• February 5, 2023

DHS Partnered Social Media Surveillance Systems Delivering Mutual Benefits

 DHS Partnered Social Media Surveillance Systems Delivering Mutual Benefits

Screenshot 2022-12-09 210411

Thesis: Begin with The End in Mind – The U.S. Government control over social media though DHS was going to surface eventually.  The people who constructed the systems knew exposure would eventually come.  Two CENSORSHIP lawsuits, one filed by Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai in 2020 [LINK], and another filed by Missouri Attorney General in May 2022 [STATE OF MISSOURI ET AL VERSUS JOSEPH R BIDEN JR ET AL], were going to push the relationship between DHS and social media into the public consciousness; mitigation efforts would be needed.

The timing of the Twitter purchase by Elon Musk, initially triggered via major stock purchase in April 2022, must be considered with the overlay of these two sunlight lawsuits.  Regardless of who owned Twitter, the nature of DHS controlling a backdoor portal into the content of social media was going to surface – as it has been unfolding from the two referenced censorship lawsuits.

The Twitter Files represent a gateway of discovery into how government assisted creating “Oligarchical Systems.” Surveillance systems delivering mutual benefits called public-private partnerships were formed.  Readers here are months ahead of where the arc of this story is destined.  However, oligarchical beneficiaries will always defend the system against rogue oligarchs who become a threat.


There are major inconsistencies in the public narrative as it swirls around Elon Musk and Twitter.

How could a businessman, an entrepreneur like Elon Musk, spend $44 billion, that’s BILLION, on an enterprise without knowing the basic outline of how that enterprise was operating.  In a world of financial due diligence, on a scale of this size, the contradictions do not make sense.

Yet if we are to take Elon Musk at his word, he had no idea that DHS operated a portal into the network. He also had no idea about James Baker working as Twitter legal counsel and carrying such a massive conflict of interest.  Additionally, via his announcement last night, Musk had no idea that Perkins Coie was legally representing Twitter.

How does an owner/operator take ownership of an organization and not know these senior executive issues?  Reconcile these questions, and we begin to reconcile a background of activity that Mr. Musk may not know about.  The alternative explanation is much more nefarious and involves Musk as a willing participant.

Regardless, before going further I cannot emphasize this point enough.   We cannot fight our way through these puzzling issues until we all approach the big questions from the same baseline, the root of what created the system.


Congress Quietly Slips Ukraine Debt Relief into 4,400 Page National Defense Authorization Act

When it comes to congress and the graft that is Ukraine, nothing should come as a surprise.  Last month, the Biden administration asked Congress for another $37.7 billion in support for Ukraine. If that passes, and it certainly will, Congress will have approved more than $100 billion in Ukraine-related spending.

To wit, yesterday congress slipped Ukraine Debt Payment Relief, into the 4,400 page National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which will make the Senate happy as the intent of the upper chamber is to continue the laundry operation.

(Via Fox News) – The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2023 passed the House Thursday afternoon in a 350-80 vote. Included in that 4,400-page bill is a section on “Ukraine Debt Payment Relief.”

That section says the U.S. treasury secretary will instruct U.S. representatives of international financial institutions to “use the voice, vote, and influence of the United States to advocate that the respective institution immediately provide appropriate debt service relief to Ukraine.”

It instructs Treasury to commence “immediate efforts” with other governments and commercial creditors to “pursue comprehensive debt payment relief for Ukraine.”


Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema Changes Political Status to “Independent”, But the Senate Dynamic Will Not Change

Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema announced she is changing her political affiliation to “independent”, a smart and strategic status considering her upcoming Arizona election challenge.

As an independent in the Senate, not much will really change as far as the voting and caucusing is concerned. However, from the standpoint of having to gain votes for reelection in Arizona and accepting the complete chaos that is now Arizona voting, the strategy will likely play well.

As a Democrat Sinema was likely to face a well-funded primary challenge from her left, while simultaneously she will likely face a strong opponent from the Republican side, by taking a place to avoid the primary and position herself as a third-party candidate, she can likely carve out enough votes to win a 3-way race.

(Politico) – In a 45-minute interview, the first-term senator told POLITICO that she will not caucus with Republicans and suggested that she intends to vote the same way she has for four years in the Senate. “Nothing will change about my values or my behavior,” she said.


Share on:
Freedom vs Tyranny

Editor @Investigator_50