Garland Moves To Transform J6 Inquisition Into A Permanent Prosecution

Attorney General Merrick Garland launched a special counsel investigation into former President Donald Trump on Friday, the week before Thanksgiving, to ensure a permanent prosecution of public enemy number one on a third bid for the White House.

The special counsel, Garland said, will take over the investigation of Trump’s purported mishandling of presidential records and probe whether Trump can be held criminally liable for the events that unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021. The former is a desperate follow-up to the latter after the House Select Committee on Jan. 6 emerged empty-handed from an 18-month investigation.

“It is in the public interest to appoint a special prosecutor to independently manage an investigation and prosecution based on recent developments, including [Trump’s] announcement that he is a candidate for president in the next election and the sitting president’s stated intention to be a candidate as well,” Garland told reporters at an afternoon press conference.

Trump officially declared his candidacy to reclaim the Republican Party’s presidential nomination this past Tuesday. Just as his administration was handicapped early on by a special counsel investigation probing left-wing conspiracies of Russian collusion, his third presidential campaign has already been hit with the same playbook.

The timeline of Garland’s announcement three days after Trump’s announcement was surely a political calculation. As the Soviet-style Jan. 6 inquisition began to wind down on Capitol Hill with nothing to show this summer, Garland personally signed off on an unprecedented raid of a former president. Garland sent more than 30 plain clothes FBI agents to search Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago over apparent violations of the Presidential Records Act, a rarely prosecuted statute now being weaponized to prosecute political opponents. The entire investigation was set in motion by a disgruntled bureaucrat at the National Archives and Records Administration. The Justice Department alleged that Trump illegally took classified documents with him to Florida after he left the White House last year.

All Americans want — and deserve — is an attorney general who cares about the law. Garland, however, is far from it. Look no further than his refusal to appoint a special prosecutor on Hunter Biden, whose father, serving as president, presents a legitimate conflict of interest worthy of an independent probe. Garland is a political activist with an axe to grind after his 2016 Supreme Court nomination was thwarted by the man he’s now pledged to prosecute to the ends of the Earth.

The appointment of a second special counsel to sic on Trump is the natural response of a Democrat to the ex-president’s pursuit of a second term. The Russia hoax failed. The impeachment over a fabricated scandal in Ukraine failed. Prosecution over the Emoluments Clause failed, and the Jan. 6 Committee failed to serve the long-sought indictment that’s become the top item on the Democrats’ policy agenda for six years. Now that the Select Committee’s days are numbered with an incoming Republican majority, Garland’s move to bring a special counsel into the mix is a move to cement the Jan. 6 inquiry into a forever investigation. But while the panel admitted their investigation was all about last week’s midterms in March, Garland is pretending his department’s politized investigations are all about public integrity.

“Such an appointment underscores the Department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters,” Garland said Friday. “It also allows prosecutors and agents to continue their work expeditiously and to make decisions indisputably guided only by the facts and the law.”

Had Garland appointed a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden, the attorney general might have a leg to stand on. Instead, the nation’s chief law enforcement official has spent the last two years covering for the incumbent Democratic president while dispatching agents on political enemies, including parents concerned over inappropriate content presented in their children’s classrooms.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Source

Garland Moves To Transform J6 Inquisition Into A Permanent Prosecution

Garland Moves To Transform J6 Inquisition Into A Permanent Prosecution

Attorney General Merrick Garland launched a special counsel investigation into former President Donald Trump on Friday, the week before Thanksgiving, to ensure a permanent prosecution of public enemy number one on a third bid for the White House.

The special counsel, Garland said, will take over the investigation of Trump’s purported mishandling of presidential records and probe whether Trump can be held criminally liable for the events that unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021. The former is a desperate follow-up to the latter after the House Select Committee on Jan. 6 emerged empty-handed from an 18-month investigation.

“It is in the public interest to appoint a special prosecutor to independently manage an investigation and prosecution based on recent developments, including [Trump’s] announcement that he is a candidate for president in the next election and the sitting president’s stated intention to be a candidate as well,” Garland told reporters at an afternoon press conference.

Trump officially declared his candidacy to reclaim the Republican Party’s presidential nomination this past Tuesday. Just as his administration was handicapped early on by a special counsel investigation probing left-wing conspiracies of Russian collusion, his third presidential campaign has already been hit with the same playbook.

The timeline of Garland’s announcement three days after Trump’s announcement was surely a political calculation. As the Soviet-style Jan. 6 inquisition began to wind down on Capitol Hill with nothing to show this summer, Garland personally signed off on an unprecedented raid of a former president. Garland sent more than 30 plain clothes FBI agents to search Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago over apparent violations of the Presidential Records Act, a rarely prosecuted statute now being weaponized to prosecute political opponents. The entire investigation was set in motion by a disgruntled bureaucrat at the National Archives and Records Administration. The Justice Department alleged that Trump illegally took classified documents with him to Florida after he left the White House last year.

All Americans want — and deserve — is an attorney general who cares about the law. Garland, however, is far from it. Look no further than his refusal to appoint a special prosecutor on Hunter Biden, whose father, serving as president, presents a legitimate conflict of interest worthy of an independent probe. Garland is a political activist with an axe to grind after his 2016 Supreme Court nomination was thwarted by the man he’s now pledged to prosecute to the ends of the Earth.

The appointment of a second special counsel to sic on Trump is the natural response of a Democrat to the ex-president’s pursuit of a second term. The Russia hoax failed. The impeachment over a fabricated scandal in Ukraine failed. Prosecution over the Emoluments Clause failed, and the Jan. 6 Committee failed to serve the long-sought indictment that’s become the top item on the Democrats’ policy agenda for six years. Now that the Select Committee’s days are numbered with an incoming Republican majority, Garland’s move to bring a special counsel into the mix is a move to cement the Jan. 6 inquiry into a forever investigation. But while the panel admitted their investigation was all about last week’s midterms in March, Garland is pretending his department’s politized investigations are all about public integrity.

“Such an appointment underscores the Department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters,” Garland said Friday. “It also allows prosecutors and agents to continue their work expeditiously and to make decisions indisputably guided only by the facts and the law.”

Had Garland appointed a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden, the attorney general might have a leg to stand on. Instead, the nation’s chief law enforcement official has spent the last two years covering for the incumbent Democratic president while dispatching agents on political enemies, including parents concerned over inappropriate content presented in their children’s classrooms.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Source

4 Kookiest Cases The DOJ Pursued While Letting Pregnancy Center Firebombers Walk Free

4 Kookiest Cases The DOJ Pursued While Letting Pregnancy Center Firebombers Walk Free

It’s been 186 days since someone — whose name we still don’t know — leaked a draft of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision overturning Roe v. Wade, setting off dozens of violent attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers as well as churches. Pregnancy clinics were firebombed, threatened, and vandalized, yet the Biden administration’s Justice Department has failed to announce the indictment of a single perpetrator.

The DOJ has used the FACE Act — an unconstitutional abuse of power that the Justice Department has turned into an even more blatantly unconstitutional attack on the First Amendment — to target peaceful pro-life advocates. And even though the FACE Act ostensibly protects pro-life pregnancy clinics, not just abortion facilities, the law enforcement arm of the Biden administration has yet to publicly indict anyone who firebombed a pro-life pregnancy center this year.

Meanwhile, the DOJ has prioritized ridiculous-sounding cases that are reflective of our government’s administrative bloat. Whether you think some of these bizarre cases are worth pursuing at all, they certainly don’t seem to rise to the level of urgency that prosecuting arsonists who terrorize pregnancy clinics would. But for Biden’s politicized DOJ, they do. Here are a few of the kookiest cases the DOJ prosecuted while allowing the perpetrators of violent attacks on pregnancy centers to continue walking free.

WV Man Indicted for Buying a Ginseng Root Plant from Ohio

What’s more important than prosecuting political terrorists? Arresting a man who obtained a plant that was “illegally transported” across state lines, according to Merrick Garland’s DOJ. Was it a deadly, psychoactive plant, at least? Nope, it was ginseng, a plant that some claim “may boost energy, lower blood sugar and cholesterol levels, reduce stress, promote relaxation, treat diabetes, and manage sexual dysfunction in men.”

“American ginseng grows wild in shady, mature Appalachian forests,” local news noted. “It’s been used for hundreds of years by the Cherokee and in Appalachian folk medicine. More recently, demand for American ginseng has shot up with Chinese demand for it in herbal medicine. It can sell for up to $850 a pound.” (Sounds expensive, yes, but note that the well-known spice saffron goes for the equivalent of $2,366 per pound.)

For his alleged crime — which the DOJ announced on Aug. 26, 116 days after the Dobbs leak — 59-year-old Tony Lee Coffman of West Virginia faces a maximum of 30 years in prison if convicted.

DOJ Investigates a Massachusetts School for Not Accommodating Indigenous Mayan Language

In September, four months after the Dobbs leak, the DOJ announced it had investigated and subsequently reached a settlement with New Bedford Public Schools in Massachusetts after the school was accused of not sufficiently accommodating K’iche’, a Mayan language spoken in some areas of Guatemala. The Justice Department settlement forced the school to employ translators and interpreters of K’iche’ as well as “train all staff who communicate with parents” on the K’iche’ language. The DOJ would then spend time and resources to “review and provide feedback” on the school’s “proposed training materials.”

In addition, “The Justice Department will monitor the district’s implementation of the settlement agreement for at least three full school years to ensure that the district complies with its obligations,” the agency press release stated, calling such enforcements a “top priority.”

Ohio Woman Pleads Guilty After Selling Marbled Crayfish

Allison Spaulding, a 46-year-old Ohio resident, faces up to a year in prison and up to a $100,000 fine for selling an invasive species of crayfish. She’s charged under the Lacey Act, a conservation law passed in 1900 and significantly broadened since then.

“The Ohio Division of Wildlife added the marbled crayfish to the injurious aquatic invasive species list for Ohio in January 2020,” the DOJ press release explained. “[C]onduct [like Spaulding’s] will be prosecuted and punished,” emphasized Assistant Attorney General Todd Kim of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

There’s likely a compelling reason to limit the sale of invasive species, sure. But this case, for which the aforementioned press release dropped weeks after the Dobbs decision leak, doesn’t seem deserving of priority over hate crimes against pro-lifers.

DOJ Fines Kohl’s, Walmart Millions for Advertising Rayon as Bamboo

On the same day that pro-abortion radicals smashed in the windows of a pregnancy resource center in Portland, Oregon, and graphicly vandalized it, the DOJ announced that retail giants Walmart and Kohl’s would each pay millions after violating the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act. The government accused the companies of “advertising products as made of bamboo when such products were actually made of rayon and did not contain bamboo fibers,” and claiming those products “were environmentally friendly.”

“False environmental claims harm both consumers and honest businesses, and companies that greenwash can expect to pay a price,” warned Samuel Levine, director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Sure, companies should be marketing honestly, and perhaps the federal government should play a role in enforcing that. But you know what didn’t get a press release on the DOJ website with a threatening quote? Anything about bringing the attacker of the Portland pregnancy center to justice.

The DOJ’s Priorities Are Clear

It’s true that criminal investigations can take time. But it’s also true that federal law enforcement agencies have prioritized investigations that are politically expedient, even at the expense of pursuing child sex abuse cases, according to FBI whistleblowers. Meanwhile, the DOJ has shown it has little interest in protecting the rights and safety of pro-lifers, as it has abused the FACE Act to go after at least 22 apparently nonviolent pro-life advocates just this year.

The FBI refused to answer The Federalist’s inquiries last month as to whether it had “made any arrests related to the vandalism, firebombing, etc. of dozens of pregnancy resource centers and churches around the country since the leak of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision,” and the DOJ failed even to respond.


Elle Purnell is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. Follow her work on Twitter @_etreynolds.

Source

5 Days Before Midterms, DOJ Is Still Refusing To Release Biden’s Plan To Federalize Local Elections

5 Days Before Midterms, DOJ Is Still Refusing To Release Biden’s Plan To Federalize Local Elections

The Foundation for Government Accountability has filed a cross-motion against the Department of Justice asking the court to immediately order the DOJ to release its “Strategic Plan” implementing President Biden’s executive order that directed a federal government takeover of elections — before the midterm elections on Tuesday.

As previously reported, Biden’s executive order directs all 600 federal agencies to “expand citizens’ opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process.” Multiple agencies subsequently decided to turn federal facilities — especially those that deal with federal benefits — into voter registration agencies. The agencies are also allowed to work with left-wing get-out-the-vote groups. 

The FGA filed a lawsuit in April 2022 against the DOJ and several other executive agencies for failing to comply with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests pertaining to Biden’s March 2021 directive. On July 12, 2022, a federal district court ordered the DOJ to deliver the documents to the FGA with a deadline of the November midterm elections.

While the FGA was due to receive the documents on Sept. 8, the DOJ did not fully comply with the court order and withheld key documents related to its “Strategic Plan” in carrying out Biden’s order.

“[A]lthough EO 14019 ordered DOJ to adopt election-related policies, and DOJ publicly touts its implementation, and another agency (Department of Defense) apparently had no problem with making its strategic plan publicly available, DOJ is erroneously asserting executive privileges under Exemption 5 and unlawfully withholding [its Strategic Plan] and other public records,” FGA’s motion argues.

According to one document obtained by the FGA through its FOIA request, back in May 2021, a senior White House official expressed his gratitude for the “ambitious and creative ideas that agencies across the government have already begun to develop in order to advance the EO’s mandate to expand access to voter registration and political participation.”

“Why is DOJ and the Biden administration working so hard to hide the full details of these ambitious and creative ideas?” asked FGA CEO and President Tarren Bragdon in a press release. “The Constitution does not envision a role for the president in administering elections, yet that is precisely what President Biden is seeking to do — and his administration is taking great pains to hide their efforts.”

The Biden administration’s intense secrecy and failure to release key details about the executive order raises questions on whether federal agencies are involved in a massive, taxpayer-funded get-out-the-vote scheme to swing elections in Democrats’ favor. Given that left-wing billionaires engaged in the same tactics during the 2020 presidential election and were largely successful, it makes sense that partisans within the federal government would also want to try it themselves.


Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

Source

The DOJ Is Hiding Information About Biden’s Attempts To Interfere In U.S. Elections

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is slow-walking its response to a federal court order mandating that the agency forfeit records pertaining to President Joe Biden’s March 2021 executive order that directed federal agencies to develop plans for federal interference in state election administration.

On Thursday evening, the agency filed a motion for summary judgment with the Fort Myers Division of the U.S. Middle District Court of Florida in an attempt to conceal communication records related to Executive Order 14019, which required all federal departments to “consider ways to expand citizens’ opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process.” In law, “summary judgment” is a decision issued by a court based on statements and evidence for one party against another without going to a full trial.

The move to shield the records in question from the public comes after a federal judge mandated in July that the agency must turn over documents related to Biden’s order to the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), which sued the DOJ back in April after its officials failed to respond to FGA’s July 2021 open records requests. While the DOJ ultimately turned over a few of the records to FGA last month, the documents were heavily redacted and did not include the DOJ’s 15-page “strategic plan” on how the agency intends to comply with Biden’s executive order.

In their Thursday legal filing arguing for a summary judgment, the DOJ claimed that its Civil Rights Division (CRT) “has submitted a reasonably specific declaration” describing the search that CRT “conducted for records responsive to FGA’s [Freedom of Information Act] request” and that documents withheld or redacted by the DOJ are protected under the “presidential communications privilege.”

“The presidential communications privilege applies to the Strategic Plan because it was ‘solicited and received by the President[’s] . . . immediate White House advisers with broad and significant responsibility for investigating and formulating the advice to be given the President’ regarding voting rights issues,” the DOJ filing reads. “The Strategic Plan therefore falls squarely within the scope of the presidential communications privilege.”

Most notable in the agency’s arguments, however, is the contention that the release of the information requested by FGA would cause “public confusion” and that “such public confusion would result from disclosure of the Strategic Plan because it contains many proposed actions that the public might construe as ‘future commitments, past actions, or provisions already in place.’”

“DOJ therefore properly withheld the Strategic Plan in its entirety,” the agency claimed.

In response to the DOJ’s continued coverup, FGA President and CEO Tarren Bragdon issued a statement blasting the agency’s behavior, saying that it’s “clear” that Biden’s administration “has weaponized DOJ to hide records and is using the legal process to run out the clock before the midterm elections.”

“DOJ offered flimsy excuses to justify concealing key information regarding their participation in government-funded ‘get out the vote’ efforts,” Bragdon said. “FGA will not stop fighting to uncover these records and expose the full scope of the Biden administration’s mass voter registration scheme. The law and the American people are on our side.”

As reported by Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway, Biden’s executive order isn’t just unethical and unconstitutional, but “a recipe for chaos, confusion, and fraud at a time when election security concerns are particularly fraught.”

“Executive Order 14019 ignores that the Constitution does not give the executive branch authority over elections. That power is reserved for the states, with a smaller role for Congress,” Hemingway explained. Considering that “H.R. 1 and other Democrat Party efforts to grab more control over elections have thus far failed,” she added, “Congress hasn’t authorized such an expansion.”

With the 2022 midterms rapidly approaching, the Biden DOJ has since been ramping up its efforts to intervene in elections under the guise of targeting voter “intimidation” in various states across the country. Most recently, the DOJ’s district attorney in New Hampshire, Jane Young, appointed Assistant U.S. Attorney Seth R. Aframe to “lead the efforts of her office in connection with the Justice Department’s nationwide Election Day Program” for the November elections.

“The Department of Justice has an important role in deterring and combatting discrimination and intimidation at the polls, threats of violence directed at election officials and poll workers, and election fraud,” an agency press release read. “The Department will address these violations wherever they occur.”


Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Source

“The Force for Change,” The Use of Twitter During the Arab Spring as a Technological Beta Test for U.S. Intelligence Control of Public Opinion and Elections

“The Force for Change,” The Use of Twitter During the Arab Spring as a Technological Beta Test for U.S. Intelligence Control of Public Opinion and Elections

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.

WSGR product and central node Alex Macgillivray threads the Obama and Biden White Houses together. Macgillivray currently serves as the Biden White House CTO. Macgillivray appointed WSGR product Gadde to be his successor at Twitter and whereby Gadde was central both to the de-platforming of then President Trump and the censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop affair. It further aggravates the position on Twitter relative to engagement in color revolutions.

At the time, President Obama said this,

“The United States has supported the forces of change.” – President Obama [2]

Obama did not say that he supported the countries of change but rather the forces of change; citing the countries as “inspiration”.

Those are carefully constructed statements with specific word choice and when discernment is applied, we understand the “forces of change” to be digital ones, like Twitter. This comports with the Arab Spring being a Twitter Beta test. The same general people are now positioned to serve the Biden Administration on the follow-through. (read more

Yes.  A million-fold YES.

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:

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.

Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01.  The Department of Homeland Security came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was formed.

When President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

The preexisting Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security apparatus: a domestic surveillance state. However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism based on political ideology.

The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four pillars of this new institution. Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government.

We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake. However, we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in 2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the design. By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the aftermath. The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch of Government was quietly created.

As time passed, and the system operators became familiar with their new tools, technology allowed the tentacles of the system to reach out and touch us. That is when we first started to notice that something very disconcerting was happening. Those four pillars are the root of it, and if we take the time to understand how the Fourth Branch originated, questions about this current state of perpetual angst will start to make sense.

Remember, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding Fourth Branch of Government. Such an effort would be exhausting and likely take our discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.

History provided enough warnings from Dwight D. Eisenhower (military) to John F. Kennedy (CIA), to Richard Nixon (FBI), to all the modern versions of warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell.

None of those prior reference points are invalid, and all documented outlines of historic reference are likely true and accurate. However, a generational review is not useful, as the reference impacting us ‘right now‘ gets lost.

Instead, we pick up the expansive and weaponized intelligence system as it manifests after 9/11/01, and my goal is to highlight how the modern version of the total intelligence apparatus has metastasized into a Fourth Branch of Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every facet of our life.  We The People are under surveillance.

If we take the modern construct, originating at the speed of technological change, we can also see how the oversight or “check/balance” in our system of government became functionally obsolescent.

After many years of granular research about the intelligence apparatus inside our government, in the summer of 2020 I visited Washington DC to ask specific questions. My goal was to go where the influence agents within government actually operate, and to discover the people deep inside the institutions no one elected, and few people pay attention to.

It was during this process when I discovered how information is purposefully put into containment silos; essentially a formal process to block the flow of information between agencies and between the original branches. While frustrating to discover, the silo effect was important because understanding the communication between networks leads to our ability to reconcile conflict between what we perceive and what’s actually taking place.

After days of research and meetings in DC during 2020; amid a town that was serendipitously shut down due to COVID-19; I found a letter slid under the door of my room in a nearly empty hotel with an introduction of sorts. The subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After many hours of specific questions and answers on specific examples, I realized why our nation is in this mess. That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.

I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works: (1) to control every other branch of government; (2) how it functions as an entirely independent branch of government with no oversight; (3) how and why it was created to be independent from oversight; (4) what is the current mission of the IC Branch, and most importantly (5) who operates it.

The Intelligence Branch is an independent functioning branch of government, it is no longer a subsidiary set of agencies within the Executive Branch as most would think. To understand the Intelligence Branch, we need to drop the elementary school civics class lessons about three coequal branches of government and replace that outlook with the modern system that created itself.

The Intelligence Branch functions much like the State Dept, through a unique set of public-private partnerships that support it. Big Tech industry collaboration with intelligence operatives is part of that functioning, almost like an NGO. However, the process is much more important than most think. In this problematic perspective of a corrupt system of government, the process is the flaw – not the outcome.

There are people making decisions inside this little known, unregulated and out-of-control branch of government that impact every facet of our lives.

None of the people operating deep inside the Intelligence Branch were elected; and our elected representative House members genuinely do not know how the system works. I assert this position affirmatively because I have talked to House and Senate staffers, including the chiefs of staff for multiple House & Senate committee seats. They are not malicious people; however, they are genuinely clueless of things that happen outside their silo. That is part of the purpose of me explaining it, with examples, in full detail with sunlight.

We begin….

In April of 2016, the FBI launched a counterintelligence operation against presidential candidate Donald Trump. The questioning about that operation is what New York Representative Elise Stefanik cites in March of 2017, approximately 11 months later (First Two Minutes).

Things to note:

♦ Notice how FBI Director James Comey just matter-of-factly explains no one outside the DOJ was informed about the FBI operation. Why? Because that’s just the way things are done. His justification for unilateral operations was “because of the sensitivity of the matter“, totally ignoring any constitutional or regulatory framework for oversight; because, well, quite simply, there isn’t any. The intelligence apparatus inside the DOJ/FBI can, and does, operate based on their own independent determinations of authority.

♦ Notice also how FBI Director Comey shares his perspective that informing the National Security Council (NSC) is the equivalent of notifying the White House. The FBI leadership expressly believe they bear no responsibility to brief the Chief Executive. As long as they tell some unknown, unelected, bureaucratic entity inside the NSC, their unwritten responsibility to inform the top of their institutional silo is complete. If the IC wants to carve out the Oval Office, they simply plant information inside the NSC and, from their perspective, their civic responsibility to follow checks-and-balances is complete. This is an intentional construct.

♦ Notice how Comey obfuscates notification to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), by avoiding the fact James Clapper was the DNI from outset of the counterintelligence operation throughout the remainder of Obama’s term. When I get deeper into the process, we will understand how the Intelligence Branch has intentionally used the creation of the DNI position (established post 9/11/01) as a method to avoid oversight, not enhance it. Keeping an oblivious doofus like James Clapper in position held strategic value [Doofus Reminder HERE].

That video of James Comey being questioned by Elise Stefanik was the first example given to me by someone who knew the background of everything that was taking place preceding that March 20, 2017, hearing. That FBI reference point is a key to understand how the Intelligence Branch operates with unilateral authority above Congress (legislative branch), above the White House (executive branch), and even above the court system (judicial branch).

Also, watch this short video of James Clapper, because it is likely many readers have forgotten, and likely even more readers have never seen it. Watch closely how then White House national security adviser John Brennan is responding in that video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director, this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place. WATCH:

[Sidebar: Every time I post this video it gets scrubbed from YouTube (example), so save it if you ever want to see it again.]

The video of James Clapper highlights how the ODNI position (created with good national security intention) ended up becoming the fulcrum for modern weaponization, and is now an office manipulated by agencies with a vested interest in retaining power. The Intelligence Branch holds power over the ODNI through their influence and partnership with the body that authorizes the power within it, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).

Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in their favor. The checks create silos of proprietary information, classified information, vaults of information that work around oversight issues. The silos, which include the exploitation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court, or FISC) are part of the problem.

Ironically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been prevented. The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the 9/11 commission.

The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside the Executive Branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to analyze threats to the U.S. This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.

However, the creation of the DNI office also created an unconstitutional surveillance system of the American people.  The DNI office became the tool to take massive amounts of data and use it to target specific Americans.  Weaponizing the DNI office for political targeting is now the purpose of the DNI office as it exists.

The illegal and unlawful nature of the surveillance creates a need for careful protection amid the group who operate in the shadows of electronic information and domestic surveillance. You will see how it was critical to install a person uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the Intelligence Branch of Government.

• The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George W. Bush. Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing resolutions and individual spending bills.

Why does this matter? Because many people think defunding the Intelligence Community is a solution; it is not…. at least, not yet. Worse yet, the corrupt divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign entities).

• When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007, they took office with a plan. Nancy Pelosi became Speaker, and Democrats controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader. Barack Obama was a junior senator from Illinois.

Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting. Baseline budgeting means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the next year budget. All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within baseline budgeting.

Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation. This is the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect. TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery Program), auto bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were all part of the non-budget spending. The federal reserve assisted with Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.

Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process since September of 2007.

• While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S. military was cut, but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded. We were all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican Party wanted to keep us that way. However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.

The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control over specific elements inside the U.S. government. Eric Holder played a key role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.

AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were aware of the larger institutional objectives. One of those objectives was weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the DOJ that had no inspector general oversight. For most people the DOJ-NSD weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting candidate Donald Trump many years later. However, by then the Holder crew had executed almost eight full years of background work.

• The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI. Why was that important? Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone who needs or holds a security clearance. The removal of security clearances could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they were assembling. Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security clearances were easy to justify.

Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this filtration within the security clearance process. How does that issue later manifest? Just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency has become, specifically including the FBI.

• At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making room for the next phase was being assembled. Names like Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.

Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional objective. Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his first foreign trip. The State Department worked with grassroots organizers (mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya. Obama leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan for contacts and support.

Why does this aspect matter to us? Well, you might remember how much effort the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources for the various mideast rebellions the White House and DoS supported. This was the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech social media.

In many ways, the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The U.S. intelligence community working with social media platforms and political operatives.

Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“. Where does this contractor activity manifest? In the FISA Court opinion of Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or MOU.

Hopefully, you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was. None of this was accidental, all of this was by design, and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally allowing most of this to take place.  The tools the government used to monitor threats were now being used to monitor every American.  WE THE PEOPLE were now the threat the national security system was monitoring.

That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the modern IC was created. Next, we will go into how all these various intelligence networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the President from knowing their activity.

♦ When Barack Obama was installed in January 2009, the Democrats held a 60-seat majority in the U.S. Senate. As the people behind the Obama installation began executing their longer-term plan, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was a tool to create the Intelligence Branch; it was not an unintentional series of events.

When Obama was installed, Dianne Feinstein was the Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and Democrat operative Dan Jones was her lead staffer. Feinstein was completely controlled by those around her including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The CIA was in the process of turning over personnel following the Bush era, and as a result of a massive multi-year narrative of diminished credibility (Iraq WMD), a deep purge was underway. Obama/Holder were in the process of shifting intelligence alignment and the intensely political Democrat Leader Harry Reid was a key participant.

THE TRAP – Many people say that Congress is the solution to eliminating the Fourth and superseding Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. This is an exercise in futility because the Legislative Branch, specifically the SSCI, facilitated the creation of the Intelligence Branch. The SSCI cannot put the genie they created back in the bottle without admitting they too are corrupt; and the background story of their corruption is way too intense to be exposed now.

Every member of the SSCI is compromised in some controlling manner. Those Senators who disliked the control over them; specifically disliked because the risk of sunlight was tenuous and, well, possible; have either left completely or stepped down from the committee. None of the SSCI members past or present would ever contemplate saying openly what their tenure involved.

[Note: You might remember when Vice Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages surfaced, there was a controlled Republican SSCI member who came to his defense in February of 2018. It was not accidental that exact Senator later became the chair of the SSCI himself. That Republican Senator is Marco Rubio, now vice-chair since the Senate re-flipped back to the optics of Democrat control in 2021.]

All of President Obama’s 2009 intelligence appointments required confirmation from the Senate. The nominees had to first pass through the Democrat controlled SSCI, and then to a full Senate vote where Democrats held a 60-vote majority. Essentially, Obama got everyone he wanted in place easily. Rahm Emmanuel was Obama’s Chief of Staff, and Valerie Jarrett was Senior Advisor.

Tim Geithner was Treasury Secretary in 2010 when the joint DOJ/FBI and IRS operation to target the Tea Party took place after the midterm “shellacking” caused by the Obamacare backlash. Mitch McConnell was Minority Leader in the Senate but supported the targeting of the Tea Party as his Senate colleagues were getting primaried by an angry and effective grassroots campaign. McConnell’s friend, Senator Bob Bennett, getting beaten in Utah was the final straw.

Dirty Harry and Mitch McConnell saw the TEA Party through the same prism. The TEA Party took Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts (Scott Brown); Sharon Angle was about to take out Harry Reid in Nevada; Arlen Spector was taken down in Pennsylvania; Senator Robert Byrd died; Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary to Joe Miller in Alaska; McConnell’s nominee Mike Castle lost to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware; Rand Paul won in Kentucky. This is the background. The peasants were revolting…. and visibly angry Mitch McConnell desperately made a deal with the devil to protect himself.

In many ways, the TEA Party movement was/is very similar to the MAGA movement. The difference in 2010 was the absence of a head of the movement, in 2015 Donald Trump became that head figure who benefited from the TEA Party energy. Trump came into office in 2017 with the same congressional opposition as the successful TEA Party candidates in 2011.

Republicans took control of the Senate following the 2014 mid-terms. Republicans took control of the SSCI in January 2015. Senator Richard Burr became chairman of the SSCI, and Dianne Feinstein shifted to Vice-Chair. Dirty Harry Reid left the Senate, and Mitch McConnell took power again.

Republicans were in control of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2015 when the Intelligence Branch operation against candidate Donald Trump was underway. [Feinstein’s staffer, Dan Jones, left the SSCI so he could act as a liaison and political operative between private-sector efforts (Fusion GPS, Chris Steele) and the SSCI.] The SSCI was a participant in that Fusion GPS/Chris Steele operation, and as a direct consequence Republicans were inherently tied to the problem with President Trump taking office in January of 2017. Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats was a member of the SSCI.

Bottom line…. When it came to the intelligence system targeting Donald Trump during the 2015/2016 primary, the GOP was just as much at risk as their Democrat counterparts.

When Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, the SSCI was shocked more than most. They knew countermeasures would need to be deployed to protect themselves from any exposure of their prior intelligence conduct.  Immediately Senator Dianne Feinstein stepped down from the SSCI, and Senator Mark Warner was elevated to Vice Chairman.

Indiana’s own Mike Pence, now Vice President, recommended fellow Hoosier, SSCI Senator Dan Coats, to become President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). [Apply hindsight here]

• To give an idea of the Intelligence Branch power dynamic, remind yourself how House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Chairman Devin Nunes, tried to get access to the DOJ/FBI records of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign via Carter Page.

Remember, Devin Nunes only saw a portion of the FISA trail from his review of a Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) previously given to President Obama. Chairman Nunes had to review the PDB at the White House SCIF due to compartmented intelligence, another example of the silo benefit.

Remember the massive stonewalling and blocking of the DOJ/FBI toward Nunes? Remember the back-and-forth battle over declassification surrounding the Nunes memo?

Remember, after Nunes went directly to House Speaker Paul Ryan for help (didn’t get any), the DOJ only permitted two members from each party within the HPSCI to review the documents, and only at the DOJ offices of main justice?

Contrast that amount of House Intel Committee railroading by intelligence operatives in the DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI, with the simple request by Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner asking to see the Carter Page FISA application and immediately a copy being delivered to him on March 17th 2017.

Can you see which intelligence committee is aligned with the deepest part of the deep state?

Oh, how quickly we forget:

The contrast of ideological alignment between the House, Senate and Intelligence Branch is crystal clear when viewed through the prism of cooperation. You can see which legislative committee holds the power and support of the Intelligence Branch. The Senate Intel Committee facilitates the corrupt existence of the IC Branch, so the IC Branch only cooperates with the Senate Intel Committee. It really is that simple.

• The Intelligence Branch carefully selects its own members by controlling how security clearances are investigated and allowed (FBI). The Intelligence Branch also uses compartmentalization of intelligence as a way to keep each agency, and each downstream branch of government (executive, legislative and judicial), at arm’s length as a method to stop anyone from seeing the larger picture of their activity. I call this the “silo effect“, and it is done by design.

I have looked at stunned faces when I presented declassified silo product from one agency to the silo customers of another. You would be astonished at what they don’t know because it is not in their ‘silo’.

Through the advice and consent rules, the Intelligence Branch uses the SSCI to keep out people they consider dangerous to their ongoing operations. Any appointee to the intelligence community must first pass through the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, before they get a full Senate vote. If the SSCI rejects the candidate, they simply refuse to take up the nomination. The president is then blocked from that appointment. This is what happened with President Trump over and over again.

• Additionally, the Intelligence Branch protects itself, and its facilitating allies through the formal classification process. The Intelligence Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} This is something 99.9% of the people on our side get totally and frustratingly wrong.

No one can declassify, or make public, anything the Intelligence Branch will not agree to. Doubt this? Ask Ric Grenell, John Ratcliffe, or even President Trump himself.

• The classification process is determined inside the Intelligence Branch, all by themselves. They get to choose what rank of classification exists on any work product they create; and they get to decide what the classification status is of any work product that is created by anyone else. The Intelligence Branch has full control over what is considered classified information and what is not. The Intelligence Branch defines what is a “national security interest” and what is not. A great technique for hiding fingerprints of corrupt and illegal activity.

[For familiar reference see the redactions to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The Intelligence Branch does all redactions.]

• Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control.

If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member? They have to go through the SSCI confirmation. See the problem?

Yes, there are ways to break up the Intelligence Branch, but they do not start with any congressional effort. As you can see above, the process is the flaw – not the solution. Most conservative pundits have their emphasis on the wrong syllable. Their cornerstone is false.

For their own self-preservation, the Intelligence Branch has been interfering in our elections for years. The way to tear this apart begins with STATE LEVEL election reform that blocks the Legislative Branch from coordinating with the Intelligence Branch.

The extreme federalism approach is critical and also explains why Joe Biden has instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the full power of the DOJ to stop state level election reform efforts. The worry of successful state level election control is also why the Intelligence Branch now needs to support the federal takeover of elections.

Our elections have been usurped by the Intelligence Branch. Start with honest elections and we will see just how much Democrat AND Republican corruption is dependent on manipulated election results. Start at the state level. Start there…. everything else is downstream.

COLLAPSED OVERSIGHT – The modern system to ‘check’ the Executive Branch was the creation of the legislative “Gang of Eight,” a legislative oversight mechanism intended to provide a bridge of oversight between the authority of the intelligence community within the Executive Branch.

The Go8 construct was designed to allow the President authority to carry out intelligence operations and provide the most sensitive notifications to a select group within Congress.

The Go8 oversight is directed to the position, not the person, and consists of: (1) The Speaker of the House; (2) The Minority Leader of the House; (3) The Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI; (4) The Ranking Member (minority) of the HPSCI; (5) The Leader of the Senate; (6) The Minority Leader of the Senate; (7) The Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, SSCI; and finally (8) the Vice-Chair of the SSCI.

Example: When the Chief Executive (the President) initiates an intelligence operation on behalf of the United States, the President triggers a “finding memo.” In essence, the instruction to the intel agency or agencies to authorize a covert operation. When that process takes place, the Go8 are the first people notified. Depending on the sensitivity of the operation, sometimes the G08 are notified immediately after the operation is conducted. The notification can be a phone call or an in-person briefing.

Because of the sensitivity of their intelligence information, the Gang of Eight hold security clearances that permit them to receive and review all intelligence operations. The intelligence community are also responsible for briefing the Go8 with the same information they use to brief the President.

~ 2021 Gang of Eight ~

The Go8 design is intended to put intelligence oversight upon both political parties in Congress; it is designed that way by informing the minority leaders of both the House and Senate as well as the ranking minority members of the SSCI and HPSCI. Under the concept, the President cannot conduct an intelligence operation; and the intelligence community cannot carry out intelligence gathering operations without the majority and minority parties knowing about it.

The modern design of this oversight system was done to keep rogue and/or corrupt intelligence operations from happening. However, as we shared in the preview to this entire discussion, the process was usurped during the Obama era. {GO DEEP}

Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, that 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 the Go8. Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance 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.

Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact he said exactly the opposite, he said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC). The unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor.

Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?

Again, no one saw the immediate issue. What Comey just described on that March Day in 2017 was the usurpation of the entire reason the Gang of Eight exists; to eliminate the potential for political weaponization of the Intelligence Community by the executive branch. The G08 notifications to the majority and minority are specifically designed to make sure what James Comey admitted to doing was never supposed to happen.

Team Obama carried out a political operation using the intelligence community and the checks-and-balances in the system were intentionally usurped. This is an indisputable fact.

Worse still, the entire legislative branch of Congress, which then specifically included the Republicans that now controlled the House and Senate, did nothing. They just ignored what was admitted. The usurpation was willfully ignored.

The mechanism of the G08 was bypassed without a twitch of condemnation or investigation…. because the common enemy was Donald Trump.

This example highlights the collapse of the system. Obama, the Executive Branch, collapsed the system by usurping the process; in essence the process became the bigger issue, and the lack of immediate Legislative Branch reaction became evidence of open acceptance. The outcomes of the usurpation played out over the next four years, Donald J. Trump was kneecapped and lost his presidency because of it. However, the bigger issue of the collapse still exists.

The downstream consequence of the Legislative Branch accepting the Executive Branch usurpation meant both intelligence committees were compromised. Additionally, the leadership of both the House and Senate were complicit. Think about this carefully. The Legislative Branch allowance of the intelligence usurpation meant the Legislative Branch was now subservient to the Intelligence Branch.

That’s where we are.

Right now.

That’s where we are.

Term-3 Obama is now back in the White House with Joe Biden.

NOTE: Former Obama National Security aide and counsel to the President, Lisa Monaco, is in her current position as Deputy Attorney General, specifically to make sure all of these revelations do not become a legal risk to Barack Obama and the people who created them.  The SSCI confirmed Monaco for this purpose because the Senate is just as much at risk.

Term-1 and Term-2 Obama usurped the ‘check and balance‘ within the system and weaponized the intelligence apparatus. During Trump’s term that weaponization was covered up by a compliant congress, complicit senate intelligence committee, and not a single member of the oversight called it out. Now, Term-3 Obama steps back in to continue the cover up and continue the weaponization.

Hopefully, you can now see the scale of the problem that surrounds us with specific citation for what has taken place. What I just explained to you above is not conspiracy theory, it is admitted fact that anyone can look upon. Yet….

Have you seen this mentioned anywhere? Have you seen this called out by anyone in Congress? Have you seen anyone in media (ally or adversary) call this out? Have you seen any member of the Judicial Branch stand up and say wait, what is taking place is not okay? Have you seen a single candidate for elected office point this out? Have you seen anyone advising a candidate to point this out?

This is our current status. It is not deniable. The truth exists regardless of our comfort.

Not a single person in power will say openly what has taken place. They are scared of the Fourth Branch. The evidence of what has taken place is right there in front of our face. The words, actions and activities of those who participated in this process are not deniable, in fact most of it is on record.

There are only two members of the Gang of Eight who have existed in place from January 2007 (the real beginning of Obama’s term, two years before he took office when the Congress flipped). Only two members of the G08 have been consistently in place from January of 2007 to right now, today. All the others came and went, but two members of the Gang of Eight have been part of that failed and collapsed oversight throughout the past 15 years, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.

TECHNOLOGY – On a global scale – the modern intelligence gathering networks are now dependent on data collection to execute their intelligence missions. In the digital age nations have been executing various methods to gather that data. Digital surveillance has replaced other methods of interception. Those surveillance efforts have resulted in a coalescing of regional data networks based on historic multi-national relationships.

We have a recent frame of reference for the “U.S. data collection network” within the NSA. Through the allied process the Five Eyes nations all rely on the NSA surveillance database (U.K, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and U.S.) The NSA database provides the digital baseline for intelligence operations in defense of our allies. The portals into the NSA database are essentially an assembly of allies in like-minded ideological connection to the United States.

Unfortunately, there have been some revelations about the NSA database being used to monitor our allies, like in the example of Germany and surveillance on Angela Merkel’s phone. As long as “the good guys” are operating honorably, allies of the United States can feel confident about having protection from the NSA surveillance of global digital data. We warn our friends if we detect something dangerous etc.

The U.S. has nodes on communication pipelines to intercept and extract data. We have also launched hundreds, perhaps thousands, of satellites to conduct surveillance and gather up data. All of this data is fed into the NSA database where it is monitored (presumably) as a national security mechanism, and in defense of our allies.

However, what about data collection or data networks that are outside the NSA database? What do our enemies do? The NSA database is just one intelligence operation of digital surveillance amid the entire world, and we do not allow access by adversaries we are monitoring. So what do they do? What do our allies do who might not trust the United States due to past inconsistencies, ie. the Middle East?

The answers to those questions highlight other data collection networks. So, a brief review of the major players is needed.

CHINA – China operates their own database. They, like the NSA, scoop up data for their system. Like us, China launches satellites and deploys other electronic data collection methods to download into their database. This is why the issues of electronic devices manufactured in China becomes problematic. Part of the Chinese data collection system involves the use of spyware, hacking and extraction.

Issues with Chinese communication company Huawei take on an added dimension when you consider the goal of the Chinese government to conduct surveillance and assemble a network of data to compete with the United States via the NSA. Other Chinese methods of surveillance and data-collection are less subversive, as in the examples of TicTok and WeChat. These are Chinese social media companies that are scraping data just like the NSA scrapes data from Facebook, Twitter and other Silicon Valley tech companies. [ Remember, the Intelligence Branch is a public-private partnership. ]

RUSSIA – It is very likely that Russia operates their own database. We know Russia launches satellites, just like China and the USA, for the same purposes. Russia is also very proficient at hacking into other databases and extracting information to store and utilize in their own network. The difference between the U.S., China and Russia is likely that Russia spends more time on the hacking aspect because they do not generate actual technology systems as rapidly as the U.S. and China.

The most recent database creation is an outcome of an ally having to take action because they cannot rely on the ideology of the United States remaining consistent, as the administrations ping-pong based on ideology.

SAUDI ARABIA – Yes, in 2016 we discovered that Saudi Arabia was now operating their own intelligence data-gathering operation. It would make sense, given the nature of the Middle East and the constant fluctuations in political support from the United States. It is a lesson the allied Arab community and Gulf Cooperation Council learned quickly when President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 and launched the Islamist Spring (Arab Spring) upon them.

I have no doubt the creation of the Saudi intelligence network was specifically because the Obama administration started supporting radical Islamists within the Muslim Brotherhood and threw fuel on the fires of extremism all over the Arab world.

Think about it., What would you do if you were Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan, Oman or Yemen and you knew the United States could just trigger an internal uprising of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood to seek your destruction?

Without a doubt, those urgent lessons from 2009, 2010, 2011 triggered the formation of the Arab Intelligence Network as a network to defend itself with consistency. They assembled the network and activated it in 2017 as pictured above.

Israel – Along a similar outlook to the Arab network, no doubt Israel operates an independent data collection system as a method of protecting itself from ever-changing U.S. politics amid a region that is extremely hostile to its very existence. Like the others, Israel launches proprietary satellites, and we can be sure they use covert methods to gather electronic data just like the U.S. and China.

As we have recently seen in the Pegasus story, Israel creates spyware programs that are able to track and monitor cell phone communications of targets. The spyware would not work unless Israel had access to some network where the phone meta-data was actually stored. So yeah, it makes sense for Israel to operate an independent intelligence database.

♦ Summary: As we understand the United States Intelligence Branch of government as the superseding entity that controls the internal politics of our nation, we also must consider that multiple nations have the same issue. There are major intelligence networks around the world beside the NSA “Five-Eyes” database. China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel all operate proprietary databases deploying the same tools and techniques for assembly.

The geopolitical conflict that has always existed has now shifted into a digital battle-space. The Intelligence Agencies from these regions are now operating as the backbone of the government that uses them, and has become dependent on them. [<- Reread that].

Once you accept the digital-era intelligence apparatus of China, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, The United States and Israel, are now the primary national security mechanisms for stabilization of government; then you accept the importance of those intelligence operations.

Once you understand how foundational those modern intelligence operations have become for the stability and continuity of those governments…… then you begin to understand just how the United States intelligence community became more important than the government that created it.

From that point it is then critical to understand that domestic intelligence operations are underway to monitor the electronic communication of American citizens inside our own country.  YOU are under surveillance.  The parents who confront school boards are under surveillance.  The political operatives inside the FBI are monitoring everyone who comes onto the radar, that is why the National School Boards Association asked the White House, then the DOJ, to have the FBI start targeting parents.  Are things making sense now?

Public Private Partnership – The modern Fourth Branch of Government is only possible because of a Public-Private partnership with the intelligence apparatus. You do not have to take my word for it, the partnership is so brazened they have made public admissions.

The biggest names in Big Tech announced in June their partnership with the Five Eyes intelligence network, ultimately controlled by the NSA, to: (1) monitor all activity in their platforms; (2) identify extremist content; (3) look for expressions of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE); and then, (4) put the content details into a database where the Five Eyes intelligence agencies (U.K., U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand) can access it.

Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft are all partnering with the intelligence apparatus. It might be difficult to fathom how openly they admit this, but they do. Look at this sentence in the press release (emphasis mine):

[…] “The Group will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.”

Think about that sentence structure very carefully. They are “adding to” the preexisting list…. admitting the group (aka Big Tech) already have access to the the intelligence-sharing database… and also admitting there is a preexisting list created by the Five Eyes consortium.

Obviously, who and what is defined as “extremist content” will be determined by the Big Tech insiders themselves. This provides a gateway, another plausible deniability aspect, to cover the Intelligence Branch from any oversight.

When the Intelligence Branch within government wants to conduct surveillance and monitor American citizens, they run up against problems due to the Constitution of the United States. They get around those legal limitations by sub-contracting the intelligence gathering, the actual data mining, and allowing outside parties (contractors) to have access to the central database.

The government cannot conduct electronic searches (4th amendment issue) without a warrant; however, private individuals can search and report back as long as they have access. What is being admitted is exactly that preexisting partnership. The difference is that Big Tech will flag the content from within their platforms, and now a secondary database filled with the extracted information will be provided openly for the Intelligence Branch to exploit.

The volume of metadata captured by the NSA has always been a problem because of the filters needed to make the targeting useful. There is a lot of noise in collecting all data that makes the parts you really want to identify more difficult to capture. This new admission puts a new massive filtration system in the metadata that circumvents any privacy protections for individuals.

Previously, the Intelligence Branch worked around the constitutional and unlawful search issue by using resources that were not in the United States. A domestic U.S. agency, working on behalf of the U.S. government, cannot listen on your calls without a warrant. However, if the U.S. agency sub-contracts to say a Canadian group, or foreign ally, the privacy invasion is no longer legally restricted by U.S. law.

What was announced in June 2021 is an alarming admission of a prior relationship along with open intent to define their domestic political opposition as extremists.

July 26 (Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.

Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes, adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.

The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove it. (read more)

The influence of the Intelligence Branch now reaches into our lives, our personal lives.

In the decades before 9/11/01 the intelligence apparatus intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize against domestic enemies.

After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after 9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence apparatus being granted a massive amount of power.  Simultaneously the mission of the intelligence community now encompassed monitoring domestic threats as defined by the people who operate the surveillance system.

The problem with assembled power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own malicious benefit. That is exactly what the network of President Barack Obama did.

The Obama network took pre-assembled intelligence weapons (we should never have allowed to be created) and turned those weapons into political tools for his radical and fundamental change. The target was the essential fabric of our nation.

Ultimately, this corrupt political process gave power to create the Fourth Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. From that perspective the fundamental change was successful.

This is the scale of corrupt political compromise on both sides of the DC dynamic that we are up against.  Preserving this system is also what removing Donald Trump is all about….  The targeting of President Trump in order to preserve the system, the system that was weaponized during the Obama administration, is what the actions of the DOJ and FBI were all about.

What would powerful people in DC do to stop the American people from finding this out?

…. Including a raid on Mar-a-Lago.

Source

Office Of Republican Tennessee Governor Bill Lee Refuses To Condemn FBI Raid, Prosecution of 11 Peaceful Pro-Lifers

Office Of Republican Tennessee Governor Bill Lee Refuses To Condemn FBI Raid, Prosecution of 11 Peaceful Pro-Lifers

The office of Republican Gov. Bill Lee failed to condemn the prosecution of 11 demonstrators charged by the DOJ for their role in a peaceful pro-life protest in his state of Tennessee. The governor’s office also refused to say whether Lee plans on doing anything to protect the First Amendment rights of Tennessean pro-lifers targeted by President Biden’s corrupt FBI. 

The home of one of the 11 pro-lifers, Chester (Chet) Gallagher, was raided by armed agents Wednesday. The charges were related to a pro-life event Gallagher orchestrated on March 5, 2021, when he and others peacefully and prayerfully attempted to convince mothers seeking an abortion to choose life at the Carafem abortion facility in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee.

That day, local police arrested several pro-lifers on misdemeanor trespass charges, and they were later released after posting bail. However, local law enforcement’s handling of the event wasn’t good enough for Biden’s DOJ. 

Of the 11 individuals facing the wrath of the FBI, seven are being charged “with conspiracy against rights secured by the FACE [Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances] Act, and committing FACE Act violations.” The other four individuals are being charged with only FACE Act violations.

If convicted, the seven conspiracy defendants face a maximum of 11 years in prison and fines of up to $250,000, according to the DOJ. The remaining four defendants face up to a year in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.

The Federalist tried reaching out to Gov. Lee’s office by phone, via his online contact form, and in an email to Lee’s Director of Communications, Casey Sellers, to ask if the governor was taking any action to protect pro-lifers like the 11 charged this week. When the communications office did not respond, a note of the governor’s non-response was included in an article about the FBI raid on Gallagher.

Shortly after the story was published, Sellers responded, saying that the governor condemned violent attacks on Tennessee pro-life pregnancy resource centers and the DOJ’s refusal to bring those responsible to justice. “The politicization of Pres. Biden’s DOJ is an abuse of power, and the American people deserve answers about vandalism and violent threats against pregnancy resource centers across the country,” she said. “Gov. Lee has called this terrorism and demanded that a recent attack against Hope Clinic in Nashville be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.” Her answer, however, made no mention of the FBI’s raid on Gallagher or its prosecution of other pro-lifers.

When the aforementioned article was not updated with Seller’s off-topic response, she emailed again yesterday evening, writing, “It looks like the story hasn’t been updated, so making sure you’ve seen this.”

The Federalist responded to Sellers last night, writing that “[We’d] be happy to update our readers if you answer [our] question: Does Governor Bill Lee plan on doing anything to protect the First Amendment rights of Tennessean pro-lifers, like Chester Gallagher and the other 10 peaceful pro-life protesters, who become political targets of the DOJ?” Lee’s communications office never responded.

The Tennessee raid on Gallagher marks the second instance of the DOJ targeting pro-lifers in recent weeks. Mark Houck of Pennsylvania is another pro-life man whose house was raided. Houck faces FACE Act violation charges, a maximum of 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and fines of up to $350,000. Less than a month ago, the Catholic father of seven and pro-life leader was arrested by 25-30 armed agents in front of his terrified wife and “screaming” children at their Pennsylvania home. 

The charges are related to a physical altercation last October between Houck and a pro-abortion activist who was working as a Planned Parenthood escort near an abortion facility in Philadelphia. While Houck and his 12-year-old son were sidewalk counseling outside the building, the pro-abortion man verbally harassed Houck’s son until Houck shoved the man, causing him to fall to the ground.

The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland revealed through court documents that by the pro-choice man’s own account the shoving did not violate the FACE Act “because Houck was standing at a corner away from the abortion facility, no clients were involved, and the alleged assault had nothing to do with so-called reproductive services.” The FBI is terrorizing Houck and his family on seemingly baseless charges. 

The FBI’s laundry list of political attacks seems to be growing every day—from working to undermine President Trump while he was in office, to raiding his Mar-a-Lago home as soon as he left, then labeling parents who exercise free speech at school board meetings as “terrorists,” and interfering in the 2020 election by instructing Facebook (and likely other platforms) to falsely brand the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation to censor.  


Evita Duffy is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, & her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at evita@thefederalist.com

Source

Can Republicans Ever Fight Big Tech? Last Week Gave Us Our First Clue

Can Republicans Ever Fight Big Tech? Last Week Gave Us Our First Clue

Something unusual happened on Capitol Hill last week: The Big Tech companies, their hundreds of lobbyists, and their well-funded network of policy groups took a loss. The House of Representatives successfully passed a small package of antitrust reform bills designed, in part, to limit gamesmanship and increase scrutiny on the largest, most powerful corporations in world history.

Now, they didn’t save the world or anything; the bills the House just passed are small, procedural, and bureaucratic in the grand scheme of things. Nevertheless, they are very important.

One bill requires firms undergoing a merger to disclose whether they receive funding from the Chinese government. (Sounds smart enough.)

The second bill makes it easier for state antitrust enforcers to oversee the corporate giants among them by letting states have their antitrust cases heard in local courts, rather than forcing cases to be moved to distant jurisdictions. (A deeply American idea.)

The third bill increases the fees billion-dollar companies must pay to have their mergers reviewed by antitrust enforcers at the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission.

Those second and third bills have already passed the Senate. It’s nearly certain all three of these will become law.

For years, we’ve heard tough-sounding rhetoric from both parties about challenging our biggest tech megacorporations. Both sides have been saying “break ’em up” since before Donald Trump even entered office. Now, Congress is finally rumbling into action.

Seriously: This is the first step they’ve taken. Google went public 18 years ago; Facebook hit a billion users 10 years ago; Apple became the world’s first trillion-dollar company in 2018, and its first $3 trillion company a few months ago, but this package of bills we just told you about represents the first affirmative acknowledgment by Congress that the power of the tech platforms must be reckoned with.

Yet in spite of the general agreement among Republicans that Big Tech firms pose an existential threat to our system of self-government, these bills were met with fierce and often acrimonious resistance from most of the GOP. Two hundred and seven Republicans voted on these bills, but only 39 of them — less than 1:5 — voted in favor.

Conservatives both in and outside of Congress were likewise split. Opposition to the bills was led by congressional firebrand Rep. Jim Jordan, while conservative stalwarts like Congressmen Chip Roy, Ken Buck, Paul Gosar, and Jim Banks voted in favor. The Heritage Foundation endorsed the legislative package as a “requisite starting point to rebalance the relationship between American citizens and the Big Tech companies that abuse them.” American Principles Project backed the bills too.

So, what’s the issue?

At issue was the bill requiring billion-dollar companies to pay an increased fee to have their mergers reviewed. Mind you, the fees in question already exist — this bill simply increased them on large mergers in response to a recent and massive increase in merger activity.

Big Tech firms have contributed substantially to the uptick in major mergers. Google and Facebook in particular have spent the last decade buying up smaller firms at a startling rate. In the past 10 years, Facebook has bought sixty smaller companies — about one every two months. Google has bought 133; that’s one company every 27 days.

Watch the video for this article, plus an interview with the American Principles Project’s Jon Schweppe:

That’s a lot of power flowing toward companies that already have more power than many countries. If we want to police the market to make sure these mergers are fair, then we could at least fund the people who do the policing.

This was a bridge too far for Rep. Jordan, however. He characterized the bill as funding the “same DOJ that raided President Trump’s home” and empowering “woke radical” Lina Khan at the Federal Trade Commission.

Now, it’s true that the increased fee funding could flow directly to the DOJ antitrust office, but that office had nothing to do with the raid on the Trump estate. The antitrust division is funded separately from the rest of the budgets at DOJ.

Meanwhile, the FTC will only gain access to additional funding if Congress decides to give it to them via the appropriations process. This is simply how the FTC is funded, and true regardless of whether or not the bill passed.

Sen. Mike Lee voted against Lina Khan’s confirmation and has been a constant critic of hers, but he still called claims that this new anti-trust bill will give her and the FCC more money a “tech-funded lie.” As he pointed out in a joint statement with Sens. Chuck Grassley and Tom Cotton, “these bills improve antitrust enforcement without appropriating any more funds to President Biden’s out-of-control FTC.”

But while most have never heard of last week’s fight, these small bills represent something significantly more important than the bills themselves: These bills took the tiniest of steps against the gigantic power of Big Tech, but only a few dozen Republicans were willing to go even that far, and dozens more were intensely opposed.

That raises serious concerns about the House GOP’s commitment to taking on the tech threat in the next Congress, should they win a majority. Antitrust is a weapon that must be wielded carefully, but it’s a weapon that absolutely must be wielded.

Lax antitrust enforcement is what has allowed Big Tech firms to buy up their competition without scrutiny and amass a market dominance that makes them virtually untouchable. It’s how we got Amazon, whose $469 billion per year in revenue is higher than the GDP of thirty-four U.S. states.

Many conservatives have been confused, and they see antitrust as some kind of socialist plot. But it doesn’t have to be. Antitrust is the market-based law enforcement that acts as a bulwark against a heavier regulatory approach down the road. The only reason we have to debate far more intrusive interventions, like treating tech companies as utility monopolies, is because we failed to properly enforce antitrust in the first place years ago. Too few conservatives understand this.

But more broadly, this recent episode reveals that the right (or at least its elected leaders) don’t understand how business has changed and how America has changed. We see this every time Republicans are pushed to actually stand up to Big Business, Big Tech, Big Defense, or Big Anything.

Since 2016, Republicans have learned to talk a pretty good game. They rail against left-wing corporate activism and “woke capital.” They trash companies that proudly and visibly throw their weight around in the culture war. But at heart, these Republicans are still loath to take even the smallest steps against them. They’re happy to do nothing and quote Reagan to justify it.

The right will never be anti-big business, and that might be OK. The alternative to business, after all, is government. But the right must stop rushing like a battered wife to bail out the corporations who continue to wield their massive private power against ordinary Americans.

Let Big Finance try and beg Sen. Elizabeth Warren for a bailout if they want; and let Big Tech find allies outside the congressional Republicans they abuse daily. Why should Jim Jordan save Facebook from the FTC when Facebook both manipulates the market and hates men like Jordan (and all his voters)?

The political right must be prepared to use the power of the government against bad market actors, because that is what antitrust is: the rule of law in the market.

Even with a number of prominent congressional Republicans running defense for them, Big Tech lost this fight — and lost it publicly. That alone should be encouraging. But this victory was carried over with the explicit help of the Democrats, and with a majority of Republicans voting against it. Last week’s votes were a great day for The Realignment, but they are also a precedent that will only be carried forward into the next Congress if the GOP — as a whole — is ready to embrace the ideas they embody as actual policy.

The grounds are shifting; The Realignment is taking place. Republicans should be careful where they’re standing.


Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)