we can’t win the election but because I believe we can and will,’ she said.

‘But we need a fresh set of shoulders for the challenges of both this year and the next three.’

During her resignation speech, Ms Ardern announced the next New Zealand election would be held on October 14.

The resigning PM was asked if she would take up a role with the UN after leaving office and didn’t give a straight answer.

Instead, she insisted she had ‘no plans’ other than relaxing with her baby Neve and marrying her fiancé Clark Gayford after their wedding was called off due to Covid restrictions.

‘I am looking forward to spending time with my family once again… so to Neve, mumma is looking forward to being there when you start school this year, and to Clarke, let’s finally get married,’ she said. (more)


Sunday Talks, Rod Rosenstein Rises to Defend Honor and Apolitical Integrity of DOJ Special Counsel Appointments

Sunday Talks, Rod Rosenstein Rises to Defend Honor and Apolitical Integrity of DOJ Special Counsel Appointments

There’s no politics here.  Washington DC is comprised of magnanimous institutions filled with exceptionally moral people who commit their lives to a career of public service on behalf of this nation.  So sayeth Rod Rosenstein as he takes up a defensive position against the vulgarian horde who do not cherish their rulers with enough reverence, or something like that.

As the story is told, there are only honorable and altruistic officials within the institutions of the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation.  The examples of Robert Mueller, Christopher Wray, Merrick Garland and both special counsels Smith and Hur are presented as evidence to highlight the great fortune of an ungrateful nation.

If Washington DC is a bubble, the great pretending Bubble Boy is Rod Rosenstein.  WATCH (or, transcript Below):

[Transcript] – CHUCK TODD:  And joining me now is the former Deputy Attorney General under President Trump, Rod Rosenstein. The newly-appointed special counsel looking into Biden, Robert Hur, served as Rosenstein’s top aide in the Justice Department, overseeing the special counsel investigation into the Russian election interference. Mr. Rosenstein, welcome to Meet the Press.

ROD ROSENSTEIN:  Thank you. Glad to be here, Chuck.

CHUCK TODD:  In December, after the appointment of the Trump special counsel, when asked whether you would’ve done it, you said you probably wouldn’t have. How about this Biden special counsel?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Yeah, I think, Chuck, having made the appointment in the Trump case, Merrick Garland put himself in a position where he really had no choice when this matter came along, unless the preliminary inquiry were to establish that there was no chance that a crime had been committed. And according to what we’ve heard, John Lausch did not make that decision.

CHUCK TODD: Do you believe that appointing a special counsel strengthens the Trump special counsel, and strengthens their ability to come to different conclusions? Or does it muddy the waters?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: I think, Chuck, you have to differentiate between the political consequences and the practical consequences for the special counsel. For Jack Smith and Rob Hur, they’re conducting independent investigations. They’re going to go evaluate the facts and the law, make their recommendation based upon what they find. So I don’t anticipate that the existence of two special counsels is going to influence the way either one of them goes about their jobs.

CHUCK TODD: To the public it appears – I had somebody use this metaphor with me, and I want to use it, there are two car wrecks: one clearly is an accident, one appears to be intentional. Is that a fair way to look at these two classified document situations?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: I think, Chuck, we should wait until we know the facts. You know, the key fact with regard to the Biden documents, of course, is what did the president know about those documents? Was he aware that they’d been moved? Did he, in any case, in the past five years, has he handled those documents? Was he aware of them? We just don’t know that yet. So I think even that we really can’t speculate, just based on what’s been public record.

CHUCK TODD: Tell me your confidence level in Jack Smith and in Robert Hur.

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Well, these are two professionals who spent extended amounts of time in the Department of Justice. They understand that their goal is to focus on the facts, and law, and apply department policy. And both of these men are not going to be influenced by political pressure.

CHUCK TODD: You feel that they’re both – you said something intriguing to me. You said, “You know, every special counsel starts with sterling credentials, and then the public gets a hold of them.” But would you say that’s the case with both of these gentlemen?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: It’s certainly true of these gentlemen, as it was with people like Ken Starr and and Bob Mueller, that you pick people with sterling reputations who are known for being nonpartisan. But you’re in the political arena where it’s inevitable you’re going to be attacked.

CHUCK TODD: There’s two sort of unique defenses in each of these cases that I’m curious your take on. One is Donald Trump’s claim that he could declassify anything he wanted. Now, he’s not made a legal claim that he did that. And the second is, Joe Biden’s currently president. So is it currently illegal for him to have classified documents in his possession, even if it’s at his home, next to his Corvette?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Well, that’s one of the questions the special counsel will have to look into. And in addition, you know, the legal status of the vice president, whether or not he has authority to make any declassification decisions. But the key question, the threshold question here is going to be: was President Biden aware of those classified documents?

CHUCK TODD: And how does that get proven? Do you think he’s going to have to sit for an interview?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Well, that would be a logical step if I were conducting this investigation. I want to go right to the source and ask the president directly whether or not he was aware of those documents.

CHUCK TODD: A sitting president can’t be indicted, according to the Justice Department. So let’s say something is found, what would happen?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: You know, Chuck, I think what should happen in a special counsel investigation is that the special counsel should evaluate the facts and the law, look at Department of Justice policies, and make a recommendation to the attorney general about whether or not prosecution is warranted. Then it’s up to the attorney general to make the decision whether to apply that DOJ policy.

CHUCK TODD: Alright. If you were – you had been in this similar situation. It’s November 4th, it’s four days before the elections. The National Archives informs you that, “Hey, you know, President Biden has just turned over some classified documents that he had in his possession.” Is it too close to the election to tell people? Is that why the Justice Department didn’t inform folks publicly? Is it too soon? Are there questions that should be raised about this or not?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Chuck, it’s not the Justice Department’s job to make public announcements like that. The decision about whether or not to go public would be left to the president and the White House. So I would not anticipate the Justice Department under any circumstances to make a public announcement about something like that.

CHUCK TODD: You wouldn’t have done that in that similar situation?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: In the Justice Department I would not have publicized it, no.

CHUCK TODD: I am curious. There’s a lot of new committees on the Hill that want to investigate some Justice Department practices. And some of these are for current investigations. You essentially said, you know, no, when you were there and others, you didn’t turn stuff over to Congress in active investigations. Do you expect Merrick Garland to do the same?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: I think the bright line, Chuck, is not to turn over anything that’s going to in any way interfere with the investigation. And so that’s a decision the department needs to make in addressing each request as it comes along. There are legitimate congressional oversight requirements that the department can accommodate. But there really is a bright line when it comes to anything that might interfere with the investigation.

CHUCK TODD: So the fact that they have already sent letters demanding certain things now, in your mind there’s nothing Justice can do until they’re done with this investigation, correct?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: I wouldn’t say that. I mean, there are, as I said, legitimate oversight issues that can be resolved without interfering with the investigation. So for example, one bright line would be investigating the prosecutor while the case is ongoing. I think that’s a place where the department would need to draw a line.

CHUCK TODD: Let’s go back in time. In hindsight, doing special counsels, is this the slippery slope that many previous attorneys generals have always feared, that once you appoint one you essentially can’t stop appointing them? Once you claim there’s a rationale of a perception of unfairness, aren’t you stuck, basically, appointing them throughout the rest of the term?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Yeah, that was true, Chuck, under the independent counsel statute, where there was actually a statutory obligation to appoint an independent counsel. It’s not true under the special counsel guidelines. It’s always left to the discretion of the Attorney General to decide whether the public interest warrants it in that particular case. So I do think when you have a similar case, as you do with the Trump and Biden documents, that you have established a precedent. But I don’t know that you need to apply that universally.

CHUCK TODD: I ask that because a decision was made last year not to appoint a special counsel on the Hunter Biden investigation. But now he has appointed a special counsel to look into Joe Biden and these classified documents. Merrick Garland made the decision to put both January 6 and the classified documents under the umbrella of one special counsel. Is he going to be forced to do the same thing with Hunter Biden?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: Well, I think you need to distinguish Hunter Biden from President Biden. We don’t know whether that Hunter Biden implicates the president in any wrongdoing. If it did, I think Merrick Garland would need to make that decision. But as long as it’s just about Hunter Biden, I don’t think that decision point will be reached.

CHUCK TODD: There’s a lot of criticism on Capitol Hill of the FBI. You worked pretty closely with Christopher Wray. What say you about Christopher Wray?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: I think Christopher Wray is doing a superb job under very challenging circumstances. You know, this criticism of the FBI has been ongoing for some time. But if you look at the work the Bureau is doing on a day-to-day basis, I think the American people should have confidence in what they’re doing. And I think Chris Wray is the right person to be in that job now.

CHUCK TODD: Judging by our political climate of the last decade, do we have to figure out another way to politically appoint members of the Justice Department? Or do you think we can get through this moment?

ROD ROSENSTEIN: I don’t think there’s any reason to mess with the appointment process, Chuck. You know, the majority of employees of the department are career employees. The leadership is subject to political appointment, and I think that that’s an appropriate way to manage the department.

CHUCK TODD: All right, Rod Rosenstein, former Deputy Attorney General who’s seen his share of special counsels, and has been through this. Appreciate you coming on–



Sunday Talks, Former DNI John Ratcliffe Gives Perspective on Biden Classified Document Issue

Sunday Talks, Former DNI John Ratcliffe Gives Perspective on Biden Classified Document Issue

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe appeared on Fox News to discuss his perspective on the classified document scandal now making headlines.

Within his remarks, Ratcliffe gives perspective to the issue of classified documents and then contrasts the issue against the previous DOJ position against former President Donald Trump.  However, in the bigger picture the perspective is somewhat askew.

As we have noted from the outset of the Biden term, the installation always appeared to be a ‘one-term’ strategy. Meaning the people behind the installation were using Biden as a single term disposable front man to advance a rapid set of ideological policies.  The controversy of the classified documents facilitates the one term design.

With that approach in mind, the issue of contrast between the Biden documents and the Trump documents is a moot point.  What is done, or not done, regarding Joe Biden has no bearing on the roadmap of continued Trump targeting.  Biden is and was always disposable.  WATCH:


Remove the pretending and what you discover is a replay of DC political manipulation and the continuation of the two-party system around the illusion of choice.  The DNC wing is heading toward Gavin Newsom ’24, while the RNC wing is headed toward Ron DeSantis ’24.   Essentially a replay of 2016’s Hillary vs Jeb.

The UniParty vulture is predictable.   The RNC wing cares about money. The DNC wing cares about ideological power.


Additional Classified Documents Found in the Garage and Home of Joe Biden Personal Residence in Delaware

Earlier today lawyers for Joe Biden made a public release stating additional classified documents were found in the garage and home of Joe Biden in Wilmington, Delaware.

The Wilmington documents are the second stash of Obama-era classified documents to be uncovered. The first collection was found at Washington offices of the Penn Biden Center, a Biden-aligned think tank.  The Penn-Biden Center opened in 2018, the classified documents were from a period of the Obama-Biden term prior to the Biden exit in January 2017.   Where were the documents in the interim period?

Following today’s admission and the press release, Joe Biden was questioned by journalists during a press conference. Video Below:

[Transcript] – […] Q    Mr. President, classified — classified material next to your Corvette.  What were you thinking?

THE PRESIDENT:  Let me — they’re — I’m going to get a chance to speak on all this, God willing, soon, but as I said earlier this week, people — and, by the way, my Corvette is in a locked garage.  Okay?  So, it’s not like they’re sitting out in the street.  But at any rate —

Q    So the material was in a locked garage?

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, as well as my Corvette.

But as I said earlier this week, people know I take classified documents and classified material seriously.  I also said we’re cooperating fully and completely with the Justice Department’s review.

As part of that process, my lawyers reviewed other places where documents might of — from my time as Vice President were stored.  And they finished the review last night.

They discovered a small number of documents with classified markings in storage areas and in file cabinets in my home and my — and my — in my personal library.  This was done in the case of the Biden Penn — this was done in the case of the Biden Penn Center.

The Department of Justice was immediately — as was done, the Department of Justice was immediately cla- — notified, and the lawyers arranged for the Department of Justice to take possession of the document.

So you’re going to see — we’re going to see all this unfold.  I’m confident —

Q    When did you find there was a second batch of documents?

(Cross-talk by reporters.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  (more)


Tucker Digs into the Joe Biden Classified Document Story

Tucker Digs into the Joe Biden Classified Document Story

As only Tucker Carlson can, the Fox News host used his opening monologue tonight to dig a little deeper into the Joe Biden “classified document” story.

This is a very good non-pretending 17 minutes to encapsulate the issues in/around the story.  WATCH:



As Vice President Joe Biden Took Classified Documents from White House to Private Office Storage in Washington DC

According to multiple media reports, it was discovered a week prior to the midterm election that Joe Biden had removed classified documents from his term as Vice-President to a private office in the Penn Biden Center.   The nature of the classified documents is unknown.

The notification from Biden lawyers to the DOJ, presumably on November 2nd, 2022, was kept under wraps until today when CBS first broke the news.   It should be noted that as vice-president Joe Biden held no declassification authority, so removal of the classified material is a much larger breech than the claimed comparison to President Trump declassifying documents and taking them to Mar-a-Lago.

The motive for the public disclosure is somewhat interesting.  Is the publicity through CBS, a known friendly narrative engineering firm for the interests of the Democrat apparatus, a specifically timed release against the backdrop of a DOJ decision not to prosecute President Trump for similar issues?  Something to consider.

(CBS News) – […] The material was identified by personal attorneys for Mr. Biden on Nov. 2, just before the midterm elections, Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president confirmed. The documents were discovered when Mr. Biden’s personal attorneys “were packing files housed in a locked closet to prepare to vacate office space at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, D.C.,” Sauber said in a statement to CBS News.

The documents were contained in a folder that was in a box with other unclassified papers, the sources said. The sources revealed neither what the documents contain nor their level of classification. A source familiar told CBS News the documents did not contain nuclear secrets.

Sauber also said that on the same day the material was discovered, Nov. 2, the White House counsel’s office notified the National Archives, which took possession of the materials the following morning.

“The discovery of these documents was made by the President’s attorneys,” Sauber said. “The documents were not the subject of any previous request or inquiry by the Archives. Since that discovery, the President’s personal attorneys have cooperated with the Archives and the Department of Justice in a process to ensure that any Obama-Biden Administration records are appropriately in the possession of the Archives.”

A source familiar with the matter said representatives from the National Archives then notified the Justice Department.

Garland assigned U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois John Lausch to find out how the material marked classified ended up at the Penn Biden Center. The review is considered a preliminary step, and the attorney general will determine whether further investigation is necessary, including potentially appointing a special counsel.

Lausch was nominated to be U.S. attorney by former President Donald Trump, and he is one of only two current Trump-era U.S. attorneys still serving. The other is Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who is leading an investigation into the president’s son, Hunter Biden.

Lausch recently briefed the attorney general and will eventually submit a final report to Garland. The review is expected to conclude soon.

The Penn Biden Center is a think tank about a mile from the White House, in Washington, D.C., that is affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania and named for the sitting president. (read more)

CTH research revealed the Mar-a-Lago document issue was essentially a nothingburger.  The documents in the Trump case likely connected to the DOJ and FBI operation against the Trump campaign and administration, with much of the information being made public prior to his departure from office.

The FBI/DOJ hype around the Mar-a-Lago issue was intended to be what it was, another round of anti-Trump narrative engineering by elements of the DOJ/FBI and same entities who carried out all previous Trump-Russia antagonisms.  Eventually the wild stories about nuclear secrets were even debunked and admitted by the Washington Post.

Former DNI John Ratcliffe, a man presumed to have seen the Mar-a-Lago documents, suspected the documents were essentially DOJ and FBI work products, including interviews with ‘sources’ like Igor Danchenko, from their fabricated case against President Trump.  Under this scenario, the objective of the DOJ/FBI would be to avoid sunlight on their political targeting operation.  The Ratcliffe viewpoint makes sense when you consider the DOJ/FBI position that no one should ever be allowed to look at those documents, including the appointed Special Master in the case, Judge Raymond Dearie, whom they fought to get removed.

If I had to hazard a guess about what classified documents VP Biden would want to take from the White House during the Obama era, they likely included some form of blackmail material in the event that Obama Inc ever tried to strong arm or threaten the Biden crime syndicate politically.  Documents likely containing dirt on nefarious issues related to the Obama administration that Biden could hold as leverage, an insurance policy of sorts.

It’s interesting the name John Lausch resurfaces as he was the Chicago area DOJ selected by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to review all of the DOJ/FBI material that was not being given to the House Judiciary Committee, and then act as the arbiter/negotiator for release.  This was 2018.

Unknown to us at the time of the Lausch involvement in the document argument was the extent of control the Weissmann and Mueller teams had over the DOJ.

As we said at the time, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has not been able to stop, stall or disrupt their ongoing activity of the corrupt DOJ and FBI elements remaining in 2017/2018.  Team Mueller was simply better than Team Sessions, and they operated as an insurgency.

Jeff Sessions was marginalized and getting his ass kicked by his own department, and then eviscerated by President Trump and the media.  Jeff Sessions appeared weak, ineffective and inept because the Attorney General was weak, ineffective and inept.

Sessions appointed John Lausch to the task of document review in an effort to give the outward impression that he was doing something to combat the stonewalling from inside the DOJ and FBI toward congress; a stonewalling ultimately being carried out by Andrew Weissmann and crew, that AG Jeff Sessions couldn’t control.

John Lausch was appointed by Sessions in 2018 to try and get the criticism to tamp down.  However, it went nowhere.  Now his name resurfaces as the arbiter of whether or not Joe Biden violated the law.


Sketchy at Best Labor Report Shows 223,000 Jobs Gained in December, Year-Over-Year Wage Rate Growth 4.6%

Sketchy at Best Labor Report Shows 223,000 Jobs Gained in December, Year-Over-Year Wage Rate Growth 4.6%

The Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) released the December jobs report today [DATA HERE] showing 223,000 jobs gained in December ’22.

Most of the job growth was in the “leisure and hospitality” sector (+67,000), healthcare (+55,000), construction (+28,000) and social assistance (+20,000).  Additionally, average hourly earnings rose by 0.3%, with a year-over-year measure of wage growth at 4.6%.

At this point in the history of our economic pretending game, we are well aware the employment numbers are heavily manipulated in order to support the government policymaking that is destroying the same workforce they claim to represent.   It’s all a ruse, just look around your community and you will see what I am talking about.

The financial pundits, Wall Street, government policy makers and various individuals and economic gaslighters are concerned that worker wage growth could drive inflation.  This is one of the most aggravating aspects to reviewing the majority of economic punditry. [Example:]

This knuckleheaded narrative engineer from the New York Times/Atlantic even has the audacity to say, “let prices continue to fall to target,” as if there is a single item at any price that is dropping.  His spin is a good example of gaslighting just from the use of the statement “price inflation is falling back towards where we want it.

Price inflation is not price.  ‘Price inflation’ is the rate of increase.  There’s a BIG DIFFERENCE between “inflation falling back” and prices dropping. Inflation falling back is merely a lessening of the rate of price increase.  The price does not drop, and never will.

This reality is why it is infuriating to see government policymakers and pundits decry wage growth as a bad thing that might cause inflation.

Government monetary, fiscal and energy policy created inflation.  Devalued currency from spending, simultaneous to massive government policy changes driving up supply side energy costs, exploded inflation.

Prices for energy, oil, gas, home heating, fuel and food all skyrocketed as a result.  Workers need pay raises to afford these essential costs of life.  However, the same people who created the inflation are now worried that wage rate increases may drive inflation.  The mindset at work here is infuriating.

Consider these empirical data points.   In August of 2021 the Biden administration permanently increased food stamp benefits by 25% for everyone who needed the subsidy {LINK}.  This permanent benefit increase was delivered at the same time as the administration was claiming “inflation was transitory.”  They knew it wasn’t transitory. They were lying.

The Social Security Benefits were also raised in 2022 by 8.7% for the largest ever cost of living adjustment in 2023 {LINK}.  Both the 25% food stamp increase and the 8.7% SSI COLA were needed to offset the inflation created by government policy….  However, the same government doesn’t want wages to rise.  Can you see the hypocrisy.

Workers are being crushed by the outcomes of policy, and those who created the policy making the outcomes do not want worker wages to offset the policy.

We need to see wage growth in the 20% range just to keep pace with the increased cost of living created by policy.  Food costs 40% more, energy 30% more, housing 20% more and the list keeps going.

The prices for many goods have already doubled, worker wages need to compensate for those increases.   However, government, Wall Street, corporations and policy makers do not want to see wage growth that will offset the price of goods because they fear those wage gains will drive inflation.

The financial media, Wall Street, govt policy makers (republican & democrats) and corporations are lying to us and simultaneously killing the working-class. We, the workforce, are in an abusive relationship with govt…. and they have the nerve to blame us for inflation.

Our food costs +40%, energy +30%, housing +20%, all of it.. with interest rates now climbing, making it worse. Yet, they now clutch pearls and worry about our need for higher wages to afford these costs (from their policy) driving inflation higher?

Yet we are supposed to be concerned about giving an entitled republican control of the speaker position in congress because.. why?

Probably the same reason they want us looking at Ukraine, or transgender issues, or queer/gay rights, or climate change, or (fill_in_the_blank with something Ron DeSantis is promoting) all to keep us from realizing our economic life is being destroyed all around us while this constant and insufferable game of pretending continues.

A pox on all their houses! 

I hate them all right now.



Please help truthPeep spread the word :)