U.K Pundit Neil Oliver provides a platform for a very important conversation.

Two researchers, Sasha Latypova and Debbie Lerman, appear with Mr. Oliver to discuss the “COVID DOSSIER.”  An extensive research document that outlines how the origin of the COVID-19 response originated from within the military and intelligence community and not, NOT, from public health officials.

As Sasha, Debbie and Neil discuss, regardless of the SARS-CoV-2 origination, what really matters is what the apparatus of the global intelligence community did in the aftermath of what was called a “global pandemic virus.”

“It is crucially important to understand that COVID was a globally coordinated response based on legal frameworks intended for biodefense/biowarfare situations. The attack that initiated the global COVID response could have been real, perceived, or invented—regardless of the trigger, the lockdown-until-vaccine paradigm originated in the military/intelligence biodefense playbook, not in any scientifically based or epidemiologically established public health plan. [ref]

This means that nothing about the response—masking, distancing, lockdowns, vaccines—was part of a public health plan to respond to a disease outbreak. Rather, every aspect of the response was intended to induce public panic in order to gain compliance with biodefense operations, culminating with the injection of unregulated mRNA products, which were legally treated as biodefense military countermeasures (MCMs), into billions of human beings.”

In a strange way, the timing of this research publication release aligns with my current concerns about DOGE revelations within the USA about the USAID and CIA activity.

In short, I worry the “old system of control” mechanisms are no longer needed.  The Western global intelligence apparatus, driven primarily by the USA intelligence community, is moving on from public influence operations that required widespread convincing and propaganda.  I fear a “new system of control” will be technologically driven and triggered by newly created technological mechanisms.

This is where Real ID, Facial Recognition, Palantir AI and govt funded technological interfaces could come into play.

The Western IC have moved beyond the phase where they were asking for permission and trying to control public opinion.

They have beta-tested alternative approaches where our permission was no longer part of the system. See covid-19 and all the responses therein.

They are moving into the phase where the outputs happen regardless of our opinion. Fully engaged control.

The old system, represented by the USAID approach toward influence, is no longer needed.

The new technologically driven system of control is no longer dependent on human willingness. Technology controlled by government, with the assist of AI and partnered with private sector, will control the options and the outcomes.

They Western IC (Five Eyes) are installing a technologically driven surveillance state in the Australia, Canada, The U.K, New Zealand and the USA.

Australia, NZ and the EU were the proving ground for health driven control operations, COVID passports – now digital ID’s (EU, UK), emergency control of banking systems (Canada), the interface with politically exposed persons; population lockdowns (NZ, AU), etc.

In the USA our constitution creates some impediments; enter the voluntary introduction of bipartisan AI.

“We will use advanced technology and non-partisan AI programming, to make the government more efficient and ensure this level of corruption and wasteful spending never happens again. Every dollar will be tracked, monitored and oversight will be transparent and available for everyone to see. Just ignore the part where the same efficiency system is monitoring your real ID, connecting your personage to the new govt and private sector interfaces, and click “I agree” on your next federal tax filing. Trust us Comrade citizen, the new technologically advanced DODGE approved govt system cares about responsible stewardship and your privacy. Swear.”

Maybe I’m wrong, but it tracks…

Simple things were left blank:

Payment categories

Payment rationales

Basic audit controls

The kind of fields any small business would require. The kind that let you track where money goes. The kind that stop a billion dollars of fraud. Every week.

Here's what Treasury didn't want exposed:

Over $100 billion flowing annually to accounts without Social Security numbers. No temporary ID numbers. No verification. Nothing.

When Musk asked Treasury officials how much was "unequivocal and obvious fraud," the answer revealed decades of corruption: HALF

Let that sink in.

$50 billion per YEAR.

A billion dollars every SINGLE week disappearing into accounts that shouldn't exist.

The kind of fraud that would shut down any bank in America.

The kind that would land any business owner in federal prison.

But Treasury had perfected its system:

1. Process payments

2. Ignore controls

3. Keep the machine running

Yesterday, something shifted. A judge's order appeared, ex parte—meaning only one side could speak. No warning. No defense allowed. Just a wall erected between Treasury officials and their own department's data.

Look at the numbers. Really look at them.

Treasury bleeds 23.87% of its budget to waste, fraud, and abuse.

Almost a quarter, vanishing into what auditors politely call "mismanagement." More than Labor at 11%. More than Veterans Affairs at 10%. More than Agriculture at 9%.

More than Defense Department's 1.85%. More than Homeland Security's 0.89%.

A pattern emerges.

The deeper you go into Treasury's operations, the more the waste grows. The more controls vanish. The more fraud flourishes.

Until now.

"Everything at Treasury was geared towards complaint minimization," Musk revealed after meeting with officials. Not accuracy. Not accountability. Not protecting taxpayer dollars. Just keeping the machine quiet.

This wasn't incompetence. This was design.

Previous management had built a perfect system:

Let the fraudsters complain. Let them threaten. Let them pressure.

Easier to process bad payments than face their wrath.

Think about that calculation. A billion dollars of fraud every week was deemed less costly than dealing with complaints from people gaming the system.

That's how machines like this protect themselves.

Not through efficiency. Not through good management. But through the path of least resistance. Through empty fields. Missing controls. Payments without social security numbers. Through a quarter of their budget disappearing into the void.

Until someone starts asking where it goes.

The system's response was swift.

Coordinated.

Precise.

Nineteen Democratic state attorneys general filed suit. Not about the fraud. Not about the waste. Not about billions vanishing into accounts without SSNs. But about "protecting" the Treasury Department from its own Secretary.

A judge in New York responded with something unprecedented: an ex parte order blocking Treasury officials from accessing their own department's data. No warning. No chance to respond. No opportunity to present evidence. Just a wall between the people elected to fix the system and the system itself.

Think about what that means: The Secretary of the Treasury—effectively the CFO of the United States government—legally barred from seeing how money moves through his own department. The people's appointee blocked from viewing the people's accounts. Young coders mapping the missing controls ordered to stop looking.

The MACHINE (that’s what I’ll be calling the DS from now on) has judges. Has lawyers. Has media. Has entire states moving in coordination.

But here's what makes this time different: The DOGE clock keeps ticking.

$74 billion saved and counting.

Each number representing not just dollars, but holes in the machine.

Gaps in the armor.

Places where light gets in.

They can file motions.

Can issue orders.

Can build blockades.

But they can't make those empty fields disappear. Can't hide a quarter of Treasury's budget vanishing into the void. Can't stop what happens when people finally see truth.

This isn't about spreadsheets anymore. This isn't about waste or controls or management. This is about who controls the machine.

Because when you find something like empty fields in Treasury's payment system, you're not just finding missing data. You're finding purpose. When basic controls sit blank while billions vanish weekly, that's not incompetence. That's design.

The machine is fighting back.

But this time, it's fighting years and years and years of gathered light. Now activated.

And summer is coming.

BREAKING:

Trump just removed the SECURITY CLEARANCE of lifelong government deep-stater, Norm Eisen.

Who is Norm Eisen?

He was co-counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during the first impeachment and trial of President Donald Trump in 2020.

He also wrote the book, “A Case for the American People: The United States v. Donald J. Trump.”

Norm wont be able to make money with a security clearance anymore, but don’t worry. Even though he’s been on a government salary for his entire life, he is worth $3 MILLION dollars.

Now, how did that happen??

Norm, any comment?

BREAKING:

Trump just removed the SECURITY CLEARANCE of lifelong government deep-stater, Norm Eisen.

Who is Norm Eisen?

He was co-counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during the first impeachment and trial of President Donald Trump in 2020.

He also wrote the book, “A… pic.twitter.com/6Iky4Koh9s

— Mila Joy (@MilaLovesJoe) February 9, 2025

The Patriarchy Paradox

"Desire’s fundamental structure is that it needs an obstacle. Remove the obstacle, and desire collapses. The worst thing that can happen to you is to get what you want."
— Slavoj Žižek, The Sublime Object of Ideology

Feminism is stuck. Its rallying cry—“Smash the patriarchy!”—reveals a paradox: The Patriarchy is both the enemy feminism fights and the fuel it needs to survive. Like a mirage that recedes as you approach it, The Patriarchy is an impossible ideal—an obstacle feminism can’t overcome but can’t stop pursuing. To abolish it would collapse the movement’s very purpose.

This paradox isn’t just political; it’s psychological. The Patriarchy functions as what philosopher Slavoj Žižek calls a “sublime object”—an unattainable X that structures desire. For feminism, The Patriarchy is the ultimate scapegoat: it explains wage gaps, sexual violence, and even women’s internalized self-doubt. But like a ghost, it’s everywhere and nowhere. The harder you look for it, the more it diffuses—mansplaining, manspreading, toxic masculinity, microaggressions, and so on.

Unconsciously, feminism doesn’t truly want to win. The drive is the fight itself—the jouissance (a term from psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan for the addictive pleasure found in suffering or failing to get what one thinks they want) of battling an eternal-external foe. Without The Patriarchy, feminism would have to confront messy truths: that sex-based differences and inequalities aren’t the result of a single system but a shifting interplay of biology, capitalism, and human desire.

This essay pokes and prods: Can feminism sustain itself without The Patriarchy fantasy?

The Patriarchy as Sublime Object

The Patriarchy emerged in Second Wave Feminism (1960s-70s) as a retroactive fantasy. Feminist discourse projected it backward, rewriting history as if male dominance were a timeless, universal force. This retroactive framing turned patriarchy into a “Master Signifier”—a term from Lacan meaning a core symbol that organizes all other ideas. For feminism, it’s the ultimate, in-the-last-instance reason behind every grievance or dissatisfaction.

But The Patriarchy is also an “empty signifier”—a concept so vague it can mean anything. It explains wage gaps, sexual violence, and even why women apologize so much. The more it absorbs, the less it clarifies. Like a conspiracy theory, it thrives on being unfalsifiable: if you can’t see patriarchy, that’s proof it’s hiding!

The Bait-and-Switch

Feminism treats The Patriarchy as both:

1. A System (“It’s not individual men’s fault!”) when deflecting criticism.

2. A Moral Failing (“Men must do better!”) when demanding action.

This double standard rigs the game. Men are told to dismantle a system they’re supposedly conditioned by. If they resist, they’re “proof” The Patriarchy exists. If they comply, they’re “performative allies.” The rules keep shifting to keep The Patriarchy alive. As capitalism erodes traditional sex-based hierarchies (e.g., male breadwinner roles), feminism reinvents The Patriarchy as psychological (“internalized misogyny”) or cultural (“microaggressions”). The enemy adapts to survive—ensuring feminism never runs out of battles to fight.

The Patriarchy as the Ultimate Shape-Shifting Obstacle to Female Liberation

The Patriarchy isn’t just feminism’s enemy—it’s its petrol. Remove it, and the movement stops. The Patriarchy is to feminism what the Joker is to Batman. And like any shapeshifting villain, it evolves to survive: Legal equality? Now patriarchy lurks in “microaggressions.” Workplace parity? It’s hiding in “unconscious bias.” Each victory spawns a new iteration, ensuring the fight—and thus, jouissance—never ends. Declining sex-based disparities? Proof of The Patriarchy’s “cunning,” not its decline.

Why Feminism Needs Its Villain

Psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan argued that human desire thrives on impossibility. Feminism mirrors this: its true goal isn’t victory but the chase. “Smash the patriarchy!” isn’t a call to action—it’s a mantra that sustains the movement’s identity. Imagine Coyote finally catching the Roadrunner: euphoria fades into existential crisis.

Intersectionality, a Third Wave iteration, entrenches the patriarchal fantasy by multiplying it. By intersecting The Patriarchy with race, class, sexuality, religion, etc., this move turns The Patriarchy into a Hydra. Cut one head off, another line of oppression appears—yielding a bespoke Patriarchy for every context, historical conjunction, or gender studies master’s thesis!

Feminism now peddles a paradox: The Patriarchy is everywhere yet invisible, systemic yet personal. Question it, and you’re accused of “denying male privilege.” But the real denial is feminism’s refusal to admit its addiction to this sublime object cause of desire.

Patriarchy as a Defence Mechanism

The Patriarchy isn’t just feminism’s compass—it’s its armor. By blaming every inequality or struggle between the sexes on this shapeshifting foe, feminism avoids confronting the real third rail: the messy, immutable tensions of biology, sexuality, and power.

Nature: The Unthinkable Sublime

Biology is the absolute “sublime object”—the force that resists ideology. Feminism’s fixation on The Patriarchy as the root of all oppression lets it sidestep uncomfortable truths:

• Reproductive asymmetry: Men and women aren’t blank slates. Biology shapes sexual dynamics no social program can erase.

• Sexual power: Desire thrives on tension—dominance, submission, attraction. Feminism flattens this into moral binaries (“oppressor vs. oppressed”), sterilizing eros into a political grievance.

Capitalism’s Double Bind

Capitalism shreds traditional patriarchy, yet feminism spins this disruption as proof of patriarchy’s fecundity. Declining marriage rates? Patriarchy. Wage gaps narrowing? Patriarchy 2.0. The enemy adapts to ensure feminism never runs out of battles.

The Escape Hatch

This loop raises the elephant in the middle of this libidinal economy. What if feminism needs The Patriarchy to sustain itself? What if its purpose isn’t liberation but eternal struggle? To outgrow the patriarchal fantasy, feminism must confront its own addiction to crisis—and ask what comes after the war it can’t afford to win.

Traversing the Fantasy

“Ideology doesn’t offer escape from reality—it offers social reality as escape.”
— Slavoj Žižek

Feminism clings to The Patriarchy fantasy because it masks a harder truth: sex-based disparities are shaped by biology, capitalism, and power—forces way beyond The Patriarchy.

To “traverse” this fantasy, feminism must confront the Real it obscures:

Step 1: Confront the Fantasy, Own Your Desire

The Patriarchy isn’t a system to smash but a screen organizing feminist desire. Like chasing a horizon, “liberation” is the unattainable objet petit a—the illusory, shape-shifting obstacle that keeps the struggle alive.

Step 2: Drop the Crutch

The Patriarchy soothes existential anxiety by framing sex-based disparities as a plot, not a product of biology, eros, or capitalism. Dissolving this crutch means facing reproductive asymmetry, sexual politics, and capitalism’s disruptions head-on.

Step 3: Embrace the Real

Sex-based relations are messy collisions—no singular force dictates them.

Beyond the Fantasy

Feminism must reorient away from idealism toward materialism. The paradox? Letting go of The Patriarchy would liberate feminism. But does the movement want liberation—or just the chase?

“Dear citizen journalists:
Do not use biometrics on your iphone.”

Image explains why:

“C. Unlocking Devices with Biometric Features During the execution of the warrant, law enforcement personnel are authorized to obtain from James E. O’Keefe, III the display of any physical biometric characteristics (such as fingerprint/thumbprint or facial characteristics) necessary to unlock any electronic device(s), including to (1) press or swipe the fingers (including thumbs) of O’Keefe to the fingerprint scanner of the device(s); (2) hold the device(s) in front of the face of O’Keefe to activate the facial recognition feature; and/or (3) hold the device(s) in front of the face of O’Keefe to activate the iris recognition feature, for the purpose of attempting to unlock the device in order to search the
contents as authorized by this warrant.”

Dear citizen journalists:

Do not use biometrics on your iphone. pic.twitter.com/6sG36fRfU8

— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) February 9, 2025

Data, "Rules" & Messiness

It is difficult to believe that the inauguration was only 2 weeks ago, given the fast and furious pace of executive orders and headlines. DOGE has been even more “prolific” in terms of generating headlines than I would have ever guessed, and I already thought it would be impactful. It is going to be interesting.

But that takes us away from a few key topics for today.

Data

If you thought that we were going to start with jobs data, you are mistaken. Today, “inflation expectations” deserve some attention. Right around 10am ET Friday, the stock market started to decline. Until that moment, it had done fairly well even as yields increased on the back of the jobs report. Then out came the University of Michigan CONsumer CONfidence data, showing 1-year inflation expectations jumping from 3.3% to 4.3%! This was lucky for us, as we had pointed out in our NFP Instant Reaction – What to Do With Data You Don’t Trust that we were moderately bearish risk assets. Consumer inflation expectations were not on my bingo card of what could turn stocks, so I guess that we can classify that under “better lucky than smart.” We should just run with it, but we cannot help ourselves. We have never fully understood:

• Why does the Fed place so much weight on inflation expectations, particularly from survey data? From people who aren’t experts?
• Not saying that “experts” have all the answers, but do these individuals really have precise, realistic estimates in mind? Maybe the options should be high, above average, average, below average, and very low? I’m hesitant to put a specific number on inflation for the next year and I spend a LOT of time thinking about it.
  • For the first time in my life, I was motivated to go to their site and see what it takes to become a respondent. But with my VPN turned on during my flight from San Diego (where Academy just hosted a great Geopolitical Summit), I couldn’t access the site. But it is on my “to do” list now.
• But this is the real kicker!

• I have no idea how UMich comes up with an average of 4.3. Nor do I really care. Not just for the reasons listed earlier, but also the fact that Republicans are expecting 0 and Democrats are looking for 5% seems insane. It is “almost” like Republicans put in low numbers, hoping the Fed sees and cuts rates (or they just believe in DOGE and the president). It is also “almost” like Democrats put in high numbers, hoping the Fed sees and doesn’t cut rates (or they don’t believe in DOGE and the president’s policies). I understand that political views could influence inflation expectations, but this seems extreme!

Since the inflation expectations data helped trigger the risk asset sell-off that I was leaning towards, I should be happy, but it seems so ridiculous that it needed to be highlighted!

“Rules”

Speaking of things so ridiculous that they need to be highlighted, let’s look at some economic “rules.”

In physics, what we consider rules are termed laws. But for most people, rules are a set of “things” that need to be followed. Whether they are laws or axioms, they are things that are clear and explicitly define and control actions. On the other hand, conjectures, educated guesses, and “rules of thumb” are general guidelines that often work or point you in the right direction. But by no means are they immutable rules that must be followed.

So why do economists insist on terming certain things rules that are really conjectures? Probably because it sounds better, especially if you want people to believe that they work. Or maybe it just makes it easier to win prestigious economic awards?

But we revisit this subject today, not to focus on how inaccurate it is to call many of these things rules, but to highlight that the so-called rules definitively don’t work when they are based on inaccurate data!

Let’s look at the Sahm Rule which came to prominence this summer. It predicts that when relatively rapid changes in the unemployment rate occur, a recession will follow. I was too lazy to look up the exact definition (airline wi-fi, limitations of working on a laptop, lack of interest), but it is something like when you get a 0.5% increase from high to low (using a 3-month average) within 6 months, we get a recession. Many claimed it happened this summer. Some, I think, argued that with rounding, it didn’t occur. But NONE OF THAT MATTERS! We just learned on Friday that the BLS said there were 2 MILLION more workers in the labor force last year than previously thought! A big enough number, that if we knew in real-time, would likely have dramatically changed all of the unemployment rate data that not only triggered things like the Sahm Rule, but also probably affected monetary policy!

*POWELL: QCEW REPORT SUGGESTS PAYROLLS MAY BE REVISED DOWN

Oh no, the Fed was relying on doctored and made up government data meant to boost Biden's reputation and to confuse the Fed?

Unpossible

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) September 18, 2024

And let’s not even get started on things like the Taylor Rule or anything that depends on R*.

GDP – a somewhat wild guess that gets amended, often significantly.

Inflation, time and again, seems to defy what we live and breathe. With hedonics, measurement issues, and well-known issues (like the lag on OER), it is difficult to take it as seriously as we are expected to (measured to 1 or 2 decimal places).

So, basing “rules” on things where the data is unlikely to be accurate is bad enough, and then layer in the risk of treating something as a rule, rather than a decent theory, and we are ripe for more policy mistakes (yes, I believe these issues contributed to transitory, etc.). Let’s not even get started on R* or the neutral rate.

If this rant seems at all familiar, it is because we covered it last month in Jobs and AI. Maybe I’m motivated to hammer this home because I’m actually hopeful that there is the possibility of achieving some change?

Whether or not we like any, all, or none of the things this administration is doing, they do seem open to change.

If we could get better, more accurate, and timely data, we should be able to make better decisions.

That would reduce the risk of policy error, poor business decisions, etc., which would be great and is why I think it should be a priority for the government to revisit – especially in this day and age where almost everything is stored electronically, updated in real-time, and we have the ability to harness AI like we’ve never had before!

Elon, if you read this, please think about it! Wouldn’t you want better, more accurate, and more timely information in your decision making? (read more)

I was just in Cuba and saw firsthand criminal aliens being unloaded off a flight at GITMO.

My message to criminal alien murderers, rapists, child predators and gangsters: do not come to this country or we will hunt you down, find you, and lock you up. pic.twitter.com/fGqZFlfE3U

— Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) February 9, 2025

If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.

If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal.

Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power.

— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 9, 2025

A corrupt judge protecting corruption.

He needs to be impeached NOW! https://t.co/zgnwZuOz2Y

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 9, 2025

I read the ruling in the case against DOGE and the Treasury Department.

It's 4 pages. It's all boilerplate and generic language.

ZERO substantive legal analysis.

See for yourself.

This isn't remotely credible. pic.twitter.com/SXNOKBI3KT

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) February 9, 2025

LMAO. You guys went judge shopping for a lunatic left-wing judge who issued an ex parte ruling. And you did it all to prevent Democrat corruption from being revealed.

— Jeff Carlson (@themarketswork) February 9, 2025

[Read the full 1776 Report here]

January 18th, 2021.

The capital of the free world looked like a war zone.

Armed troops patrolled empty streets. Barriers rose like steel forests. And in a quiet corner of the White House, someone uploaded forty-five pages to the government website.

No ceremony. No press release. Just a document dropped into the digital void.

"The 1776 Report"

But Two days later, it vanished.

Scrubbed from official servers.

Dismissed as propaganda.

Lost in the chaos of transition.

And yet, something survived.

What most Americans never knew was that this wasn't just another government report. This was a diagnosis of what was killing the American spirit—and more importantly—a blueprint for its renewal.

Written not for 2021, but for this exact moment in 2025, as things begin to change.

"We have arrived at a point," it warned, "where the most influential part of our nation finds these old faith-based virtues dangerous, useless, or perhaps even laughable."

Simple words. Surgical precision. Like a doctor naming a disease everyone felt but no one would acknowledge.

The report mapped the pathology of American decline with cold clarity. First came the bureaucrats, moving without force or violence.

Their weapon was more subtle: the quiet assumption that experts should rule citizens, that Washington knows better than communities, that freedom needs managing.

Then came the deeper transformation.

Not through force of arms, but through the capture of institutions. "Following Gramsci's strategy of taking control of the culture," the report revealed, "they impart an oppressor-victim narrative upon generations of Americans."

Not through force of arms, but through the capture of institutions. "Following Gramsci's strategy of taking control of the culture," the report revealed, "they impart an oppressor-victim narrative upon generations of Americans."

The result?

A new creed declaring America irredeemably flawed, dividing citizens into oppressors and oppressed.

Schools became battlegrounds.

Truth gave way to ideology.

Debate surrendered to cancellation.

But here's what made the report extraordinary:

it mapped the exact pressure points where renewal would begin.

Like a military assessment written for civilians like me.

A battle plan disguised as historical analysis.

"The facts of our founding," it declared, "are not partisan. They address the concerns of ALL Americans—every class, race, religion, and region. Properly understood, these facts resolve the concerns and fulfill the aspirations of our entire people."

Critics called this empty rhetoric in 2021.

They should have read more carefully.

Those weren't just words.

They were coordinates, marking exact points where American renewal would begin.

And now, as dawn breaks over a changing nation, you see these coordinates becoming reality.

Watch what's starting to happen across America.

The report didn't just predict our crisis.

It mapped the forces working to unmake our founding principles with a precision that now feels prophetic. Like a geologist identifying fault lines before an earthquake, it traced three deep fractures in American life.

First came the Progressives, declaring America had outgrown its Constitution. "The software no longer fits the hardware," they claimed.

But this wasn't about updating.

It was about replacement.

They didn't want to improve the system.

They wanted to fundamentally transform it.

They wanted to fundamentally transform it.

The D E E P S T A T E grew like ivy over the republic's classical architecture.

Unelected bureaucrats claimed the power to make rules, enforce them, and judge violations—exactly the combination of powers the founders warned against.

Government by consent gave way to government by expertise.

Then came Critical Theory, imported from Europe not to understand America, but to condemn it. Not studying history, but weaponizing it.

Where the founders saw universal principles, these theorists saw only power relationships. Where the Declaration proclaimed human equality, they insisted on permanent group conflict.

The result was identity politics.

A new creed more dangerous than the old divisions it claimed to remedy.

"It divides Americans into two groups," the report warned. "The more a group is considered oppressed, the more its members have a moral claim upon society. As for their supposed oppressors, they must atone forever."

Most chillingly, the report exposed how this revolution would defend itself: not by winning arguments, but by preventing them from happening at all. Not through force of arms, but through the subtle power of institutional capture. The DS wouldn't just resist change.

It would make change impossible.

Unless someone was ready. Unless there was a plan.

In 2021, they tried to bury this warning. But you can't bury truth forever. You can't cancel human nature. You can't stop an idea whose time has come.

And now in 2025, that time has arrived.

The sun rises early in Washington. Its first rays catch marble columns that have watched over the capital for centuries. But something's different in these opening weeks of 2025. Something electric. Something unstoppable.

Inside those buildings and institutions being audited and gutted for the first time in forever, a forgotten report's prophecies are finally becoming reality.

Look closer.

The DS meeting its match in digital sunlight.

Critical Theory crumbling against hard truth.

Identity politics dissolving in the face of American renewal.

Not through violence. Not through revolution. But through the quiet power of principles the report saw waiting to awaken.

"All the good things we see around us," it declared, "from our highways to our freedoms—they come from American unity, stability, and justice. And those come from our founding principles."

This wasn't just theory. This was the roadmap back to American greatness.

Hidden in plain sight, waiting for the moment when a prepared people would rediscover their power.

"As we approach the 250th anniversary of our independence," the report challenged, "we must resolve to teach future generations an accurate history of our country so that we all learn and cherish our founding principles once again."

In 2021, they tried to delete those words.

In 2025, those words are deleting the old order.

That seed planted in winter's darkest hour?

It's becoming something unstoppable:

The reclaiming of American education.

The restoration of American confidence.

The renewal of American purpose.

The sun continues rising over the city—not the district—of Washington.

Ancient columns casting long shadows across marble steps.

A forgotten document just wrote tomorrow's history.

Truth breaks through.

This ruling is really good.

Why?

The process is still early and, as such, is in a phase where the antibodies are just emerging and starting to ramp. We haven’t seen a crescendo yet but it’s coming. It is akin to the adrenaline fueled fight/flight response of a trapped animal.… https://t.co/jdmJul98FZ

— Chamath Palihapitiya (@chamath) February 8, 2025

Outrageous. Obama Judge Paul Engelmayer didn’t just bar @elonmusk and @doge from Treasury systems, he barred the Secretary of the Treasury himself. Without citing a single law or even allowing Trump admin to appear in court! This outlaw should be reversed immediately and…

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) February 8, 2025

New York Judge Paul Engelmayer just forbade all political appointees — including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent — from accessing Dept. of Treasury data, all based on Blueanon conspiracy theories!!

Those theories couldn’t be challenged because the order was EX PARTE — meaning Trump’s lawyers weren’t warned, and couldn’t weigh in. Only Democrat Attorneys General were allowed to argue.

The judge cites no law or logic to support this unprecedented order, because it defies both. The judge’s ruling is, in essence, that Scott Bessent simply occupies a ceremonial position without real power, like the King of England.

This is a grenade thrown into the functioning of the Treasury Department.

It forbids the elected government from accessing information about budget and finances. Instead, only the permanent, deep-state government can know what’s being spent.

It means Scott Bessent’s subordinates have far more power than Scott Bessent does.

Democrat pundits who whine about the Constitution are liars, and will shred it the first chance they get.

For now, the order is only for the next week, but if a court tries to make it permanent the Trump Administration should absolutely consider defying it.

Better yet, SCOTUS should bar this judge from ever hearing similar cases again, and every Democrat lawyer involved should be sanctioned.”

New York Judge Paul Engelmayer just forbade all political appointees — including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent — from accessing Dept. of Treasury data, all based on Blueanon conspiracy theories!!

Those theories couldn't be challenged because the order was EX PARTE — meaning…

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) February 8, 2025

USAID has pushed nearly half a billion dollars ($472.6m) through a secretive US government financed NGO, "Internews Network" (IN), which has "worked with" 4,291 media outlets, producing in one year 4,799 hours of broadcasts reaching up to 778 million people and "training" over 9000 journalists (2023 figures). IN has also supported social media censorship initiatives.

The operation claims "offices" in over 30 countries, including main offices in US, London, Paris and regional HQs in Kiev, Bangkok and Nairobi. It is headed up by Jeanne Bourgault, who pays herself $451k a year. Bourgault worked out of the US embassy in Moscow during the early 1990s, where she was in charge of a $250m budget, and in other revolts or conflicts at critical times, before formally rotating out of six years at USAID to IN.

Bourgault's IN bio and those of its other key people and board members have been recently scrubbed from its website but remain accessible at http://archive.org. Records show the board being co-chaired by Democrat securocrat Richard J. Kessler and Simone Otus Coxe, wife of NVIDIA billionaire Trench Coxe, both major Democratic donors. In 2023, supported by Hillary Clinton, Bourgault launched a $10m IN fund at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI). The IN page showing a picture of Bourgault at the CGI has also been deleted.

IN has at least six captive subsidiaries under unrelated names including one based out of the Cayman Islands. Since 2008, when electronic records begin, more than 95% of IN's budget has been supplied by the US government (thread follows).

USAID has pushed nearly half a billion dollars ($472.6m) through a secretive US government financed NGO, "Internews Network" (IN), which has “worked with” 4,291 media outlets, producing in one year 4,799 hours of broadcasts reaching up to 778 million people and "training” over…

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025

USAID (and State) funneled nearly half a billion dollars through this building which is at "876 7th St Arcata, CA 95521-6358". The IRS and IN government contracts list this address as the current registered address for IN although it was clearly abandoned by December 2024. Shot… pic.twitter.com/ELzv3G4p5l

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025

IN's funding has doubled since 2016: pic.twitter.com/8jnO6DMJwM

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025

Where Internews fits in the funding graph (h/t @DataRepublican) https://t.co/d11oX7nmFq pic.twitter.com/47xMOJsPeJ

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025

Removed Internews Network (IN) page of its chief executive Jeanne Bourgault at the Clinton Global Initiative (2023) pic.twitter.com/hKInv2i9m2

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025

How IN lost its way (2006, John Hopkins University Magazine):https://t.co/6L8NsDfJFs pic.twitter.com/xLr7xELcAN

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025

Now I want you to listen to me very closely: when the CEO of USAID’s Internews pressured advertisers to create exclusion lists to only fund approved news sources, she was carrying out USAID’s formal policy goal to have USAID partners do “advertiser outreach” to “redirect funding” https://t.co/NVI6DtUfcl pic.twitter.com/vyWReP0epx

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) February 8, 2025

Elon said “I was told that there are currently over $100B/year of entitlements payments to individuals with no SSN or even a temporary ID number. If accurate, this is extremely suspicious.”

Over $100 BILLION is being sent every year to people in America… https://t.co/M6TtK10cjw

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) February 8, 2025

Ambassador Stevens was sent to Benghazi to secretly retrieve US made Stinger Missiles that the State Dept had supplied to Ansar al Sharia in Libya WITHOUT Congressional oversight or permission.

Sec State Hillary Clinton had brokered the Libya deal… pic.twitter.com/lMWegG3PIc

— Joe_S_Pure (@Joe_S_Pure) February 7, 2025

Nervous Elizabeth Warren: "Check my website, I don't take contributions from Big Pharma executives. I don't take any corporate PAC money."pic.twitter.com/dSaNck5C2x

— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) February 4, 2025