More Skullduggery Uncovered

Yesterday I posted an article espousing the theory that the raid on Mar-a-Lago was really about the FBI wanting to recover information that incriminated the Obama administration for spying on the Trump campaign. There was another article posted at Substack yesterday that gave further credence to that theory.

The Substack article reported:

Last December 15th, as Americans decorated trees, lit Menorahs, and prepared to tune out for winter holidays, CNN ran an extraordinary article titled, “The mystery of the missing binder: How a collection of raw Russian intelligence disappeared under Trump.”

Co-authored by Natasha Bertrand, the gargantuan exposé claimed a mysterious “binder” of “highly classified information related to Russian election interference” went “missing” in the chaotic waning days of Donald Trump’s presidency in January 2021, raising concerns that some of America’s most “closely guarded national security secrets… could be exposed.”

CNN and its intelligence sources meant “exposure” in a bad way. Sources have told Public and Racket, however, that the secrets officials worry might be “exposed” are ones that would implicate them in widespread abuses of intelligence authority dating back to the 2015-2016 election season.

“I would call [the binder] Trump’s insurance policy,” said someone knowledgeable about the case. “He was very concerned about having it and taking it with him because it was the road map” of Russiagate.

Transgressions range from Justice Department surveillance of domestic political targets without probable cause to the improper unmasking of a pre-election conversation between a Trump official and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to WMD-style manipulation of intelligence for public reports on alleged Russian “influence activities.”

The CNN report claimed intelligence officials were concerned about the disclosure of “sources and methods that informed the U.S. government’s assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Trump win the 2016 election.”

They should be concerned. The story of how a team “hand-picked” by CIA Director John Brennan relied on “cooked intelligence” to craft that January 6th, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment is the subject of tomorrow’s story, the last in this three-part series.

Corruption, not tradecraft, is what officials are desperate to keep secret.

I rather doubt the mainstream media will cover this unless they absolutely have to. Meanwhile, please follow the link to read the entire article. It really isn’t surprising, but it is alarming that a group of people inside our government felt entitled to determine the results of an election regardless of the will of the voters.

The Real Purpose Of The Raid At Mar-a-Lago?

If you don’t have your conspiracy hat on, you are probably going to need it for this article.

An animal is most dangerous when it is cornered. On Tuesday, The New York Post posted an article about the illegal spying on President Trump during the presidential campaign of 2016 and afterward. Obviously, that was illegal, but it seems as if Democrats are not required to abide by laws.

The article reports:

The US Intelligence Community asked foreign spy agencies to surveil 26 associates of Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, which triggered the allegations that the former president’s campaign had been colluding with Russia, according to a report. 

Former CIA Director John Brennan identified and presented the targets to the US’s intelligence-sharing partners in the so-called “Five Eyes” agencies – the intelligence-gathering organizations in the US, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – according to a report published Monday on Michael Shellenberger’s Public Substack

The report by independent journalists Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by The Post.

They cite multiple unnamed sources, including ones close to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, led by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio). 

The article concludes:

Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was sentenced to probation in 2021 after admitting that he falsified an e-mail to renew a wiretap against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. 

​​Page had been wiretapped after intelligence sources suspected he might have been targeted by Russian spies. The wiretap, which was approved by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, was renewed several times after it was first granted.

Last March, Special Counsel John Durham concluded that the FBI investigation of Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia was “seriously flawed” and had no basis in evidence, after a four-year review of the probe. 

In response, the FBI said it had “implemented dozens of corrective actions” since the improper Trump probe and that “the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented” had the reforms been in place in 2016. 

In 2022, Taibbi and Shellenberger were involved in the publishing of the Twitter Files expose, which detailed how the social media giant’s previous management team sought to silence controversial voices and suppress news items such as The Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Do you really believe all necessary corrective actions have been taken? What if there is more to this than meets the eye? What if documents detailing exactly who was involved in this illegal activity exist and the FBI does not know where they are? Would they logically be at Mar-a-Lago or in President Trump’s possession? Is it possible that was what the raid at Mar-a-Lago was really about since other Presidents have never been treated that way?

President Trump is a smart man. I suspect (and I would also suggest that the parties who broke the law spying suspect) that somewhere in a very secret place the documents showing the abuse of our justice system are in President Trump’s possession. I also think that those who engaged in the illegal spying will be brought to justice if President Trump is re-elected. That is why the deep state is working so hard to prevent President Trump from being our next President.

When Sustainable Energy Isn’t Sustainable

On January 20th. a website at Substack called Energy Bad Boys posted an article about the Nobles wind farm in Minnesota.

The article reports:

In 2007, Minnesota began its quest to power the state with wind turbines and solar panels when the Next Generation Energy Act (NGEA) was signed into law. This legislation mandated that 25 percent of the state’s electricity come from “renewable” energy sources by 2025.

These mandates, along with generous federal tax subsidies and monopoly utilities seeking to maximize their government-approved profits by building new infrastructure, led to a building boom in wind turbines and solar panels.

From 2007 through 2022, Minnesota built thousands of wind turbines totaling 3,690 megawatts (MW) of installed capacity and 1,143 MW of solar capacity en route to meeting the mandates in 2020, five years ahead of schedule.

However, many of the turbines built to comply with the 25 percent mandate are already being refurbished or “repowered” long before the end of their supposed 25-year useful lives. In fact, one of these wind facilities, the Nobles wind farm, has already been repowered after just 12 years in service.

But why was Nobles refurbished more than a decade before the end of its useful life at a cost of $240 million? The official reason provided by Xcel Energy for repowering Nobles was to spur economic activity in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and extend the retirement date of the facility from the year 2035 to 2045.

This story makes for a good newspaper headline, but the data tell a very different story. Digging deeper into the reasons surrounding Xcel’s decision to repower the Nobles facility illustrates how our state and federal energy policies are causing America’s energy decisions to grow increasingly irrational.

The article also notes:

Currently, there aren’t enough transmission lines to move the power generated from these wind facilities to other areas of the 15-state regional grid that could use it. This is because the existing transmission lines can only transport so much power at a time, similar to how water flowing down a sink is governed by the width of the drainpipe. As a result, the oversupply of electricity frequently causes power prices to go negative, which sends a signal to wind turbine operators to scale back supply, at least it works that way in theory.

In reality, the PTC pays wind projects $26 for each MWh of electricity the facility produces, whether or not that electricity is needed. The subsidies mean that electricity generated from wind farms could potentially be sold into the market at a price of negative $25 per MWh and still turn a profit for their owners. This is why the areas with the most wind turbines see the most negative prices, which you can see in the map below.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is only one of many illustrations of the fact that the government is subsidizing the quest for a perpetual motion machine that will never exist.

 

Things The Media Forgot To Share

On Sunday, The Vigilant Fox at Substack posted a list of ten stories the media forgot to tell us this week.

This is the list:

10 – 97% of scientists don’t agree on ‘climate crisis.’

#9 – EU politician makes bold statements about Donald Trump.

#8 – Tucker Carlson declares, “The whole George Floyd story was a lie.”

#7 – Man gets dragged out of Hillary Clinton rally for asking about Bill Clinton’s trips to Epstein Island.

#6 – Big Pharma doesn’t want you to know that statin drugs are impairing brain function.

#5 – New research finds heart anomalies within 48 hours after the COVID-19 shot.

#4 – Florida Surgeon General drops eye-opening revelations on Biden admin’s booster push.

#3 – Swiss banker calls for arrest of Bill Gates and those responsible for “democide.”

#2 – Whistleblower reveals startling data linking tens of thousands of New Zealand deaths to the COVID jabs.

#1 – Pfizer hid nearly 80% of COVID-19 vaccine trial deaths from regulators in order to qualify for Emergency Use Authorization.

If you are still relying on the mainstream media for your news, some of this may be new to you.

 

This Will Be A First (And Not A Good First)

On Sunday, Julie Kelly posted an article at Substack about the potential gagging of President Trump during the election season (a season that I think began in November of last year).

The article reports:

Another precedent-setting event related to the criminal prosecution of a former president is scheduled for Monday morning in the federal courtroom of Judge Tanya S. Chutkan in Washington.

Special Counsel Jack Smith is asking Chutkan—an Obama appointee with a record of biased and often inaccurate statements about Donald Trump and the events of January 6 in general—to silence the leading GOP presidential contender on a key campaign issue through the heart of the 2024 primary season.

Smith’s prosecutors and Trump’s defense attorneys will square off during what is expected to be a fiery hearing to debate the special counsel’s proposed gag order ostensibly needed to prevent Trump from unduly influencing the D.C. jury pool with his criticism of the prosecution and those involved. A jury pool, by the way, almost exclusively populated by Democrats with deep contempt for Trump.

Chutkan set a March 2024 trial date for Smith’s four-count indictment against Trump for attempting to “overturn” the 2020 election; the indictment and trial, anticipated to last four to six weeks, represent a history-making case of election interference—a sitting Democratic president using his Department of Justice to ruin his presumptive Republican rival.

But forcing Trump to endure not one but two federal criminal trials isn’t enough to quench the Biden regime’s insatiable appetite for destruction. Smith, citing social media posts and interviews, wants Trump, his lawyers, and even his campaign associates banned from making any comments about the case.

“In service of his criminal conspiracies, through false public statements, the defendant sought to erode public faith in the administration of the election and intimidate individuals who refuted his lies,” Smith wrote in his September motion for a wide-ranging gag order. “The defendant is now attempting to do the same thing in this criminal case—to undermine confidence in the criminal justice system and prejudice the jury pool through disparaging and inflammatory attacks on the citizens of this District, the Court, prosecutors, and prospective witnesses. [The] Court can and should take steps to restrict such harmful extrajudicial statements.”

The article concludes:

Trump’s lawyers responded in pointed fashion, calling the gag order “an extraordinary step of stripping President Trump of his First Amendment freedoms during the most important months of his campaign against President Biden.”

Which obviously is Smith’s motivation. A top DOJ official during the Obama-Biden administration, Smith has his marching orders. In a follow-up motion, Smith wrote that Trump’s candidacy shouldn’t be used as a “cover for making prejudicial statements about this case.”

After Monday’s hearing, it is Chutkan’s next move.

And Team Trump should be worried.

Not only does Chutkan have a history of making outlandish remarks in January 6 cases, she wrote the opinion that pierced presidential privilege and forced Trump to produce his records to the January 6 Select Committee. She also ruled against the Trump administration in cases involving illegal immigrants seeking abortions. Given her brazen partisanship from the bench, it is safe to assume her gag order is already a work in progress.

What has happened to the judicial process in America is a disgrace. I am convinced that the majority of our judges have never read the U.S. Constitution.

UPDATE:  The gag order has been put in place. It will be interesting to see what happens next. This will probably find its way to the Supreme Court. What the Supreme Court will do with it is anyone’s guess.

Some Basic Comments On The Removal Of Kevin McCarthy

Don Surber at Substack reminds us of a few reasons Kevin McCarthy is no longer Speaker of the House. When you begin to look at the history of Republican leadership in the House of Representatives, it is amazing that Kevin McCarthy lasted as long as he did. He acted as his predecessors did– he supported the Washington establishment and the uni-party. The agreement he made with his peers that got him elected was not worth the paper it was written on. If you listened to his press conference last night, you realize that either he still doesn’t get it or he lies as easily as he speaks.

Don Surber notes:

By a vote of 216-210, the House ended Kevin McCarthy’s two-faced, double-dealing speakership, as he became the first and only person booted out as Speaker of the House. A bipartisan majority decided enough was enough with McCarthy who had promised to allow congressmen to read an appropriations bill and wait 72 hours before holding a vote. He broke that promise this weekend. Matt Gaetz moved to remove him. Gaetz and 7 other Republicans joined 208 Democrats to vote McCarthy out.

This is a payback. McCarthy and his loyalists joined Democrats to pass the Democrat budget. Gaetz used Democrats to oust McCarthy. Democrats wisely go by the Benedict Arnold Rule: never trust a turncoat.

…Rank-and-file Republicans are as happy to see McCarthy leave as Taylor Swift is writing a song about the boyfriend she just dumped. Washington lifers are as sad as Travis Kelce will be when she dumps him.

The lifers are so mad that they are writing mean things about Gaetz.

The article concludes:

Gallup said, “Republicans’ 14-percentage-point lead in public preferences for keeping the country prosperous is up from a 10-point margin last year and is its widest advantage on this measure since mid-1991.”

Republicans blew that opportunity in 1991 when George H.W. Bush said, “Read my lips: no new taxes” — and then agreed to new taxes. You can put Peggy Noonan’s words in a Bush but you cannot make him Reagan.

Look for McCarthy to join Newt and Ryan at the Fox News henhouse, where he will talk a big game and do nothing.

Just as he did as speaker.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Mr. Surber reminds us of the history of the uni-party and its unwillingness to listen to its voters. It is possible that this action might cause some Republicans to hear what their constituents are saying about the budget and the war in Ukraine.

A Few Comments On The Trump Trial In New York

From Jonathan Turley at The Daily Caller:

Fox News legal analyst and constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley laid out a major problem for Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James’ civil case against former President Donald Trump on Monday.

James sued Trump in Sept. 2022, accusing him of committed fraud to secure more favorable terms for loans. Judge Arthur Engoron ruled Tuesday that Trump and his businesses exaggerated his net worth and deceived banks and insurance companies.

…“But I also want to note that James’ comments ignore one thing, in front of that courthouse,” Turley continued. “She ran for office on the pledge to bag Donald Trump. She didn’t say on what grounds. She ran to bag him on any grounds, and so she doesn’t have any more credibility in making these comments than did the Trump team, for people who view this as a very political environment. You know, many of us wrote at the time that we were deeply concerned about a candidate for attorney general that was essentially pledging a trophy defendant as the basis for running for office. And she delivered it … And so I think that she has also damaged her own credibility in that effort.”

From Attorney Robert DuChemin at Substack:

…That is why I find it bizarre that New York would go after the Trump Organization for what the state claims are inflated real estate values. It took me only one trial to learn that appraisers say what they are paid to say.

…The case against the Trump organization, however, is not a criminal case. That is why he was not entitled to a jury. Nevertheless, although the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees us the right to jury trials only in criminal cases, the Eighth Amendment prohibits “excessive fines.” Several U.S. Supreme Court decisions have held that any fine designed as “punishment” instead of restitution is excessive. Many intermediate appellate and trial courts have ignored those decisions but some recent comments by members of the current Supremes have indicated they are going to stop the practice.

Therefore, because there were no damages incurred as a result of the alleged fraud, New York will be limited by the Eighth Amendment in their ability to fine the Trump Organization. Anything above court costs and some nominal fine would likely violate the Eighth Amendment.

In short, the New York case is clearly the persecution of a political opponent. If I was the judge I would have thrown out the state’s case immediately. But then again, I am not a judge in a communist state that values party loyalty over truth and justice.

Let’s see if the court acknowledges or abides by the Eighth Amendment. Please follow the link to read the Substack article. Attorney DuChemin definitely has a way with words.

Summing It All UP

On Monday, Don Surber at Substack posted an article putting President Trump’s mugshot in perspective. The article compares the mugshot to another mugshot from 2005 of Tom DeLay where Tom DeLay was smiling. I need to mention that the mainstream media was very upset with the fact that he was smiling. I also need to mention that a jury trial found Tom DeLay innocent. Of course the accusations ruined his career (just as they ruined the career of Bob MacDonald whose guilty verdict was overturned by the Supreme Court). There is a pattern here–it’s called lawfare and is used by the Democrats to get rid of their political opponents. President Obama used a variant of it in 2004 when he managed to get the messy divorce records of his main primary opponent unsealed and leaked to the press. I have no doubt that somewhere behind all of the prosecution of President Trump you will find puppet strings pulled by President Obama or his associates.

Don Surber notes:

Craig Smith wrote in Newsweek, “In the early ’90s, I was a militant activist and bank robber. I saw myself as a black Robin Hood, stealing from white-owned banks to fund black cultural events. I was caught and sentenced under then-Senator Joe Biden’s 1994 crime bill to an unheard of 52 years, though I was a first time offender and no one was hurt during any of my robberies. And I was released by Trump’s 2019 criminal justice reform bill, the First Step Act, thanks to Trump’s prodding of Congress to reverse many of the draconian laws written and supported by our current president.

“The former president freed 5,000 incarcerated people like me from outrageous sentences. Yet he is now facing the possibility of serving a sentence of his own. As I watched former President Donald Trump get perp-walked and mugshot at the Fulton County Jail in Georgia, I couldn’t help but notice the deep irony: The same criminal justice system that Trump made radical reforms to is now being used to discredit him and hamper his chances of winning the presidency for a second time.

“None of us who have benefited from Trump’s radical reform of the criminal justice system under the First Step Act are blind to that irony. But it goes beyond that: Trump’s repeated run-ins with the law, and what seems like an unfair obsession with catching him and punishing him disproportionately for his so-called crimes, reminds a lot of us of what was done to us.”

…Smith ended his column, “At the end of the day, these repeated arrests may end up having a very unintended consequence. Instead of proving to the country that Trump is unelectable, it may have removed a barrier in the form of him being unrelatable. These arrests have made Trump relatable to the 5 million people in America under some form of supervision by the U.S. criminal legal system.

“In 2020, President Trump got the votes of 18% of black men. Don’t be surprised if he gets more in 2024 if he’s the GOP nominee for president. Now that he’s suffered the indignity of what Joe Biden’s crime bill put so many of us through, he will be an even bigger champion of our cause.”

The defiance in Trump’s mugshot has turned the tables on the press and the rest of the sociopaths who want Trump and his supporters dead. He has become Liam Neeson in Taken.

It’s time for Americans to wake up and see what has happened to justice in this country.

Putting The Cart Before The Horse

On Monday, Townhall reported that the charges brought against President Trump in Georgia have been released before the Grand Jury is done interviewing witnesses. A two-page report was posted on the Fulton County, Georgia, website before someone realized the mistake and quickly took it down. How can the charges be released before the Grand Jury is done?

The article reports:

According to the document that was reportedly (and briefly) posted to the county’s website, it appears Trump will face a total of 39 felony counts on the following charges that the docket lists with dates ranging from November 4, 2020 through September 17, 2021:

…While officials in Fulton County have been tight-lipped on the situation so far, Monday’s events raised more questions about how the grand jury was considering charges against the 45th president — especially if charges were ready to go before the panel had finished hearing testimony from witnesses.

Trump primary opponent Vivek Ramaswamy chimed in on the matter Monday afternoon, calling the indictment “disastrous” and “downright pathetic.”

In his Street Law 101 article posted at substack, Robert DuChemin (my favorite Florida lawyer) states:

As to the forthcoming Georgia case, whatever it is, it should be easy to get dismissed because the chairman of the grand jury, some ugly wokie chick, went on national TV claiming that she told the prosecutor to bring them anything he had and they would return a decision recommending prosecution of President Trump. Not only does this give the state unclean hands because it is a felony for anybody on the jury to discuss what went on but it also demonstrates her prejudice prior to being presented with any of the facts. I do not see how Georgia can overcome such a blatant abuse of the law. That case should be easily dismissed.

Generally the state or county waits for the Grand Jury to finish before posting their findings on the county website. The lack of professionalism on the part of those out to get President Trump is amazing.

The BRICS Agenda

The BRICS (razil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) agenda is not necessarily good news for America–it will mean the death of the American dollar. However, there are actually some good things about it. The BRICS countries are the only countries right now (with very few exceptions) that are willing to stand up to the economic plans of the World Economic Forum.

On July 9th, Elizabeth Nickson posted an article at Substack about the plans of the World Economic Forum.

The article reports:

Earlier this month in St. Petersburg, the BRICS — that is, the nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — met to consider the application of nineteen more countries to their number, and in two months they will gather against, in Durban, South Africa, with an eye towards laying out an alternative to the U.S. dollar’s dominion over world trade. Algeria, Egypt, Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe, are among those applying to join BRICS. These countries are setting their face against western democracies and their death march into “climate change” degrowth and population reduction. They may save us yet.

That currency will be pegged to the natural resources possessed by each country. This critical shift will mean that financialization of each country’s resources will be unavailable to the world’s oligarchs, who today are acquiring land as fast as they can to set aside as carbon credits on the massive new taxes deemed necessary. The BRICS do not care about “climate change” or species extinction (which they know are based on a falsification of science), they care about growth and using their resources to give their people a better life. They do not want the World Economic Forum telling them what to do. When it comes to the Ukraine conflict, they are on Russia’s side.

The article includes the following quote:

The following is a quote from DeGrowth.org. Here’s a pre-translation: Break Everything That Works

Lastly, the ruptural mode of transformation involves halting, which is a confrontation with existing capitalist structures to the end of harm reduction (e.g. occupying a coal mine) and smashing, which is a break with existing structures (e.g. occupying and overtaking a production facility). Evidently, smashing can enable the strategic logic of building alternatives. Chertkovskaya cautions that rupturalmodes are to be applied deliberately to overcome capitalist structures in specific spatio-temporal contexts rather than in an attempt to overthrow the global capitalist system in one go.

This is a war on capitalism waged by people who are not willing to let anyone else acquire wealth.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is a wake-up call to those who believe the environmental movement is actually about the environment.

Some Perspective On The Indictment Of President Trump

Obviously the big story in the news today is the indictment of President Trump. Oddly enough, the new information on bribery in the Biden family has been pushed off of the front pages by this indictment.

Don Surber is a former newspaper reporter who now posts in Substack. On June 9th, he posted the following observations:

The indictment of President Trump is hooey. Washington no more cares about national security than it cares about Poca Dot football or whether I finally am allowed by my wife to buy that Bentley.

I don’t know about the leaders in your state, but in West Virginia they stand with the people, the president and the Constitution.

Attorney General Patrick Morrisey tweeted, “Here we go again with another political prosecution. I think every American (including the other Presidential candidates) should speak out against having two different systems of justice. No double standards!”

Governor Jim Justice tweeted, “The Biden Administration and the Democrats know they can’t beat President Trump and me unless they weaponize the federal government. Democrats will stop at nothing to defeat us and keep the presidency and their Senate majority. I will always stand with President Donald Trump!”

The article notes the treatment of Hillary Clinton:

The FBI is best at covering up crimes. Consider Hillary sending state secrets while secretary of state via email to foreign governments and others who paid the troll via donations to her fake charity.

Remember the words of Jimmy the Weasel Comey, who said, “From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were ‘up-classified’ to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.”

She committed at least 110 felonies by e-mailing classified information.

Comey admitted it.

The article cites the hope found in the law of unintended consequences:

“Another example is the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese in 1941, designed to decimate the US Naval force in one blow and bring America to its knees. Instead, it shook the American public out of its deep isolationism, ensuring the total mobilization of the country’s superior manpower and resources to not only defeat the Japanese but also to obliterate its military for good. The very success of the attack guaranteed the opposite of the intended result, Robert Greene writes in his spectacular book, The Laws of Human Nature.”

One man cannot make America great again, in fact, one-man rule would make America something other than America.

But 62 million voters can. Four years later, we were 75 million strong. Next year, 100 million.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is extremely insightful.

The Truth About The Jobs Report

Robert DuChemin is a writer at substack. He is a Florida attorney who does great research and is very adept at analyzing information. Recently he posted an article that included some good perspective on the recent jobs report.

The article notes:

…Today’s Labor Department press release claims once again to have “created” more than 360,000 new jobs. I read the entire release and nowhere in the release did they mention the total number of people employed in the USA last month.

It is not like they don’t have those numbers. After a little digging, I discovered from the Labor Department’s own files that 160,721,000 Americans were employed last month. In April, 161,031,000 Americans were employed (shockingly, they adjusted this number after last month‘s release). There is no way anybody using regular math can claim that a loss of about 700,000 jobs was an increase of 360,000 jobs. No wonder they left the total numbers out of their press release.

But it is worse than that. Prior to the pandemic, in February 2020, there were 162,800,000 Americans gainfully employed.

So, with all of his claims of “creating” more jobs, in 2 1/2 years and a $5 trillion increase in debt, Joe still has not replaced all of the jobs lost to the Wuhan Flu disaster. He remains 2,000,000 jobs short.

It drives me crazy that nobody in the broadcast or cable news is discussing this outright lie. Does everybody think Americans are too stupid to read a basic spreadsheet?

Also horrible was the government adding more than 50,000 jobs last month while the number of private-sector jobs decreased. As any first year economics student could tell you, private sector jobs expand the free market economy, government jobs contract the free market economy.

Joe is also going to claim the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 as a Democrat victory even though he has yet to read the actual bill passed by Congress. He gets the bill tomorrow. As I have previously explained, the fact that they won anything was a huge GOP victory because China Joe promised several times that he would “not negotiate,” “not budge one inch,” not give in to people who want to make America great again. The GOP, only 4 people shy of having zero control of any part of our government, was able to negotiate substantial reductions and recover previously allocated money for the first time in US history. There is no way this was a Democrat victory.

Joe’s plans to destroy this country are on life-support, and the GOP can easily pull the plug during this year’s appropriations.

A good statistician can make numbers say anything he wants them to say. It seems as if the only people in the Biden administration who are actually good at their jobs are the ones that know how to lie with statistics.

A Realistic Look At The Debt Ceiling Bill

I am not a regular reader of substack, but there is an awful lot of really good content there. One of my favorite contributors is Florida lawyer Robert DuChemin, Sr. On Thursday, Attorney DuChemin posted an article about the agreement reached and passed by Congress on the debt ceiling. The article presents a very realistic view of the bill.

The article states:

I am quite disappointed in the way many Republicans are discussing the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. It was a GOP win. Period. If one is playing a football game and your guy kicks a field goal with three seconds remaining to win the game, you won. The fact that you threw four interceptions and should have won by much more doesn’t really matter at that point. You won.

FSU blew a 14-point, fourth-quarter lead against LSU last year. Yet we still cheered when FSU blocked the tying PAT with no time remaining for the win.

…And this was actually a very big victory. It is the first time in history where Congress has retrieved funds, any funds, that it previously had appropriated. Among the funds recovered was a $400 million gift to the National Institutes of Health to fund more “gain-of-function” research. Yes, that is the same research that brought us the Wuhan Flu (Covid-19 to the wokies) and caused Russia to invade Ukraine after they discovered we were doing the same thing on their border.

The same goes for the reduction in the IRS funding. I will admit it is not as much money as I wanted but is sufficient to terminate China Joe‘s plans to expand the IRS this year. When next year‘s appropriation comes up, the GOP can simply cut out more.

Although future guarantees are like frosting on the cake, they are worthless. If the federal government had a nickel for every time a politician went back on their promise, we wouldn’t be in this situation because the federal government would no longer be in debt. Should the Democrats keep the Senate and pick up only four seats in the House, they will simply refund everything in 2025.

The article mentions something the Republicans complaining about the bill need to realize:

The Democrats are so much better at this than the Republicans. That is why 165 democrats in the House voted for the bill. The only Democrats that voted against it are from gerrymandered “safe“ districts. The other Democrats know they better claim it as a victory if they want to win next year’s election. The conservatives voting against the bill also are mostly from safe districts but their criticism is costing their brethren votes.

The conservatives are a minority in one branch of government. Until they control two branches, Washington will continue to do business as usual.

A Different Perspective From What Is Generally Being Said

Robert DuChemin is a friend who writes at Substack. He recently posted an article about the young man in Massachusetts who leaked classified documents. I am probably not the only person who feels that there may be more to this story than meets the eye.

These are some off Robert’s observations:

The most revealing thing about the leak is that it proves the Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, lied to congress when he testified to the exact opposite of all three of those facts. He knew the truth yet chose to lie to Congress. He would be arrested if he had any connection to Donald J Trump, but since he plays for the evil team, he is allowed to walk free.

This is something that could have been prevented if we just followed common sense . . . and the law. In the USA, the Secretary of Defense must be a civilian.

10 US Code, Section 113, also states, in pertinent part:

“(a) . . .

(2) A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense—

(A) within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force in a grade below O–7; or

(B) within 10 years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force in the grade of O–7 or above.”

Lloyd Austin, therefore, should not have been appointed Secretary of Defense. He left the military to take the job.

How did this happen?

Through corruption. When China Joe became president, his political party controlled both houses of Congress. They passed a resolution (which has the effect of a law) to waive that requirement specifically for Lloyd Austin. The vote was solidly along party lines. In other words, the communist party that controlled our government decided they did not want to abide by this law so they simply changed it, not permanently but on a one-time basis to suit their desire.

The article also notes:

The focus in the news on Teixeira is misplaced. It should be on the fact that our government is so corrupt that agency employees lie to their bosses, our elected representatives, and nothing happens to them. At the same time, people who believe in the freedom of information, telling the truth, and an open government are persecuted and destroyed.

The former head of the FBI, James Comey, admitted leaking confidential information. His crime was a far worse crime against our society because he held a position of trust. He is walking free while a kid whose testicles dropped about a week ago is going to have his life destroyed.

Somebody should be asking how we can claim to live in a country governed by the Rule of Law when we allow this to happen. They also may want to ask how in the world we entrusted a child with such sensitive information.

I have been asking that question ever since the Pentagon entrusted a guy who did not even know what sex he was, Bradley Manning, with confidential information that he leaked to the public after he decided to become Chelsea. His sexual confusion alone should have demonstrated such mental instability that he/she did not deserve a top-secret clearance.

The Obama pardoned Bradley/Chelsea because he/she released information that hurt the good guys. Jack, however, will never get pardoned as long as the same people whose lies he exposed remain in control of our government.

Please follow Robert on Substack. His articles are always informative and insightful. He is a lawyer by trade, and I wouldn’t want to be up against him in a courtroom.

Ignoring Some Violence–Amplifying Other Violence

On March 9th, Don Surber posted an article at Substack about how lawlessness is sometimes treated. Please read the entire article as it has multiple examples of inconsistencies on law enforcement’s handling of ‘mostly peaceful’ protests.

The article notes:

CNN reported on January 21, 2017, “Six police officers were injured and 217 protesters arrested Friday after a morning of peaceful protests and coordinated disruptions of Donald Trump’s inauguration ceremony gave way to ugly street clashes in downtown Washington.

“At least two DC police officers and one other person were taken to the hospital after run-ins with protesters, DC Fire Spokesman Vito Maggiolo told CNN. Acting DC Police Chief Peter Newsham said the officers’ injuries were considered minor and not life threatening.

“Bursts of chaos erupted on 12th and K streets as black-clad ‘antifascist’ protesters smashed storefronts and bus stops, hammered out the windows of a limousine and eventually launched rocks at a phalanx of police lined up in an eastbound crosswalk. Officers responded by launching smoke and flash-bang devices, which could be heard from blocks away, into the street to disperse the crowds.”

The limousine in question was hired by former CNN presenter Larry King and destroyed by rioters. A Muslim owned the vehicle. It was his livelihood.

The media sided with the Inauguration Day insurrectionists.

Esquire reported on April 12, 2017, “How the Government Is Turning Protesters Into Felons.”

The magazine whined, “While scattered vandalism and punching (a neo-Nazi) were deemed headline-grabbing militancy, the media relegated the most extreme incidents involving anarchists and antifascists — namely, recent treatment of them — to footnotes.”

Scattered violence and punching someone you claim is a neo-Nazi is OK.

Sitting in Nancy Pelosi’s office chair is an insurrection.

A year after the Inauguration Day violence, all charges were dropped.

The article concludes:

“Also, why is it hard to understand that when an election takes place during a pandemic, with millions of people shipping ballots rather than showing up at voting centers on election day, many people would be skeptical about the results of that election, especially when the candidate who lost won the election day vote?

“Instead of labeling people election deniers, is it not better to ensure that even the appearance of fraud is eliminated by having most people vote in-person on election day and with proper identification?

“When a country decides to live a lie and chases shadows, it conducts false investigations with predetermined outcomes and ends up blaming people like Tucker Carlson for showing the other side of the story. And that is a shame!”

It was not a security failure. It was a deliberate solicitation of protesters and an invitation for rioting in order to disqualify Trump in 2024. Thanks to Tucker Carlson, the Constitution and the truth, it won’t work.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Then ask yourself why the violent protestors of 2017 had all of their charges dropped and the mostly non-violent protestors of 2021 are still in jail.

Following The Money On Transgender Surgery

Have you ever wondered where teenagers get the money for the drugs and surgery needed to be transgender? The procedures involved are not cheap. The drugs involved are regulated–you cannot pick up a prescription that contains a steroid without signing for the prescription. So who is paying for the sudden increase in transgender surgery–the American taxpayer.

On March 1, Don Surber posted an article at Substack about transgender surgery in America and who is paying for it.

The article reports:

Technavio reported in November, “The gender reassignment surgery market is estimated to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 10.73% between 2022 and 2027. The size of the market is forecast to increase by $321.48 million. The growth of the market depends on several factors, including the increase in the number of people opting for sex change surgeries globally, favorable government policies, and increasing insurance coverage for gender reassignment surgical procedures.”

Nothing medical, it’s just business.

You can see why “The AMA opposes policies preventing transgender individuals from accessing basic human services and public facilities consistent with gender identity, including the use of restrooms.”

The article explains the origin of taxpayer-funded transgender surgery:

The story said, “The authors of the aforementioned study point to Medicare’s decision in May 2014 to lift a coverage ban on transgender surgeries as the turning point in access to care, noting that the share of patients seeking gender-affirming procedures covered by Medicare or Medicaid increased from 25% in 2012-2013 to 70% in 2014. After Medicare and Medicaid started covering transgender surgeries, and after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, private insurance companies followed suit.”

Taxpayers fund 70% of these surgeries thanks to Obama.

In 1981, Reagan banned billing taxpayers for this elective surgery. Between Obamacare and Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements, Obama and his administration produced a cottage industry that Technavio is really pushing.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. This is another example of a seemingly minor change in the law that has had huge ramifications. It is another example of the reason all Americans need to pay attention to any changes in government regulations.

A Logical Question About The Balloon

Robert DuChemin, a Florida lawyer, noted the following in an article at Substack:

So, if three Chinese balloons came over the United States during the Trump Administration how come there is not a single picture of any one of them? I live in Florida, where one of the alleged incursions supposedly occurred. I have a feeling we have many more people looking at the sky than they do in Montana and we are not all too old to see the sky. Yet no pictures.

How could they have been “undetected” when the DOD just showed us that our satellites can track a balloon from the moment it leaves a Chinese launch site?

The answer is simple. The White House, just like it has done during every other day of this administration, decided it was better to lie to the American people than to tell us the truth. The truth is that our current administration has no earthly idea what is going on outside of Joe’s fake White House studio across the street.

When something happens, the Democrats have three favorite responses. It is either racist, President Trump‘s fault, or something that has been going on since President Trump was in office.

On Friday, the White House had a trifecta. They claimed that inflation, like invading Chinese balloons, has been around since the Trump administration. They claimed that they are still trying to fix a border problem that was Trump’s fault, and they followed the dumbest elected members of their party down the road by claiming that the US congress, which removed four congressmen from committees (including one who withdrew from the committees in lieu of discipline) was racist.

The truth is that neither of the first two things occurred during the Trump administration, the current administration created the border problem (If they were going to fix Trump’s border problem they would start by finishing the wall he started and our US Congress approved.), and three of the four congressmen removed from committees are white men.

It’s amazing what the mainstream media expects you to believe.

Sometimes The Only Way To Deal With Washington Is To Laugh

Don Surber is a retired newspaperman. He writes columns at Substack. Recently he wrote one about the wit and wisdom of Louisiana Senator John Kennedy.

Here are a few excerpts:

Early in his days in the Senate, the Republican John Kennedy said, “This is Washington, D.C. Politics is in everybody’s blood, kind of like herpes.”

…At a hearing on October 9, 2017, he said something that shocked the Advocate, Louisiana’s biggest newspaper.

It reported, “During a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing last week, members of Congress expressed bewilderment that credit reporting company Equifax, under siege after a data breach affecting more than 145 million people, has received a $7.25 million contract with the IRS to validate the identity of taxpayers communicating with the agency on the telephone or through its website.”

At the hearing, Kennedy said to former Equifax CEO Richard Smith of that contract, “You realize, to many Americans right now, that looks like we’re giving Lindsay Lohan the keys to the mini-bar.”

…Six days earlier, he questioned Wells Fargo CEO Timothy Sloan about the bank’s creation of 3.5 million unauthorized deposit accounts and more than 500,000 unauthorized credit card applications.

Kennedy said, “I am certainly not anti-business. You can’t be for jobs if you are against business. What I am curious about is what in God’s name were you thinking? I am not against big business. With all due respect, I am against dumb.”

…On June 9, 2022, he told Fox, “In my state, the price of gas is so high that it would be cheaper to buy cocaine and just run everywhere.”

…“Just because you’ve seen My Cousin Vinny doesn’t qualify you to be a federal judge.”

…Kennedy told Neil Gorsuch when his nomination came up, “I guess what I want is a cross between Socrates and Dirty Harry, and I believe you just might be that person.”

He told Brett Kavanaugh, “I want someone who is willing to protect the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights and understands that the Bill of Rights is not an a la carte menu.”

The article notes that Senator Kennedy is not uneducated:

He plays the blunt good old boy so well, he could have been Buford T. Justice in Smokey and the Bandit, but without the swearing. He also graduated from Vanderbilt, got a University of Virginia law degree and was educated at Oxford. Good old boys ain’t dumb, as Northerners who underestimate them learn over and over again.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Senator Kennedy definitely knows how to disarm his opponents with a smile.

An Interesting Twist

On Thursday, Substack posted the following headline:

Court orders production of Seth Rich laptop

As you remember, Seth Rich was murdered in Washington, D.C., in July 2016. He was shot twice in the back and the police declared it a botched robbery– his wallet, expensive gold, cell phone and gold necklace were not taken. There has been a theory that Seth Rich was the one leaking information about the Democrat campaign to Wikileaks.

The Substack article reports:

This case involves a multi-year fight by attorney Ty Clevenger to obtain records relating to the FBI/DOJ investigation of Seth Rich, particularly whether Rich was involved in the hack of the DNC or had communicated with Wikileaks.

This fight dates back to 2017 and includes two FOIA lawsuit. In the first lawsuit, the FBI produced no responsive documents. The parties knew the FBI had something, and so this sparked a second lawsuit – where the FBI somehow found 20,000 pages of potentially responsive documents.

…Of those 20,000 pages, the government found 1,596 pages of responsive documents, of which the government withheld 1,469 pages under various FOIA exemptions (privacy, law enforcement exemption, etc.).

The FBI also withheld the contents of Seth Rich’s personal laptop, which it possesses, in its entirety, alleging the privacy of Rich’s family in “preventing the public release of this information” outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

The court rejected that argument, stating “the FBI has not satisfied its burden of showing more than a de minimis privacy interest that would justify withholding information from Seth Rich’s laptop.”

The article concludes:

What might be more interesting is the FBI’s complete records on Seth Rich. The FBI has fought production of those records – first by failing to “find” its own documents, and now by alleging documents must be withheld due to “national security grounds” and the “basis that disclosure of the information would threaten intelligence-gathering efforts.”

The information in the FBI’s possession includes that which was “provided by foreign government agency authorities under an implied assurance of confidentiality.” It also may – or may not – include whether the FBI used a “code name” associated with Seth Rich. And, if FBI representations are to be believed, it also includes “details of intelligence activities, sources, and methods related to national security.”

Unfortunately, the court won’t require the production of this information. Some questions will remain unanswered. Read the full order here.

There are a lot of valid questions regarding Seth Rich’s death. It would be nice to see them answered.

The Story Behind The Story

On Monday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article with a rather different viewpoint on the origins and purpose of the current war in Ukraine. It is a long, involved article, so I suggest you follow the link to read the entire article. I will try to provide some  highlights.

The article notes:

Current CIA Director William “Bill” Burns was the former ambassador to Russia and Jordan.  Bill Burns had a 33-year career at the State Department under both Republican and Democratic presidents and speaks fluent Russian. If the people in the background of Joe Biden wanted an intelligence operative to trigger a specific result from Russia, there’s no one more strategically perfect for the job than CIA Director Bill Burns.

The article by Beinart (Peter Beinart on substack {SEE HERE}) is mainly focused on pointing out the irreconcilable nature of Joe Biden implying Ukraine could join NATO, while his own CIA Director has a history of giving serious warnings emphasizing the “brightest of all red lines” about that specific point.

[…]  “Two years ago, Burns wrote a memoir entitled, The Back Channel. It directly contradicts the argument being proffered by the administration he now serves. In his book, Burns says over and over that Russians of all ideological stripes—not just Putin—loathed and feared NATO expansion. He quotes a memo he wrote while serving as counselor for political affairs at the US embassy in Moscow in 1995. ‘Hostility to early NATO expansion,” it declares, “is almost universally felt across the domestic political spectrum here.”

On the question of extending NATO membership to Ukraine, Burns’ warnings about the breadth of Russian opposition are even more emphatic. “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin),” he wrote in a 2008 memo to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.” (read more)

The article reports the following:

The CIA Director is crystal clear that Russia would be seriously triggered about any prospect of Ukraine entering NATO.

Yet, in December of 2021, the exact same time when U.S. backchannel intelligence was being shared with China about Russian troop movements on the border with Ukraine, Joe Biden was telling Ukraine that membership in NATO was in their hands.

The war in Ukraine now can be conveniently blamed for economic woes, the high price of gasoline, the empty supermarket shelves, other supply chain problems, etc.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

The Courage To Stand Up And Be Heard

Yesterday a cousin posted on my Facebook page that he would never buy Levi’s again. I wondered what in the world he was talking about, but wasn’t concerned because I don’t wear Levi’s. When I heard his reason, I wished I wore Levi’s so that I could not wear them anymore.

Jennifer Sey is an accomplished lady. Her biography includes being a 17-year-old gymnast, the reigning national champion in 1986, and going to the Soviet Union. She was smart enough to bring 10 pairs of Levi’s 501s with her. She eventually became brand president of Levi Strauss & Co. Jennifer is a lady who speaks her mind. She recently resigned her position with Levi Strauss & Co. so that she could continue to speak her mind.

Substack posted her story on Monday.

The article reports:

In 2008, when I was a vice president of marketing, I published a memoir about my time as an elite gymnast that focused on the dark side of the sport, specifically the degradation of children. The gymnastics community threatened me with legal action and violence. Former competitors, teammates, and coaches dismissed my story as that of a bitter loser just trying to make a buck. They called me a grifter and a liar. But Levi’s stood by me. More than that: they embraced me as a hero. 

Things changed when Covid hit. Early on in the pandemic, I publicly questioned whether schools had to be shut down. This didn’t seem at all controversial to me. I felt—and still do—that the draconian policies would cause the most harm to those least at risk, and the burden would fall heaviest on disadvantaged kids in public schools, who need the safety and routine of school the most. 

I wrote op-eds, appeared on local news shows, attended meetings with the mayor’s office, organized rallies and pleaded on social media to get the schools open. I was condemned for speaking out. This time, I was called a racist—a strange accusation given that I have two black sons—a eugenicist, and a QAnon conspiracy theorist.

In the summer of 2020, I finally got the call. “You know when you speak, you speak on behalf of the company,” our head of corporate communications told me, urging me to pipe down. I responded: “My title is not in my Twitter bio. I’m speaking as a public school mom of four kids.” 

When Jennifer began speaking out against school closings due to Covid, pressure from the company became more intense.

The article reports:

Then, in October 2020, when it was clear public schools were not going to open that fall, I proposed to the company leadership that we weigh in on the topic of school closures in our city, San Francisco. We often take a stand on political issues that impact our employees; we’ve spoken out on gay rights, voting rights, gun safety, and more. 

The response this time was different. “We don’t weigh in on hyper-local issues like this,” I was told. “There’s also a lot of potential negatives if we speak up strongly, starting with the numerous execs who have kids in private schools in the city.”

I refused to stop talking. I kept calling out hypocritical and unproven policies, I met with the mayor’s office, and eventually uprooted my entire life in California—I’d lived there for over 30 years—and moved my family to Denver so that my kindergartner could finally experience real school. We were able to secure a spot for him in a dual-language immersion Spanish-English public school like the one he was supposed to be attending in San Francisco.   

National media picked up on our story, and I was asked to go on Laura Ingraham’s show on Fox News. That appearance was the last straw. The comments from Levi’s employees picked up—about me being anti-science; about me being anti-fat (I’d retweeted a study showing a correlation between obesity and poor health outcomes); about me being anti-trans (I’d tweeted that we shouldn’t ditch Mother’s Day for Birthing People’s Day because it left out adoptive and step moms); and about me being racist, because San Francisco’s public school system was filled with black and brown kids, and, apparently, I didn’t care if they died. They also castigated me for my husband’s Covid views—as if I, as his wife, were responsible for the things he said on social media.

All this drama took place at our regular town halls—a companywide meeting I had looked forward to but now dreaded. 

The article notes:

In the last month, the CEO told me that it was “untenable” for me to stay. I was offered a $1 million severance package, but I knew I’d have to sign a nondisclosure agreement about why I’d been pushed out.

The money would be very nice. But I just can’t do it. Sorry, Levi’s.

The article concludes:

I’ll always wear my old 501s. But today I’m trading in my job at Levi’s. In return, I get to keep my voice.

That’s called courage.

Following The Science?

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about a response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made to the Health and Human Services Department.

The article includes the response from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):

So the letter states that the CDC has no information on whether people who have recovered from Covid have become infected again or have transmitted the disease to other people. It seems to me that in the world of looming vaccine mandates, that might be important information.

The article links to a substack article which states the following:

You would assume that if the CDC was going to crush the civil and individual rights of those with natural immunity by having them expelled from school, fired from their jobs, separated from the military, and worse, the CDC would have proof of at least one instance of an unvaccinated, naturally immune individual transmitting the COVID-19 virus to another individual.  If you thought this, you would be wrong.

My firm, on behalf of ICAN, asked the CDC for precisely this proof (see below).  ICAN wanted to see proof of any instance in which someone who previously had COVID-19 became reinfected with and transmitted the virus to someone else.  The CDC’s incredible response is that it does not have a single document reflecting that this has ever occurred.  Not one.  (See below.)

In contrast, there are endless documents reflecting cases of vaccinated individuals becoming infected with and transmitting the virus to others.  Such as this study.  And this study.  And this study.  And this study.  It goes on and on…

But it gets worse.  The CDC’s excuse for not having a shred of evidence of the naturally immune transmitting the virus is that “this information is not collected.”  What?!  No proof!  But yet the CDC is actively crushing the rights of millions of naturally immune individuals in this country if they do not get the vaccine on the assumption they can transmit the virus.   But despite clear proof the vaccinated spread the virus, the CDC lifts restrictions on the vaccinated?!  That is dystopian.   

At some point, Americans are going to have to realize that this is not about the vaccine or the virus and begin to reclaim their freedom.