Natron Means Business

@Houseofyogi Funny how they never got any credit for canning Manafort early on; instead the DC machine took the narrative and ran with it. No doubt Russia preferred Trump, just as Hillary did initially, for self-serving reasons, but neither can be pleased that their schemes haven't worked out

@Houseofyogi I think a lot of the Russian infiltration narrative sprung from Paul Manafort, who briefly served as Trump's campaign manager in 2016, but was fired after 2 months, coming under scrutiny for his shady foreign lobbying and connection to pro-Russian elements in Ukraine.

Trump Derangement Syndrome: The Real Insurrection A businessman from New York who had never held office, never served in government, never been part of the machine, ran for president in 2016. The Clinton campaign wanted him to. An internal DNC memo from April 2015 called it the "Pied Piper" strategy: elevate Trump, Cruz, Carson. "Tell the press to take them seriously." They wanted him because they thought he'd be the easiest to destroy. 63 million Americans didn't get the memo. They voted for the guy who wasn't a politician. Wasn't groomed by donors. Wasn't part of the DC corruption machine. 306 electoral votes. 30 states. And the people who rigged the game to get the opponent they wanted couldn't accept the result when they lost to him. Five Senate Democrats drafted impeachment frameworks in December 2016. Six weeks before inauguration. Before he signed anything. They had the conclusion before he took the oath. They just needed the evidence. Not on January 6th. Starting January 20th, 2017. Everyone wants to talk about insurrection. Nobody wants to talk about the one that ran for four years. They manufactured the evidence. The Steele Dossier. Funded by the Clinton campaign. Laundered through a law firm, an opposition research shop, a former British spy, and a Russian national named Igor Danchenko who told the FBI his information was "rumor and speculation." FBI lead investigator Peter Strzok wrote internally they were "unaware of ANY Trump advisors engaging in conversations with Russian intelligence officials." Same guy who texted a colleague about Trump winning: "No. No he won't. We'll stop it." Offered Steele a million dollars to verify a single claim. He couldn't. Durham concluded the FBI could not corroborate a single substantive allegation. Mueller: three years, $30 million, no collusion. Intelligence reports later assessed that key parts of Steele's material were themselves RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION. The people screaming about Russian interference spent three years amplifying Russian disinformation to destroy a sitting president. They used the fake evidence to spy on Americans. The FBI took that unverified dossier funded by one campaign and used it to get FISA surveillance warrants on Carter Page, a member of the opposing campaign. Secret court. Secret warrant. Opposition research treated as intelligence. The Inspector General found 17 significant errors and omissions in the warrant applications. Danchenko, the primary source, had been flagged by the FBI's own counterintelligence division. Subject of a full investigation into his Russian intelligence contacts. The FBI's response: put him on their payroll from 2017 to 2020. While the country went to war with itself over a story he made up. The press didn't just cover the lie. They built it. And they fanned the flames of insurrection. FBI Director Comey personally briefed Trump on the dossier. The meeting was immediately leaked to BuzzFeed, who published it in full. The New York Times published: "Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence." The FBI's own Strzok had already flagged the claim internally as inaccurate. The headline stood. The coverage accelerated. The Washington Post and New York Times won Pulitzer Prizes for their Russia coverage. For reporting built on a dossier the FBI couldn't verify. No retractions. No corrections. No Pulitzers returned. The Russia coverage built the machine. They used it on everything. They told you he called neo-Nazis "very fine people." He didn't. The full quote, on camera: "I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally." Snopes confirmed it in 2024. Didn't matter. Biden launched his entire 2020 campaign on the lie. The BBC spliced two clips from his January 6th speech, filmed 50 minutes apart, into one quote. Cut "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." Replaced it with "fight like hell." Made it sound like a direct call for violence. Their director-general resigned. Their head of news resigned. Days before the 2024 election. The press built the permission. Congress used it. They tried to remove him before, during, and after. Democrat Al Green introduced impeachment articles in 2017. Before Mueller concluded anything. Then said it on camera: "I'm concerned that if we don't impeach this president, he will get re-elected." Rashida Tlaib, day one in Congress: "We're going to impeach the motherf***er." First impeachment: a phone call with Ukraine. Purely partisan. 230 to 197. Zero Republicans. Second impeachment: seven days. No committee hearings. No formal investigation. Fastest impeachment in American history. Against a president who had already lost and was leaving office in a week. Jerry Nadler, 1998, arguing against Clinton's impeachment: "Impeachment is an undoing of a national election." Twenty years later the same man led the charge to impeach Trump. Same seat. Opposite position. Only thing that changed was the name on the door. The data proves none of it was about principle. Oxford studied four administrations. Bush. Obama. Trump. Biden. Support for violating democratic norms tracked one variable. Not values. Not ideology. The jersey. Democracy Fund: 24% of Americans changed their position on congressional oversight between 2019 and 2022. Of those who flipped, 83% moved in whichever direction served their party. They elevated him because they thought he'd lose. He won because 63 million people were tired of being managed. Fabricated evidence. Secret surveillance. A weaponized press. Two impeachments. All dressed up as patriotism. They couldn't buy him. So they tried to bury him. When that didn't work they tried to remove him. When that didn't work they doctored the footage. Question an election and you're a threat to democracy. Fabricate evidence to overturn one and you're defending it. That's the deal they sold you. And half the country bought it without reading the receipts. TDS was never a syndrome. It was a permission structure. It told you the threat was so big the rules didn't apply anymore. And you believed it. The rules always apply. That's the whole point of having them. Stop being an NPC. I hope you understand what's at stake.

@AndreChimene @CramerSez "The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs", the rallying cry of the demoralized cynic share.google/wBSn3r9t84sQ8w…

Currently today we are paying over $1 billion a day to fight this war for Israel that’s gonna be a lot more than 19 billion it already is and Congress is asking for another 250 billion for this war of course that’s not a war for us I ran never attacked us. They don’t threaten us, but they do threaten in Israel so when are you gonna say something about that since you’re so hung up on money and how much we spend $1 billion a day for this war so far and 200 billion more on the table… It ain’t for us it’s all for Israel and you know that.

- A communist Muslim is mayor of NYC. Somali Muslims have ripped us off for $19B in Minnesota alone. Reports claim there are Muslim NO GO ZONES in Dearborn, MI Texas Islamists have begun to demand Sharia Law in specific cases. BUT, SURE. KEEP LETTING TUCKER, JONES, AND OWENS CONVINCE YOU JEWS AND ISRAEL ARE OUR BIGGEST THREAT. Ever seen a Jewish suicide bomber? No? Then, shut the fuck up. -

@spooked75 The reason you can post this here is because here you are free to speak, even anonymously if you choose. And you can call out anything you think is untrue, misleading, or manipulative--no matter the source. You can try to persuade, and people can believe you, or not. Cheers 🍻

I spent 13 years in counterintelligence and HUMINT. Let me explain why the government psyop operation on X is a problem. I'm not some random person speculating about intelligence operations. I spent 13 years in the United States Army doing counterintelligence and human intelligence work. Then another 7 years working for the government in related fields. I know how this works. When I tell you that military PSYOP personnel operating on a domestic social media platform is a serious problem, I need you to understand I'm not being hyperbolic. What PSYOP actually does: Psychological Operations are designed to influence the emotions, attitudes, and behavior of target audiences. That's the literal job description. These are professionals trained to shape how people think, what they believe, and how they act. This is a legitimate function — in foreign theaters. PSYOP exists to influence foreign populations in areas where the US military operates. It's a tool of warfare and foreign policy. The problem: It's not supposed to be used domestically. There's a reason for this. The Smith-Mundt Act historically prohibited the government from directing propaganda at American citizens. The idea was simple: the US military and intelligence community should not be in the business of psychologically manipulating the American public. That's what authoritarian governments do. That's what we criticized the Soviet Union for. That's what we point to when we call countries "unfree." What's happening now: US military psychological operations personnel are now embedded in the platform that tens of millions of Americans use as a primary news and information source. The "free speech" platform. The one that was supposed to be the alternative to government-influenced big tech. Let me be clear about what this means: The same people who are trained to run influence campaigns on foreign populations — to change what they think, to manipulate their behavior, to shape their perception of reality — are now operating on a platform used primarily by Americans. The irony is suffocating: The MAGA crowd screamed for years about "government censorship" and "deep state control" of social media. Elon Musk bought Twitter explicitly to "free" it from government influence. And now? Literal military psychological warfare specialists are running operations on the platform. And MAGA is fine with it. Because it's THEIR government now. THEIR psyop. This is what I was trained to recognize: In my years doing counterintelligence, part of my job was identifying foreign influence operations. Recognizing when a population was being manipulated. Understanding the techniques. I know what a domestic influence operation looks like. I know the signs. I know the methods. And I'm watching it happen in real-time to my own country, being cheered on by people who think they're "free thinkers" while consuming content curated by military psychological operations specialists. It doesn't matter if you agree with the current administration. Today it's your team running the psyop. Tomorrow it won't be. The infrastructure you're cheering for will be used against you eventually. That's how this works. That's why we had rules against it. You don't give the government the power to psychologically manipulate the domestic population just because you like the current president. That power doesn't go away when the next administration takes over. Wake up. You're not free thinkers. You're targets. And you're thanking them for it.

@spooked75 Yes that's a genuine concern and hazard of all social media platforms. I think most users understand there are all sorts of "ops" going on--foreign & domestic, govt and non-govt, but still consider censorship and deplatforming the greater threats, all things considered.

@DefiantLs There were blue and red versions of controlled opposition, and he was blue. But anyone taking real action to restore sovereignty? That is the thing that was NEVER supposed to happen. The "No Kings" stuff really just means "No National Sovereignty" Maybe their deepest conviction

@DefiantLs Wow, it's amazing isn't it? Even as recently as 11 years ago some of them might sing this tune occasionally. I actually voted for him in the Dem primary that year. But I guess it was always fake opposition. Fundamentally they just do not believe in our national sovereignty.

Meanwhile Bernie Sanders in 2015.. "Open borders? … That's a right-wing proposal which says essentially there is no US. It would make everybody in America poorer…"

@ConceptualJames All these old clips of Democrats sounding sensible on immigration reminds you just how much they've changed in recent years. There's no more restraint. They're fully committed and consumed.

Wild.

@Houseofyogi Just imagine Democrats packing the Court with at least 4 more KBJs. They've fantasized about it, it's no secret they would love to do it.

Ketanji Brown Jackson is unfit for the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is supposed to be the one institution in America that isn't a stage. Nine people. Lifetime appointments. No elections. No donors. No campaigns. Just the Constitution. Yesterday the Court ruled 8-1 that Colorado's ban on talk therapy violated the First Amendment. Six conservatives agreed. Both liberal justices agreed. Except Jackson. She wrote a 35-page dissent. Eight justices needed fewer pages to explain the law than she needed to explain why they were all wrong. And read it aloud from the bench. Turning the court into a spectacle. Then Kagan, Obama's appointee, publicly corrected her. Called the case "textbook" viewpoint discrimination. Accused Jackson of "reimagining and collapsing well-settled legal distinctions." Jackson fired back in a footnote. Accused Kagan and Sotomayor of being dupes for the conservative majority. A Supreme Court justice calling her own colleagues political pawns. In a legal opinion. From the bench that exists to be above politics. Every time she loses, she turns on whatever allies she has left. Three separate 8-1 rulings across three years. Lone dissenter every time. Barrett wrote that Jackson "decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary." She has two liberal allies sitting right next to her. They looked at her reasoning and chose the law over her activism. Last term, every justice on the Court agreed with the majority more often than she did. Dead last of nine. In contested cases: 51%. Kagan, same team: 70%. One builds coalitions. One writes 35-page letters to nobody. Majority opinions: 5. Fewest on the Court. Dissents: 10. Most on the Court. Words per oral argument: 1,350. Next closest justice: 900. She talks the most. Writes the longest. Wins the least. Before the Supreme Court she spent eight years on the DC District Court. More of her rulings were overturned than nearly two-thirds of her peers. Reversed unanimously for exceeding her jurisdiction. Tried to overrule Congress on immigration. The court above her said she had no authority. And that court leaned left. Six of ten judges appointed by Democrats. Even they thought she went too far. A judge is supposed to be consistent. States can't ban gender procedures for minors. States have ABSOLUTE power to ban talk therapy for minors. Same justice. Same year. The only variable is which side of the culture war the regulation falls on. A judge is supposed to be honest. Told law students in 2015 that critical race theory informs sentencing. Told the Senate in 2022 that CRT doesn't come up in her work as a judge. One of those was under oath. Can't define the word "woman" in front of the Senate. Celebrates being "the first Black woman" on the Supreme Court on The View. Under oath she's not a biologist. On daytime TV she's making history. A judge is supposed to protect the vulnerable. Federal sentencing guidelines called for 10 years in a child pornography case. She gave 3 months. Her sentencing averaged 57% below national for possession. 47% below for distribution. Every. Single. Case. Below guidelines. A judge is supposed to defend the Constitution. Not treat it as a document to be corrected. She praised the 1619 Project, which argues America's true founding wasn't liberty in 1776 but slavery in 1619. She wrote from the bench that "Our country has never been colorblind." Rejecting the plain meaning of the Equal Protection Clause. She accused the Court itself of enabling "our collective demise." "Let-them-eat-cake obliviousness." "Five-alarm fire." "Moneyed interests." These aren't legal opinions. These are campaign speeches from a chair that's supposed to be above campaigns. Harvard Law. A Supreme Court clerkship. Eight years on the federal bench. She told the Senate she doesn't have "a judicial philosophy per se." But she told the country she's "not afraid to use her voice." She's an activist. Weakest judge of the highest court. Biden had judges with more cases argued before the Court and bipartisan support. He passed over them for the nominee endorsed by Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and Demand Justice. She doesn't want to be a justice. She wants to be a politician. She just skipped the election. I hope you understand what's at stake.

The Iryna Zarutska mural thing shocks me. I don’t know why, particularly after the attempted assassination of Trump and the murder of Charlie Kirk, and more importantly their reactions. But it feels like a new low. I would love nothing more than for our current political madness to end, but it’s clearer every day half the country has no interest in such a thing. Perhaps the tribe is superior to the nation after all. I’m pretty sure people in the Amazon don’t deal with this level of internal division. In fact if this keeps up that’s exactly where we are headed: to our most primitive selves, and all the nastiness that implies.

I'll take even extremely biased news sources--liberal and conservative--over anyone who talks like this.

Gotta send this clip to the misses. She still thinks NPR and MPR are "neutral" news sources

@E_Barcohana They may be "national stories" in some sense, but the vast majority of Americans are probably not aware of these incidents and rarely see the videos. If they did, I suspect things would be different.

Every national story of an outrageous violent crime is committed by either an illegal or a perp that was let out of jail a million times before they killed someone. Sometimes both.

Party members trained at elite universities in Moscow & Leningrad were dispatched to the countryside of Russia and Ukraine to implement "dekulakization"--an ugly sounding word for a hideous reality share.google/PCjyRNKDjVnPZT…

The revolution swept away many older structures of authority, hierarchy, and ownership, but soon replaced them with a more centralized, regimented, iron-fisted system of administered hierarchy in which party loyalty was everything.

Iran was trying to use the North Korean model to get a nuke: create sufficient conventional deterrence so you won’t be challenged in acquiring one (it’s called the Seoul Hostage Problem). This has been explained over and over since day one. Everyone claiming shifting goalposts or no imminent threat has been lying. The reason North Korea was allowed to get nukes is because Seoul (and its 10 million inhabitants) is within artillery and rocket range of North Korea. During the 1994 nuclear crisis, the Clinton administration seriously considered airstrikes on North Korea’s Yongbyon reactor but backed off precisely because of the artillery threat to Seoul. Iran was trying to accomplish the same by stockpiling missiles and drones which would have had the same deterrent effect. The proof is what Iran has been doing in the past month: attacking all its neighbors in order to pressure the US to stop attacking it Beyond this, they were building medium-range ballistic missiles that could reach Paris and London, meaning all of Europe could be held hostage as they built a nuclear bomb. The reason Iran has not built a nuclear weapon until now is not because it couldn’t, but because it knew it would be attacked and denied this capability. So by allowing them to continue developing this conventional deterrence, you would be allowing Iran to get a nuclear weapon. And unlike North Korea, Iran is led by an eschatological death cult Reagan saw nuclear mutually assured destruction (MAD) as both morally bankrupt (because of the innocent-body-count problem) and dangerously fragile because it assumed flawless rationality between adversaries…this means it only takes one irrational actor to destroy the world. Working backwards from the conclusion that Iran’s Islamist regime must never have a nuclear weapon, it was necessary for the US to attack Iran to deny it the conventional capacity to hold the entire eastern hemisphere hostage. Every European leader knows this and behind the scenes praises the US for this action. But they are cowards, held hostage by their own internal Muslim populations, and so adopt these ridiculous public positions. This was never about Israel. And if your argument is that Iran should be allowed to get a nuclear weapon then you are a fool and a traitor to western civilization…you’re a useful idiot

What manner of sorcery is this? A President can wave a magic wand and instantly welcome a million guests to the country. But, we are told, once cast, the spell is virtually impossible to reverse. Some powerful, dark, dangerous magic.

@AylmerTH @X People having their voice heard--can't be having that now can we

British MP Max Wilkinson: @x is a "massive problem" because it allows critics of mass immigration to "have their voice heard in a really easy way that they couldn't in the past".

@TheFP @FPJaySolomon You're probably wondering how I go here...

How does a liberal college student go from volunteering for Elizabeth Warren and climate causes… to chanting “Death to America” in Iran? That’s the question investigative reporter @FPJaySolomon set out to solve when he started looking into the disturbing story of Calla Walsh.

No Kingz. Know Spooks. Yaasss Queen 👑 Are Caliphs Kosher?