Tuesday, October 11, 2022

Has a Quisling GOP Enabled a Desperate October Surprise?


Who benefits from the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage? The answer is obvious. A regime facing devastating electoral losses in just over a month.


The panic is palpable. With the midterms just a month away, even carefully curated polling data is showing momentum building towards a Republican blowout, and the reckless cabal in charge of the Biden Administration has clearly run out of political ammo. 

Gas prices are back on the rise and Biden’s politically motivated action in drawing down the strategic oil reserve to lower prices at the pump is now a widely acknowledged and dismal failure, and one that has gravely endangered national security. Despite the administration’s pathetic groveling, OPEC just added insult to injury by restricting oil supply to accelerate the price squeeze. The administration’s massive “stimulative” federal spending gambit of the last few years has only succeeded in stimulating runaway inflation and an explosion of the national debt, made immeasurably worse by fast-rising interest rates. Transparent pandering to his base in the form of unconstitutional and widely panned student loan bailouts has only reinforced the perception of fiscal irresponsibility and political opportunism bereft of principle. 

On top of these disasters, are others. COVID vaccine uptake has collapsed, as more people realize the mandates and shutdowns have inflicted enormous damage on the country—all for an ineffective, dangerous, and novel gene-therapy treatment with massive adverse effects. Orchestrating an invasion of illegal immigrants on the southern border for permanent electoral advantage has backfired as U.S. citizens grasp the insanity of bringing in unprecedented numbers of workers during an economic downturn, and recent immigrants themselves grasp that their future prosperity and safety is not with a party that is tanking the economy and spiking violent crime. Even Biden’s initial promise of national reconciliation has been revealed to be a sick joke, as the Delaware Democrat has engaged in unprecedented polarization, demonization, and targeting of his political opponents. 

But thanks to the quisling GOP leadership, one last card remains in the hand of the desperate Biden regime. Is it beyond them to play it? They may already have put it down on the table. Two weeks ago, it is possible the administration made a calculated decision that it was worth risking nuclear conflict with Russia through an unprecedented act of energy terrorism and environmental depredation in order to shore up political support and suppress dissent at home.

On Monday September 26, the Nord Stream pipeline was blown apart in international waters off the coasts of Denmark and Sweden in what EU officials called an act of deliberate sabotage. Already facing a winter of skyrocketing fuel costs and energy and food shortages due to the senseless Russia-Ukraine conflict, now the prospect of catastrophe in the coming months has increased immeasurably. 

Coincidentally, on September 28 (barely a day after the sabotage of Nord Stream was discovered) U.S. and EU officials announced the opening of the the Baltic Pipe natural gas pipeline from Norway to Poland via Denmark and the Baltic Sea, hailing the new gas link as a crucial move to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas. No credible analyst, however, believes the supply will be enough to curtail severe shortages. 

The number of “coincidences” one needs to entertain in order to subscribe to the official media and government narrative that Putin blew up his own pipeline (in the process destroying any possible leverage he had over European support for his Ukrainian foes) requires a truly Homeric suspension of disbelief. One has to ignore the fact that both Biden and longtime neocon warmonger Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland explicitly threatened Nord Stream operations in early 2022 should Russia invade Ukraine. One must further ignore the fact that Defense Department Spokesperson John Kirby bragged that the destruction of Nord Stream presented a “tremendous opportunity for years to come” to reduce dependence on Russian gas and oil, while disavowing U.S. responsibility for creating such good fortune. Above all, one must ignore the fact that Putin and Russia gain precisely no strategic advantage from destroying an expensive investment they were effectively using as political leverage over Europe. Putin, we are told, is mentally unbalanced and increasingly unstable due to cognitive impairment (unlike the current occupant of the White House). 

So, in traditional realpolitik analysis, cui bono? The answer is obvious. A regime facing devastating electoral losses in just over a month. A desperate regime that has failed to prolong the panic over COVID (or to create a new panic over Monkeypox) in order to credibly suspend in-person voting on what was once known as Election Day. A regime with far too much to lose should the GOP gain congressional oversight as a result of inevitable revelations related to 1) government collaboration with Big Pharma and media to perpetuate vaccine fraud; 2) the use of intelligence agencies and their social media lackeys to target political opponents; 3) the coordination by Biden political operatives of election fraud in 2020, and, especially; 4) the Biden crime family and its operations in both China and Ukraine. 

Many Americans have trouble believing a United States president would intentionally provoke a high stakes nuclear showdown with Russia over the territorial integrity of the Russian-speaking eastern part of Ukraine (one of the most corrupt governments on the planet) where we have no vital national interest. But the Biden Administration’s lack of interest in reducing hostilities became crystal clear with the recent revelation that in April the United States scuttled a tentative deal to end the war—even though both Russia and Ukraine were ready to agree—in which Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23 and Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership. 

Of course, provoking foreign crises in order to suspend civil liberties (including elections) and crack down on political opponents at home with the use of “wartime emergency powers” has long been a favorite page in the playbook of totalitarian regimes over the world. And the events of the past week should leave no doubt that the Biden regime is contemplating, if not on the verge of implementing, just such a contingency. 

Days after the explosions sabotaging the Nord Stream pipelines, a $290 million purchase of drugs to treat radiation poisoning for distribution to the U.S. population was announced on October 4 by the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), an agency within the HHS with the job of preparing the nation for future disasters and public health emergencies. On October 6, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zenenskyy called on NATO to launch “preemptive strikes” into Russia to “make it impossible for Russia to use nuclear weapons.” On the same day as Zelenskyy’s call for a preemptive strike, Joe Biden said that the threat of nuclear “Armageddon” is at its highest level since the Cuban missile crisis, and that the United States is trying to find an “off-ramp” for Russia before they begin the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Finally, there was the Ukrainian bombing of the the only bridge connecting annexed Crimea to the Russian mainland—a momentous move that most likely could not have been taken without U.S. military support, and which has already led to a massive escalation of Russia’s attack on Ukrainian cities and the credible threat of using tactical nuclear weapons in response. 

The big question now is not whether the Biden regime is prepared to risk everything to prevent devastating electoral losses and congressional investigations. The real question is why have Republicans been complicit in, nay enthusiastic supporters of, this disastrous proxy war that has already resulted in the energy and food supply disruptions roiling Europe and about to roil the United States? 

Normal American voters, who regard it as madness to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into a war defending the ostensibly sacred borders of Ukraine while allowing an illegal invasion of millions over our own nation’s porous southern border, can be forgiven for wondering who in Washington is sticking up for their interests. They may soon be wondering why Republicans went along with a ruinous, provocative policy of nuclear gamesmanship that allowed the Biden Administration to divert attention from its own abject policy failures with a choreographed foreign crisis, giving them an excuse to use emergency powers to step up persecution of their political opponents at home. And perhaps to disrupt an election.







X22, Christian Patriot News, and more- Oct 11

 



Today, Lifetime announced their Christmas movie lineup, which sounds almost as bad as Hallmark's, and the worst TV showrunner of all time is spouting off again (more on that in the comments section.).

Here's tonight's news:


Elvis Chan: Cyber Conduit Between FBI and Big Tech

This FBI agent based in the Silicon Valley and working with social media companies to censor what you see on their platforms has a long history of blocking and tackling for his Democratic bosses.


Election Day is four weeks away and barring some major catastrophe, Republicans are expected to make major gains in offices across the country and win a majority of seats in Congress. A stagnant economy, an unpopular occupant of the White House, reckless warnings of possible nuclear war, and a twisted fixation on mutilating and sexually tormenting children have Democrats on the ropes; even a criminal indictment of Donald Trump, which would be the biggest “October surprise” in political history, is unlikely to save Democrats from self-immolation on November 8.

So, Democrats are once again colluding with Big Tech to censor “disinformation” about the 2022 midterms. Of course, the definition of “disinformation” is open to interpretation—content hostile to the regime, naturally—but the FBI’s point man on the topic recently told reporters the bureau is on the lookout for wrongthink. Elvis Chan, an assistant special agent in charge responsible for the cyber branch of the FBI’s San Francisco field office, met with reporters last week to explain the nature of potential hijinks in the November election.

“People are trying to dispel the disinformation and misinformation that is going on; that there are things that are happening to the election. We don’t see any credible threats at this point,” Chan told a San Francisco television reporter following an October 6 press briefing. “That’s not to say we aren’t monitoring them, we are.”

Chan also said “federal agencies have their eye on misinformation and election lies that often spread through social media” but assured the voting public that “federal law enforcement agencies are sharing data with those social media platforms with the aim of combating election misinformation with the truth.”

He should know about working with social media. According to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt against numerous government agencies and officials for conspiring with media companies to silence free speech, Chan was one of two FBI agents who urged Facebook officials to censor content related to Hunter Biden’s laptop before the 2020 election. “Pursuant to the third-party subpoena, Meta [Facebook’s parent company] has identified—Elvis Chan as involved in the communications between the FBI and Meta that led to Facebook’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story,” Schmitt wrote. (The other agent was Laura Dehmlow, a section chief for the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, another politically-motivated operation created by FBI Director Christopher Wray in 2017.) Both Chan and Dehmlow are defendants in the lawsuit.

Mark Zuckerberg repeatedly has admitted that FBI agents warned Facebook officials to be on “high alert” for a “dump” of news that could be the result of foreign actors attempting to interfere in the 2020 election; the news dump that followed was the New York Post’s explosive reporting on the laptop, just weeks before Election Day. The company immediately announced it would reduce visibility of the Post’s articles until “fact checkers” could verify it was not the work of a foreign interference campaign. Twitter locked the Post’s account for two weeks and blocked users from sharing articles, flagging the links as “potentially harmful.”

The primary conduit between Big Tech oligarchs and the FBI appears to be Chan. Schmitt’s lawsuit accuses Chan of playing a “critical role for FBI—in coordinating with social-media platforms relating to censorship and suppression of speech on their platforms.”

In a recent podcast interview, Chan—who seems to spend most of his time conducting interviews and speechifying at security conferences rather than investigating cyber crime—bragged that his office “was very involved in helping to protect the U.S. elections in 2020.” This required, Chan admitted, communicating with technology and social media companies “on a weekly basis” to share alleged intelligence about foreign interference in the election. “That’s where the FBI and the US government can actually help companies,” he said.

Regularly corresponding with these companies is easy for Chan; his office is located in the heart of Silicon Valley, home to more than 300 companies tied to Big Tech. One can only imagine how frequently Chan and his FBI colleagues hobnob with the powers-that-be in northern California in swanky hot spots. This also explains why the FBI refuses to investigate Facebook and Twitter for flagrant election interference on a number of fronts; it would be hard for the FBI to investigate companies for doing what the FBI told them to do.

No foreign entity, of course, was responsible for the coverage and distribution of the Hunter Biden laptop story; to the contrary, the flagrant attempt to sway voters by concealing incriminating information about the Biden family was executed by powerful domestic interests including Chan, Big Tech, and the conventional news media. FBI agents in Washington warned that negative reporting associated with Biden’s laptop was a “foreign disinformation campaign” and briefed Republican senators to that effect in the summer of 2020.

Team Biden also did its part to promote the falsehood. “If we see tonight from Donald Trump these attacks on Vice President Biden’s family, I think we need to be very, very clear that what he’s doing here is amplifying Russian misinformation,” a campaign spokeswoman warned on October 22, 2020.

Ironically—or not—Chan himself is a purveyor of general disinformation about American elections. He insists the 2020 election was the safest in history, claiming “there was mostly not voter fraud, despite what you hear on different outlets.”

For years, Chan has promoted the unproven narrative that the Russians attempted to influence the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win. As Twitter sleuth Stephen McIntyre pointed out last week, Chan’s name appears in evidence collected by Special Counsel John Durham in the criminal case against Michael Sussmann, a lawyer for Perkins Coie, the firm representing both the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee in 2016.

That spring, the DNC blamed the Russians for a hack of its email system. Sussmann hired CrowdStrike, a cyber security firm led by a former top FBI official, to investigate the intrusion; the FBI and Sussmann coordinated talking points and scheduled a phone call with Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima in June 2016 to leak the results of CrowdStrike’s alleged probe into the source of the hack.

But it wasn’t enough. Sussmann desperately wanted the FBI’s official imprimatur on the Russian hack narrative. In July 2016, another FBI cyber chief asked Sussmann to approve a draft statement for reporters about the stolen emails; Sussmann succeeded in getting the bureau to issue a stronger response that backed his clients’ allegations. Chan’s name first appeared that same month as the FBI continued to help Democrats spin the Russian hack story.

By late September, Sussmann was pushing the FBI to publicly conclude the incursion was the work of Kremlin-based hackers—and that’s when Chan was again looped in. He participated in several email discussions between Sussmann, the Justice Department, CrowdStrike representatives, and other FBI officials in October regarding an FBI examination into the hack and potentially “fake” documents. A call between all the parties, including Chan, took place on October 11, 2016. Afterwards, Sussmann and Chan communicated directly as his office sought to obtain data directly lifted from the DNC system.

It never happened.

And neither did the Russia-based hack of the DNC email system; testimony later revealed CrowdStrike didn’t have evidence that Russian hackers were responsible for the breach. The email hack story, like every other animating aspect of the Russian collusion hoax, turned out to be untrue. But that isn’t stopping Chan from continuing to insist Kremlin operatives influenced the 2016 election.

So, what is Chan up to now? How will he and his Big Tech sycophants silence dissenting views about the 2022 election, either before or after Election Day? With Democrats desperate to stem heavy losses, one can only guess what the FBI has in store this time around. And what are they already planning for 2024?

Regardless, it’s obvious that Chan is not an outlier in the FBI. He is just another sleazy partisan operative disguised as a dutiful FBI agent and more proof that the corrupt rot at the Federal Bureau of Investigation infects every office in the country.




Angela Lansbury: Murder, She Wrote actress dies aged 96

 

Dame Angela Lansbury, who starred in the TV show Murder, She Wrote and the film Beauty and the Beast, has died at the age of 96.

Her family said in a statement: "The children of Dame Angela Lansbury are sad to announce that their mother died peacefully in her sleep at home in Los Angeles at 1.30am today, Tuesday, October 11, 2022, just five days shy of her 97th birthday.  


"In addition to her three children, Anthony, Deirdre and David, she is survived by three grandchildren, Peter, Katherine and Ian, plus five great grandchildren and her brother, producer Edgar Lansbury.

"She was proceeded in death by her husband of 53 years, Peter Shaw. A private family ceremony will be held at a date to be determined."  


https://news.sky.com/story/angela-lansbury-murder-she-wrote-actress-dies-aged-96-12718271   




Congress, Your Duty To Americans Must Trump Your Infatuation With Foreign Wars


Ukraine is not a NATO ally, and even if it were, no military response could go forward without a vote of Congress. 



Earlier this year, as the Senate approved Finland and Sweden joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., offered a straightforward amendment to clarify in law that “Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty does not supersede the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war before the United States engages in war.” The Senate rejected the measure 87-10. In arguing against the need for clarity, Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said, “Now, it’s well and good for Congress to consider war powers and a role in military conflicts, but doing so … while Ukraine is under attack and while Russia may be potentially eyeing violence against NATO nations is not the time.”  

But now is the time to reconsider how the alliance was originally understood when the U.S. first joined NATO. During the Senate debate in 1949 on whether to ratify the North Atlantic Treaty that would formally establish NATO, intervention skeptics raised concerns about binding the U.S. to a collective defense of Europe and wanted to ensure ratification did not supersede the war-making power of Congress. Secretary of State Dean Acheson provided such assurances, saying ratification, “does not mean that the United States would be automatically at war if one of the nations covered by the pact is subjected to armed attack. Under our Constitution, the Congress alone has the power to declare war.”

Today, the faltering will of Congress on matters of war and peace could not come at a worse time. Russian President Vladimir Putin is threatening the use of nuclear weapons in order to defend annexed territory in Ukraine. In a response now seen by the Kremlin as further provocation, Ukraine officially submitted its application for fast-track membership to the NATO alliance. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said of Ukraine, “De facto, we have already proven compatibility with alliance standards. … We trust each other, we help each other, and we protect each other.”

To turn up the heat even more, the U.S. foreign policy establishment believes the U.S. would and should respond to any use of nuclear weapons by Russia, even if solely contained within Ukraine’s borders, all but guaranteeing the conflict would spill into NATO territory. Former CIA Director David Petraeus said, “Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a NATO — a collective — effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black Sea.” U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said the U.S. has had the “opportunity to communicate directly to Russia a range of consequences for the use of nuclear weapons and the kinds of actions the United States would take” but declined to offer any indication of what could be included. 

Reinterpretation of Obligations

Why did the U.S. abandon the strategic sanity expressed at NATO’s inception? Over time, a collectivist reinterpretation of U.S. obligations as a part of the NATO alliance emerged, supposing that an invocation of Article V mandates a U.S. military response to both an attacked NATO country as well as protectorates NATO has allowed under its de facto guardianship. Presidents make this collectivist interpretation possible by continually demonstrating an ability to circumvent Congress and engage the U.S. in undeclared, unconstitutional, and often endless wars. It is no wonder Europe feels enveloped in the safety of the U.S. security umbrella and has little incentive to provide for its own defense. It is no surprise Ukraine believes it is entitled to enjoy the same luxury.

The uncomfortable reality is Article V doesn’t require any specific response from any NATO member. The only commitment member states undertake in the event of an armed attack are “such actions as it [each individual member state] deems necessary” to restore the security of the region. No treaty would ever successfully supersede the sovereignty of individual states, particularly not by binding a group of nations to a future war.

The Founders also understood the importance of protecting the self-determination of the United States and the need to guard against foreign entanglements and influence. It is why the power to make treaties is shared. It is why Congress and Congress alone is vested with war-making. But the protections only work if Congress plays offense against the reckless global gallivanting of the president and defense against its own internal temptations. 

Congress Failing

Congress is failing on both accounts. President Joe Biden’s promise of unwavering support for Ukraine, deployments to the European theater, and massive arms commitment have all gone completely unchecked. In fact, Congress continues to blindly affirm, in a bipartisan fashion, policies toward Ukraine that make it nearly impossible for the U.S. to exercise any restraint as the risk of being drawn into nuclear war in Europe grows.

For the American people, burnt out on years of endless wars in the Middle East, Congress must draw red lines. Romney is wrong. Now is exactly the time for Congress to find its backbone. President Biden and NATO need a reminder that Ukraine is not a NATO ally, and even if it were, no military response could go forward without a vote of Congress. Passive members of Congress that allow anything less do not deserve another term.




EU foreign policy chief says diplomats are slow, ineffective and patronising

 

The EU’s foreign policy chief has accused his top diplomats of being slow, ineffective and patronising towards the countries they work in, also berating them for failing to anticipate Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“This is not a moment when we are going to send flowers to all of you saying that you are beautiful, you work very well and we are very happy,” Josep Borrell, the EU’s high representative for foreign policy, told ambassadors who work for the EU’s external action service.

Borrell, a Spanish former foreign minister, who has a reputation for bluntness, lamented that the EU’s global diplomatic network was less informative than reading the papers. “Sometimes, I knew more of what was happening somewhere by reading the newspapers than reading your reports,” he said.

“I should be the best-informed guy in the world,” Borrell complained, instructing them to be more reactive to unfolding crises. “Behave as you would behave if you were an embassy: send a telegram, a cable, a mail – quickly. Quickly, please, react.”  

The EU, he said, had failed to predict that Russia would attack Ukraine, leaving him reliant on warnings from the US, notably a phone call from US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, two days before the invasion. “I have to recognise that here, in Brussels, the Americans were telling us ‘they will attack, they will attack’, and we were quite reluctant to believe it.”

As his audience sat in silence, Borrell accused his diplomats of lacking empathy and patronising counterparts in their host countries. “We think that we know better what is in other people’s interests. We underestimate the role of emotions and the persisting appeal of identity politics.”  


The comments come amid growing concern among senior EU officials that the EU’s dash for alternatives to Russian gas has alienated African countries by pushing up prices.

Reprising a long-term concern, Borrell said the EU was losing the “battle of narratives” to Russia and China, who deployed troll farms to amplify their messages around the world. “This is a battle that we are not winning, because we are not fighting enough,” he said, criticising EU diplomats for not retweeting his blog posts or tweets. “I am still surprised that, in some delegations, it seems that they do not take enough consideration of our communication, and they do not tweet and retweet the messages that we are delivering from the centre. You have to be a network that is repeating, transmitting, insisting.”

Borrell, who once described the EU’s monthly foreign ministers’ meetings as “more a valley of tears than a centre of decision-making”, has never held back in his criticism of what he sees as the EU’s foreign policy shortcomings, but it remains unusual for a senior European official to launch such unbarred criticism against their own staff.  


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/11/eu-foreign-policy-chief-josep-borrell-says-diplomats-are-slow-ineffective-and-patronising    





RealClearPolitics Makes Electrifying Prediction as to Who Will Win the Senate


Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

There’s some terrific news just dropping about the race for the Senate.

RealClearPolitics is predicting that the Republicans will win and Democrats will lose their majority in the Senate next month in the midterm election.

While RCP thinks that Herschel Walker will lose in the effort to take out Sen. Raphael Warnock, they still think that the Republicans will pick up two seats in the process. Walker is facing some flack because of the accusation that he paid for an abortion for a woman; he had been doing well before that point. It’s hard to say how that will work out yet — part of that will be how people judge his reaction to the accusation. Warnock and Walker are still tight in the polls with Walker at 3.8 points behind, but those polls may not be factoring in what people are thinking about the latest news yet.

In RealClearPolitics’ latest prediction, they are saying that the GOP will hold Pennsylvania. That’s a pretty big prediction. Dr. Mehmet Oz has been surging and is now in a toss-up with John Fetterman. Fetterman had the lead for a long time, but Oz has been getting out there all over the state and people have started looking more at Fetterman’s reluctance to debate, his radical policies, and his health problems. So the gap has been closing. They’re running for the seat that is being vacated by Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA).

RCP is also predicting that the Republicans will pick up Nevada, where Republican Adam Laxalt has been leading against Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) in all the polls, the RCP average has Laxalt up by more than two points. RCP is also saying Arizona will be a win for the Republicans where Blake Masters is behind Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) but in a very tight race. Kelly just got eaten alive by Masters in a debate that exposed how ineffectual Kelly has been for Arizona.

As we reported, the RCP projection has the Republicans up 220-180 in the House, with 35 toss-ups, with many of those eminently winnable by Republicans, with nine races just moving in the direction of the GOP.

I don’t know about you, but that’s sounding pretty wave-y to me.

That’s great news, and there may be more.

According to FiveThirtyEight, they are projecting Trump-backed Kelly Tshibaka has the best chance of winning over Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who has held the seat for the last twenty years but has been a frequent thorn in the side of more conservative Republicans and the base.

Some are questioning that prediction because Alaska has ranked-choice voting that one might think would work to the benefit of Murkowski. The top four advance to the general election including Murkowski, Tshibaka, and Democrat Patrick Chesbro. Buzz Kelley — another Republican — was the fourth, but he dropped out and threw his support to Tshibaka. But his name is still on the ballot because he didn’t drop out in time to take it off.

But if that prediction is correct, not only could we take the Senate, but then take it with a stronger position without one of the people who has frequently thrown in with the Democrats.

So good news all around!




Biden Admin Quietly Begins To Treat Border Crisis Like Invasion


Sarah Lee reporting for RedState 

The Washington Examiner, citing reports from the Center Square, has a piece up today detailing that 20 states — including some very blue states like Oregon — have deployed military troops to the Southern border since Joe Biden took office.

The Defense Department requested 2,500 National Guard members from states earlier this summer to help federal law enforcement with detecting human and drug smuggling operations. Both Democratic- and Republican-governed states have signed on to the border security mission.

To date, states sending troops include Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, and South Carolina, according to the Center Square.

In addition, the U.S. Virgin Islands and seven states — Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, and Washington — agreed to send aviation support.

Despite the progressive-friendly media’s attempts to cancel use of the word “invasion” when covering the border crisis, the policy response from DoD looks an awful lot like they think it might be time to treat “the surge” (one of the preferred media euphemisms) as one. This is especially true when considering the use of air cover from reliably blue states. From The Examiner:

The Oregon Army National Guard agreed to send UH-72A Lakotas and helicopter crews to work with the U.S. Border Patrol, which is responsible for arresting noncitizens who attempt to enter the country illegally.

“The mission will not be easy,” Chief Warrant Officer Dave Long told the East Oregonian. “We will fly each night. Our mission is to stop fentanyl, meth, and other illicit drugs from crossing the border and, additionally, to stop human trafficking and provide humanitarian aid to those in need. But my priority will be to use all of my skills and experience to bring everyone home on this deployment.”

Tom Homan, former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and a senior fellow at the Immigration Reform Law Institute, wrote in August that Biden owns the crisis because, through policy and a general dismantling of Trump’s border response, he effectively threw wide the border doors. Complicating matters, illegal crossers have a reasonable suspicion they can stay if they make it, and there will be few consequences.

[T]he Biden administration has cut down on prosecuting illegal immigrants by nearly 80 percent. This all but invites more to come. Under Biden’s watch, over 800,000 illegal immigrants have now come into the United States unapprehended — the “got-aways.” We simply don’t know what criminal types were among them — we do know that just since October, there were 56 people on the terror watchlist among the ones we did apprehend. Biden’s callous disregard for public safety is beyond worrisome.

And things have gotten wildly out of hand, not just because of a surge of new, unprocessed immigrants, but because the murderous Mexican cartels have been enriched in income by a staggering 2,500 percent over the last four years. They’ve made $13 BILLION in revenue in 2022 so far.

Reports began trickling out very recently that Biden was working on completing parts of Trump’s border wall. As The Economist put it: “The Southern border is a political problem for Democrats because it is an actual problem.”

Well said. But it’s also a problem for Americans in general because fentanyl deaths are soaring, immigrants are being shuttled into the interior to parts unknown, and border states are at their breaking points. It’s nothing if not a tragedy that the humanitarian crisis wasn’t enough to get Team Biden to actually start addressing the “political” problem at the border. But how’s this for politics?: Biden’s open border policy and non-response to the growing crisis is also a massive failure of leadership and should be a reason Biden is allowed only a single term in the White House.



Connecting Things – Konnech Election Compromise, CCP Infiltration, CEO Arrest, True The Vote and Recent Deep State Misinformation Efforts


Major Hat Tips to Rasmussen [link], Kanekoa News [link] and Catherine Englebrecht of True the Vote [link].

CTH often says don’t get so close to any granules that you miss the big picture.  Rasmussen Reports has drawn attention to that big picture, the timeline tells the story, and with recent announcements about ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ triggers, it is worth putting the details of the entire dynamic into context.  I would consider all these issues easily connected.

First, it is important to note how the public impression is constructed using the affiliations and relationships CTH continually points out.  When the FBI/DOJ need to get out in front of an issue they use the New York Times (and Politico) to establish the defensive and offensive narrative.   [The State Dept use CNN, and the CIA use the Washington post] These are constants in an ever-changing world of information warfare.

♦On October 3rd New York Times journalist Stuart Thompson writes a hit piece against Catherine Englebrecht and True The Vote, written to cast their election review efforts as conspiracy theories. [link]

♦24 hours later, October 4th, the CEO of  Konnech – a company specializing in proprietary PollChief software to manage election workers – was arrested. [link] Konnech Corporation Chief Executive Officer Eugene Yu was arrested for exploiting access to U.S. election data, including election worker information, and transferring the files to China.

I guarantee journalist Stuart Thompson was used as a tool by FBI officials who knew the arrest was forthcoming.  Essentially, the arrest of Eugene Yu was based on the exact claims of Chinese datamining that Catherine Englebrecht and Gregg Phillips had been outlining since late 2020.  [link] The FBI was/is working to diffuse the truth of U.S. election compromises that True the Vote has been outlining.

After the arrest of Eugene Yu (October 6th) the New York Times had to try and hide their useful work and affiliation on behalf of the political FBI by posting this update.  The transparency of the coordinated effort is brutally obvious:

Editors’ Note, Oct. 6: After this article was published, the chief executive of Konnech, Eugene Yu, was arrested in connection with an investigation into the possible theft of personal information about poll workers. In communications with The Times for this article, neither Mr. Yu nor a spokesman for Konnech said that the company was the subject of an investigation. They also asserted that all the company’s data was stored on servers in the United States; prosecutors in Los Angeles, who brought the charges against Mr. Yu, said that they had found some company data stored on servers in China. The Times is continuing to report on this story. (link)

A familiar pattern: (1) Write a requested ‘conspiracy theory’ hit piece.  (2) Immediately watch the reality of the next event confirm the ‘conspiracy theory’.  (3) Attempt to recover credibility after the disinfecting sunlight exposes the motive of the effort.  This is what ideological narrative engineers do in their relationships with the corrupt system operators within government.

The FBI takes the information provided by True The Vote, assembles the evidence that supports the claims by the voting integrity watchdog, then takes the information up to the DC FBI leadership and almost immediately the switch is triggered.  True The Vote now becomes the target of the political FBI.  We have watched this outline numerous times, only this example is brutally obvious.

So, we have Chinese Communist Party (CCP) infiltration -via software exploitation- into U.S. election systems and databases.   That’s the bottom line.

Additionally, the FBI is covering up the issue and trying to deflect from the severity of the problem (perhaps to them it is not a problem) by hiding the truth.  Once again, the FBI is weaponized against what they consider “domestic threats,” honest Americans.  Yeah, we have a major institutional problem, and the corruption is metastatic.

It is then appropriate to add another ‘big picture’ layer to the issue….

…Nothing has been done to correct the election integrity issue.  With the U.S. midterm elections taking place only a month after this explosive development unfolds, there is nothing visible to reflect any emergency action has been taken to mitigate the compromise.  Which takes us to the latest issue.

Big Tech, Social Media and even electronic payment processors (PayPal) start beating the drums about using their vast power to target anyone who they would identify as pushing ‘misinformation‘ and/or ‘disinformation‘ about the 2020 election itself.

Now, this latest round of service term updates (2022) should be contextualized against the November 2020 service term updates which included targeting for any individual, site or content that questioned U.S. election integrity.

Put it together, stand back and you can make a solid argument the private sector institutions that are in alignment with corrupt government efforts are proactively positioning to shut down anyone who will research and outline the flawed and/or manipulated outcomes in the 2022 midterm elections.   We have the 2020 background -and major social media purge- as context.

I’m not sure what the solution is, but everyone needs to be on high alert at a precinct level in this election.