The New Korean War


For the record I fully support an armed intervention in North Korea. In my opinion the US has tried every other option and all of them have failed. Bill Clinton tried complete and total submission. Offering a yearly tribute in oil to North Korea as well as offering to build their nuclear program with American aid. Undisclosed provisions in the deal suggest that the North Korean leaders could have personally gotten something as well. It did not work. Bush Jr tried belligerence with economic sanctions. Stopping the tribute provided by the Clintons and then using the UN to contain North Korea. The regime did not care. Obama tried ignoring North Korea. That did not work. Now it is very likely that they have nuclear weapons as well as the means to deliver them.

Equally important is that I am confident Trump is the best man for the job. In my opinion Bush made two very critical mistakes in the Iraq war which could have changed the flow of history.


This is the first mistake. When Bush was making his case for the war in Iraq he led the public to believe that it would have been an easy task. The US military would overwhelm the Iraqi army and their resistance would crumble. Even if this was the case he should not have said so. One of the most important strategies to managing expectations is to underpromise and overdeliver. This allows you to have a margin of error in case things turn out worse than you expect. In case things work out better than you expect then you can always congratulate the troops for doing a good job and keeping casualties to a minimum.

At this point I would like to direct you to the tweets of President Trump during hurricane Harvey.  At all times he was pointing out how big and terrible the storm was while praising the capability of Texas and the American people to get through the disaster. If you think that the storm is huge then you mentally prepare yourself for lots of damage and suffering. When things turn out to be less damaging than you expect then you can always give credit and praise the first responders.

When we finally go into North Korea Trump will be using this tactic.

Nation Building

This is the second and most critical mistake from Iraq. The US army is actually very good at conventional warfare. I divide the Iraq adventure into two episodes. The first is when we actually had an Iraqi army to fight and the second was when we were fighting the insurgency. The US was actually very successful during the first phase. In fact it was so successful and so widely covered that the entire thing felt like a video game instead of an actual invasion.

Things went south went we stayed instead of pulling out right after. As a nation the US is not equipped to handle insurgencies. We just do not have the moral fortitude to do the things required to defeat an insurgency or to sustain a campaign of attrition. Part of being able to implement successful operations is understanding your own limitations. If we pulled out right after unseating the Iraqi then we would have been able to declare victory. What ever happened to Iraq after would have been a thing for the foreign section of the nightly news instead of a national concern.

I am very confident that President Trump will not make this mistake. Nation building seems to be the last thing in his mind nor is sacrificing military efficiency for humanitarian concerns which is another good thing.

I am fully aware that leaving Iraq or in this case North Korea right away may cause a humanitarian crisis. I would rather the world deal with a humanitarian crisis there, after having achieved the downfall of the Kim regime, than have the United States deal with a humanitarian crisis here after LA gets nuked.


The Hidden Russiagate Target: Wikileaks


As events develop and more things are exposed things become clearer. The target for the intelligence community for Russiagate is not Trump. It is Wikileaks. The aim is to discredit the organization as nothing more than an agent of Russia in the eyes of the public. After all it does not matter how accurate the information they present is if the public thinks that Wikileaks is doing it to further Russian interests. With Wikileaks effectively eliminated the intelligence agencies lose the only effective check they have on their activities.

Note that I am not saying this is the goal of Democrats. They are sincere in their efforts to unseat Trump. Just like they would be in their efforts to unseat any republican elected. Manufacturing a crisis is the easiest way back to power for Democrats. The intelligence community is a separate from the Democrats and they have their own goals. The Democrats are just being used as useful idiots.


Under normal circumstances the intelligence community would not only be supportive of Trump they would be fiercely loyal to him. In many ways Trump is the perfect president for the deep state.

First off Trump is very results oriented. He does not particularly care about the methods used just as long as the objective is achieved. If the CIA were to torture 50 terrorists to save 5 american lives Trump would not have a problem with it and would even congratulate the agents while other presidents may have moral issues.

Second by this time Trump is already immune to the media and public pressure. He knows that a certain segment of the public will never support him and the media will always paint his administration in the worst light possible. If Homeland Security were to have a scandal under his term then he would not care very much and just call the media fake news.

Third because Trump is a larger than life character most of the attention is centered around him. Russiagate was always going to happen. If Cruz, Rubio, or any other Republican won the Democrats would still accuse them of being a puppet for Putin. The email issue started during the primaries which mean any Republican who made it to the general would have benefited from it. Russiagate is not a delusional response but a logical one. If you are working in the leadership of the Clinton campaign and managed to lose despite every conceivable advantage, double the war chest, a friendly media, establishment figures on both sides supporting you, and a third party candidate whose primary purpose was to draw votes away from Trump in Mcmullin you would have a very hard time finding a job afterwards. Russiagate is a defense mechanism for the leadership of the Clinton campaign after all they decided on it hours after the election ended. The difference is that the other Republicans would have reacted differently to it. Trump shines a spotlight on it. If the CIA were to effect a hostile takeover of Ukraine tomorrow and the plans leaked all over the media the American public would still be talking about Russiagate the next day.

Trump represents a perfect storm for the deep state of a president who does not care what methods they use and who focuses the publics attention on him making them care less about the deep state in the process. It is like having a blank check from to do what you will.


While Trump can be a boon for the intelligence community Wikileaks represents a bigger threat. At the end of the day the deep state knows that whoever the president is they will still be around at the end of their 8 years. Trump, Rubio, Cruz, Clinton, Obama, or anyone else is not going to abolish any of the intelligence agencies so they can ultimately work with any of them.

Guantanamo Bay, Chelsea Manning, The Iraq war, The Afghanistan war, The detainee policies, Vault 7, and more. Wikileaks has proven to be the only entity who can effectively check the power of the various intelligence communities. It could very well be that Wikileaks has done more to limit the deep state than the GRU, Mossad, and every other foreign intelligence agency. Not only would the CIA, FBI, and other agencies lie in order to remove Wikileaks from the picture they would most likely kill to do so.

The Truth

The stakes are much higher than anyone realizes. We are not just discussing Trump or partisan politics anymore. What we are seeing is nothing less than the intelligence community or “deep state” eliminating any checks to their power.

Think of a future without Wikileaks. There is no organization which is currently capable of succeeding them in their function. It does not even seem like there is any with even just the potential to take over. Leakers would have nowhere to go. Traditional media would not dare do what Wikileaks does. If a organization does rise up to replace them all the intelligence communities would have to do is raise up some links to Russia or any other nation and they would be discredited by association to Wikileaks.

Without any organizations to check them the intelligence community can do whatever they want. We already have the Vault 7 releases which state that they can use tv sets to spy on people and are working on technology to obtain remote control of cars, which has been described as the perfect assassination tool. By supporting their drive to eliminate Wikileaks the intelligence community is essentially asking you to hand over complete control over to them with no oversight. There is very few things that are more terrifying than what the deep state is asking us to do.

His Name Was Seth Rich


His name was Seth Rich. The mainstream media is about to go into overdrive about a possible impeachment of President Trump. They are beginning to show their desperation as the Russian narrative is about to be broken. The only justification ever offered for the Russian collusion is that Russia hacked the DNC servers and gave the information to Wikileaks. If the information did not come from Russians then they would have done very little or nothing to help Trump.

Leak Vs. Hack

From the very start there has been very little discussion in the media about whether the information was leaked or hacked. The Democrats needed the information to be hacked to fit in with their Russian narrative and so it was a hack not a leak. Some of the DNC operatives have recently said in their new book that the Russian angle was determined right after Hillary lost the election. It makes sense as the Clinton team would need to find employment in the future and would need to justify why they lost a campaign and states that have not been lost for decades when they had twice the money the other campaign had. The fact that there was a possibility that it could have been a leak was not even discussed.

Make no mistake evidence does exist for both sides and it is not as one sided as it seems. On the one hand you have the intelligence community saying that it was a hack. Except that you don’t really have anyone on the intelligence community providing anything specific instead we have the press quoting some “anonymous sources” confirming that it was the Russian who gave the info to Wikileaks. I hope i do not need to tell anyone that blind trust in the intelligence community is not a good thing. Democrats seem to have forgotten the lessons taught by Iraq.

On the other hand you have Wikileaks. Julian Assange has consistently said that the information came from a leaker not a hacker. Wikileaks has a reputation as never having to recant any of the information they have given out. Even the DNC emails themselves were proven to be completely true. I am not advocating for blind trust for Wikileaks as well. Yet the only argument the left has for accepting the anonymous sources of the NYT is their reputations. Surely in that case the reputation of the organization with a 100% accuracy rating should be considered.


This next part is not discussed at all. In fact I may be the first person to point this out. If you pay attention to nothing else in this article please pay attention to the next sentence. The Intelligence Community has motive to discredit Wikileaks. I have bolded it for your convenience. Read the bolded sentence five times if possible. With the information given during Iraq, the Vault 7 release, Chelsea Manning and others Wikileaks has proven to be a very effective check on the powers of the government. The intelligence community would love nothing more than for Wikileaks to be tied to the Russians so that they would lose the trust of the American people. With no independent party to check them the intelligence community can go back to doing whatever they want.

Seth Rich

We now go to Seth Rich. According to his family, most of which are democrats and some of which are current democrat political operatives, Seth Rich was a lifelong committed democrat who loved Hillary and would never ever think of leaking to Wikileaks. Julian Assange on the other hand has been hinting heavily that his source was Seth Rich. He has offered a reward for information of the murder and has publicly stated that the operatives which gave him the emails put their life on the line doing so. Right after Rich was murdered. Of course Seth Rich is dead so we can attribute anything we want to him. His family can say that he would die before betraying Hillary Clinton and we can say otherwise. The only thing that matters is what he actually did. Anonymous sources as well as the investigator assigned to his case have stated that his computer forwarded 44000 emails from the DNC servers to Wikileaks. The exact amount of emails that have been published. The investigator has of course been silenced by the family of Seth and a confidentiality agreement but the questions still remain.

We now go to the murder of Seth Rich. This comes after emails from Podesta saying that they should make “examples” of the leakers. The murder of Seth Rich has been ruled as a “botched robbery”. This is very strange. In a robbery the primary motive is financial gain. In a botched robbery what usually happens is the items of value are stolen but the victim is killed in the process. In this case the victim was killed but everything of value was left alone. It is almost like the killer was not interested in them.


Given that the intelligence community has more motive to lie about Wikileaks than they ever did about Iraq. The credibility of Wikileaks itself. The suspicious murder of Seth Rich and the heavy insinuation from Assange that the leaker was Rich. The fact that the DNC denied the FBI access to their servers despite being sure of the hacking (why bother about your privacy when everything has been compromised anyway). Why exactly are we not even looking into the possibility that this was a leak and not a hack? Could the media have some sort of bias and are pushing their preconceived conclusion for their own ends?

If the media will not do their job then we will have to do it for them.

His Name Was Seth Rich.

Trump Defeats the Intelligence Community


It is no secret to everyone that there has been some friction between the Trump administration and the intelligence community. Particularly those members of the intelligence community who identified as democrats or neoconservatives who want a harder line with countries like Russia. Various leaks were given to the media, though we can never be sure of their authenticity they are there and floating around the zeitgeist. The democrats have been uncharacteristically pleased with the efforts of the IC to undermine Trump as well.

The Breaking

There is one simple rule about Trump that makes me love him more than any other leader. When someone hits you, the retaliation must be certain and disproportionate. We saw this in the primaries. He initially did not care about Cruz and was in fact very cordial to him. Till Cruz went after him and he went after him hard. Trump endorsed Romney in 2012 and when Romney went after him we heard a speech about how Romney went down on his knees. Trump has mastered the art of escalation and brinksmanship as his long list of surrendered foes show.

The IC tried to take Trump on at this game as well with disastrous results. The IC took days to leak details about the Trump administration. Trump did voice some complaints about it but never really fought back. That is until one day we saw wikileaks release Vault 7. The largest leak since the days of Edward Snowden which exposed a lot of the innermost secrets of the CIA. The Trump administration will never admit to being behind the leaks or even facilitating it but the timing speaks for itself. The CIA is now scrambling to explain itself to a populace who has just found out that their Samsung TV’s are being used as listening devices and other intelligence agencies are wondering if they will be next.

This is not to say that there will be absolutely no leaks from this department in the future. There are always lone wolves with axes to grind. What I am saying is that institutional resistance from the IC is over.

Popular Support

This is the primary mistake of the IC. All institutions whether public or private need support from the public to survive. This acts as your shield against the government as the higher your support is the more political capital it would take to enact legislation against you or question your activities. The inverse is also true if you have no support from the public or worse if the public hates your institution then the political class may actually gain political capital by targeting you. Take Planned Parenthood for example and the NRA. They are very popular with the left and the right respectively. Any moves by Democrats against PP or Republicans against the NRA would cost a lot of political capital. Now take banks for example. They are universally hated by the left and the right so they have to spend a lot of money on lobbying efforts just to make sure there is no legislation against them.

The IC used to be in the same category as the PP or NRA where they would get a lot of support in one side of the political spectrum. By misplaying their hand against Trump they have moved towards the category of banks or those institutions disliked by both sides. Traditionally Republicans have always supported the IC. In debates of security versus privacy like in the Apple issue in the past Republicans generally take the side of the IC which requested for Apple to hack the phone and Democrats take the side of privacy advocates which say it is a security risk. On questions of torture the Republicans generally take the side of the IC more in understanding its necessity while the Democrats generally stand up for the human rights of enemy combatants.

When the IC went after Trump they gambled that the Republican voters would support them over the President and they gambled wrong. It was a very hard sell for the voters as well as they had just won majorities in both elected branches of government and were very satisfied with the selection made by Trump to the Supreme Court. It was absolutely the wrong time for the IC to break with their strongest supporters. When the Vault 7 leaks broke out the usual voices on the right were silent. After all they had just spent weeks defending the President from the IC. This put the Democratic pundits in the awkward situation of having to defend the newly revealed capability of the IC. All the while trying to unify the party with the disaffected Bernie wing, some of which would be perfectly happy disbanding the IC or at the very least impose so many regulations and requirements in the name of transparency which would make the agencies useless. This means that the pundits aligned with the Democratic party are not able to defend them as hard as they could.

To sum up this article. The IC went up against Trump. Suffered one of its largest leaks in history. Then they also lost the support of the segment of the public who usually defend them, all the while still being hated by half the democrats.

Trump Tower Gate and its Implications

images (16)

After all the noise coming from the left about various Trump scandals we finally have one that dwarfs Watergate and it is coming from the Obama administration. If the wiretapping scandal is true then it represents massive abuse of power on behalf of the democrats. The best part about this is that there are records for the FISA requests. It is just classified. All it would take is for the president or the congress to request and review it. We can see whether Obama and his cohorts are lying and there were FISA requests or whether BBC, NYT, and other noteworthy news outlets were lying and there were no FISA requests. Assuming it is true we can examine its implications.

No FISA Safeguards

There is supposed to be some protections placed into the law to prevent abuse by the government. According to the law an impartial judge is supposed to look at the evidence presented by the administration and make a ruling as to the existence of probable cause in that investigation. In practice there has only been one FISA application rejected from 2009 to 2015 out of more than 10000 cases. As you can see the standard is so low that almost every request is granted. There used to be some oversight though as there is that one case out of 10000 that was rejected. Theoretically the administration can then appeal that decision.

The Obama administration showed that you do not have to go thru this process. If the original judge takes the rare stand of rejecting your request and appeal all the administration has to do is to change the request slightly and file it as a new request so that they can draw a friendlier judge.


When you gather information from surveillance it is very hard to just gather one specific thing. You will most likely gather a lot of data and then have to sift thru it to get the things that you are looking for while discarding the rest. In Obama Trump Towergate for instance Obama and his administration attempted to either tap the phones of Trump Tower and the Trump campaign and/or access the servers in Trump Tower. This would have gotten them either all the contents of the server which they would sift thru for relevant financial transactions or all the conversations of the Trump campaign made inside Trump Tower.

The intelligence community responsible for these investigations have proven that they have no problem leaking things. The extra information gathered like campaign strategies, internal polling, and other things that would be useless to the investigation itself would be very useful to the political opponents of the administration or intelligence community. The polling methods of Conways firm for example were more accurate than the others this cycle and were used for the internal polls of the Trump campaign and would be very useful to his opponents. Internal conversations and strategies would also be very useful. The Obama administration or any future administrations could have  started an investigation on an unrelated matter to get access to the data and then leaked it to Clinton campaign.

Foreign Agents and Vault 7

The Obama administration used the “agents of foreign powers” track to order the surveillance of the Trump team. They argued that there was evidence that the Russians were hacking the DNC to benefit the Trump campaign as he was their puppet. With the Vault 7 revelations we now know that the intelligence agencies can perpetrate any attack and then mask it as one done by the Russians, Chinese, or anyone else they want to blame.

This means that the administration can work with the intelligence agencies to have the opposing party declared as “agents of foreign powers” every election. All the intelligence agencies would have to do is mask one of their attacks and the administration can then declare the opposition party an “agent of a foreign power” and place them under surveillance.

Using the example set by Obama future administrations can place their political opponents under surveillance for very flimsy reasons and have the information gathered leaked to assist the administrations political party.