Authored by Sundance via The Last Refuge,

During the rushed debate over the Patriot Act, was when I first heard political officials talking about the importance of “continuity of government.”

I immediately recognized what all these DC voices were describing was a construct of a post-911 government that would exist and maintain itself without the elected representatives of WeThe People.

The intelligence gathering and homeland security system put into place after the Patriot Act was passed, is a bureaucratic administrative state without the presence of elected officials controlling the apparatus. That leads to the following question:

How can a constitutional republic function without elected officials in control of it?

That question is at the heart of our current situation.

That question is at the epicenter of this “new American democracy” that no one seems to understand.

The simple answer is it cannot.

We have been fighting this three-headed IC monster (DHS, DNI, DOJ-NSD) ever since.

This reality the underlying predicate behind why Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the Special Counsel charges against Trump. This reality is also the underlying framework behind why the Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the plenary power of the President with control over the executive.

In the post-9/11 system that was created by the Patriot Act, our Constitutional Republic was inextricably fractured, placing systems and silos in charge of government under the auspices of “continuity of government.”

From that moment forth, elected representatives no longer held authority or oversight *over* the national security apparatus. Instead, the Patriot Act flipped the actual system of democratically elected representative government.

The RESULT: Our elected officials became subservient to the institutional interests of unelected agency officials. As Senator Schumer calls them “the six ways from Sunday” coalition.

This reality empirically surfaces with people like former AG Bill Barr saying the President does not have unilateral authority over the DOJ. Also, the Lawfare approach and narrative that a President is not the arbiter of governing power. Both statements are constitutionally false, as affirmed by SCOTUS – Thank God.

Understand this. This is the root of the cancer that was always present, silent and lurking in the background institutions prior to 9/11. After the Patriot Act passed, that cancer fully metastasized and entered the bloodstream of American governance.

What was previously a slimy bag of institutional snakes, kept in place by a tenuously worn nylon bag – sewn from the remaining fabric of our constitution, was released by the Patriot Act.

Everything thereafter, including the constant bites we suffer from the unleashed weaponization, is a consequence of that moment.

That’s the root of our modern political reality.

This is the “new American democracy,” where the unelected officials and administrators within institutions hold power.

Under this Patriot Act framework, representative government [executive branch, legislative branch and even the judicial branch] are subservient to those who use the shield of national security. This outcome is the direct consequence of creating a system for the “continuity of government.”

LEARN IT!

Then, suddenly, everything about the domestic enemy we confront gets really clear.

Thankfully, the Supreme Court has now given indications that they understand what has taken place.

The Supreme Court has recently affirmed that only the President of the United States has the authority to control the Executive Branch.  As a direct and consequential outcome, only the President of the United States can remove the core issue that has corrupted our constitutional intent.

Every element vested in the “continuity of government” as a manipulation of the constitution are now aligned to eliminate the threat President Donald Trump represents.

We have one chance.

Vote like your freedom depends on it, because it does.

Read the SCOTUS opinion, not from a point of view of President Trump, but from the point of view of what does this allow him to do in his second term, and what invisible straightjackets did it remove that were a threat during his first term?

While impeachment is a political process within the Legislative Branch, and the Supreme Court is extremely hesitant to overstep their role therein, the High Court did put this sentiment clearly into the opinion about immunity: …“The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution.”…

Congress may not criminalize the conduct of the President simply for carrying out his core executive branch duties.

Removal of Executive Branch officials is a core duty, an official act, carrying absolute immunity.

That affirmed reality is exactly why the Deep State and Lawfare crowd are very alarmed.

Jeff Bezos’ decision for The Washington Post not to endorse a presidential candidate this year has resulted in a total shitshow for the progressive newspaper, with staffing members having epic meltdowns and editor-at-large Robert Kagan (husband of Victoria Nuland) walking off the job on Friday. Even more troubling for the paper is the mass exodus of liberal subscribers being reported by NPR News on Monday afternoon. 

According to two sources within the paper and familiar with the subscriber exodus, over 200,000 digital subscription cancellations had occurred by Monday afternoon. 

Not all cancellations take effect immediately. Still, the figure represents about 8% of the paper’s paid circulation of 2.5 million subscribers, which includes print as well. The number of cancellations continued to grow Monday afternoon. -NPR

Former Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli told NPR, “The problem is, people don’t know why the decision was made. We basically know the decision was made, but we don’t know what led to it.”

The editorial page editor, David Shipley, told colleagues that WaPo’s publisher, Will Lewis, said the reason for the lack of a Harris-Walz endorsement was to create an “independent space” where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.

WaPo has mostly endorsed Democrats for nearly a century (with only 3 Republicans since 1928): 

• 1932 to 1944: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat)

• 1948: Thomas Dewey (Republican)

• 1952 & 1956: Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican)

• 1960: John F. Kennedy (Democrat)

• 1964: Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat)

• 1968: Hubert Humphrey (Democrat)

• 1972: George McGovern (Democrat)

• 1976 & 1980: Jimmy Carter (Democrat)

• 1984: Walter Mondale (Democrat)

• 1988: Michael Dukakis (Democrat)

• 1992 & 1996: Bill Clinton (Democrat)

• 2000: Al Gore (Democrat)

• 2004: John Kerry (Democrat)

• 2008: Barack Obama (Democrat)

• 2012: Barack Obama (Democrat)

• 2016: Hillary Clinton (Democrat)

• 2020: Joe Biden (Democrat)

• 2024: Neutral 

Back to WaPo’s mass exodus of subs, Google search data shows “cancel Washington Post subscription” has gone parabolic nationwide since the weekend. Most cancelations are based in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. 

And Amazon cancellations, too?

The move comes after the Los Angeles Times declined to endorse Kamala Harris. And perhaps the rationale given the timing – just days before the presidential election –  comes as the race is neck-and-neck with former President Trump. 

Update: 

Boeing’s money raise officially hit this AM. The offering: 90 million shares of common stock and $5 billion in depositary shares.

Goldman Sachs, BofA Securities, Citigroup, JPMorgan are leading the deal as joint bookrunning managers for both offerings. 

The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] (“Boeing” or the “Company”) announced today the launch of concurrent separate underwritten public offerings of (i) 90,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $5.00 per share (“Common Stock”) of the Company and (ii) $5 billion of depositary shares (“Depositary Shares”), each representing a 1/20th interest in a share of newly issued Series A Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $1.00 per share (“Preferred Stock”), of the Company (together, the “Offerings”). Boeing expects to grant to the underwriters of the Offerings a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional (i) 13,500,000 shares of Common Stock and (ii) $750 million of Depositary Shares, solely to cover over-allotments, if any. Boeing intends to use the net proceeds from the Offerings for general corporate purposes, which may include, among other things, repayment of debt, additions to working capital, capital expenditures, and funding and investments in the Company’s subsidiaries.

Holders of the Depositary Shares will be entitled to a proportional fractional interest in the rights and preferences of the Preferred Stock, including conversion, dividend, liquidation and voting rights, subject to the provisions of a deposit agreement. The Preferred Stock is expected to have a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Unless earlier converted, each share of Preferred Stock will automatically convert, for settlement on or about October 15, 2027, into a variable number of shares of Common Stock based on the applicable conversion rate, and each Depositary Share will automatically convert into a number of shares of Common Stock equal to a proportionate fractional interest in such shares of Common Stock. The dividend rate, conversion terms and other terms of the Preferred Stock will be determined at the time of pricing of the offering of the Depositary Shares. Currently, there is no public market for the Depositary Shares or the Preferred Stock. Boeing intends to apply to list the Depositary Shares on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “BA.PRA.”

*   *   * 

Boeing shares moved lower in premarket trading in New York after a Bloomberg report revealed a capital raise could take place as soon as Monday. This would prevent credit rating agencies from downgrading Boeing’s investment-grade credit rating to speculative territory amid dwindling cash reserves and a drawn-out strike. 

Three sources familiar with the matter said the beleaguered airplane maker, plagued by a months-long strike, could raise as much as $15 billion, adding the amount could change depending on demand. 

Boeing’s advisers have been lining up a funding deal for weeks. 

These are dire times for Boeing… 

• Oct 1: Dilution Fears: Boeing Considers $10 Billion In New Shares As Strikes Strain Liquidity

• Oct 15: Boeing Desperate For Liquidity, Files $25 Billion Shelf Registration

• Oct 20: Boeing Explores Asset Sales In Potential Shrinking Of Corporate Footprint

The people noted that the transaction will likely consist of a combination of common shares and a mandatory convertible bond. About two weeks ago, the planemaker filed a $25 billion shelf registration. 

At the time, Boeing wrote in the shelf filing: “This universal shelf registration provides flexibility for the company to seek a variety of capital options as needed to support the company’s balance sheet over a three-year period.” 

The latest strike estimates from JPMorgan analysts indicate Boeing will lose $1.5 billion each month if workers stay off the production lines of commercial jets and continue picketing in the streets. Three major rating agencies have warned that the strikes could downgrade Boeing’s investment-grade credit rating to speculative territory, in other words, ‘junk.’ 

Last month, CFO Brian West told analysts at the Morgan Stanley conference that Boeing “will take any necessary actions” to preserve its investment grade rating and beef up its balance sheet. 

“We are perfectly comfortable to supplement our liquidity position to support those two objectives,” West told investors when asked about future money raises. 

Goldman analysts Noah Poponak and Anthony Valentini recently told clients:

“The company faces a balance sheet question, and has suggested raising capital is possible given the importance of the credit rating. We assume Boeing raises $12bn of equity before year-end, which matches the total maturities due in 2025 + 2026, and keeps the cash balance well north of $10bn in the near-to-medium-term while they ramp back up commercial deliveries and strive to resolve defense profitability.”

Bloomberg noted:

“Boeing needs the capital infusion to maintain its investment-grade rating and fund its eventual recovery from a crippling strike, now in its seventh week. The company is on pace to use around $4 billion in cash during the fourth quarter, which would bring its free-cash outflow to around $14 billion for the year. The planemaker expects to continue burning cash through the first half of next year as it restarts its airplane factories, including the assembly lines for its cash-cow 737 Max jetliner.” 

In markets, Boeing shares are lower by about 1% in premarket trading…

At all costs, Boeing must protect its investment-grade rating. 

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Brazil’s ruling Workers’ Party (PT per its Portuguese abbreviation) has presented itself as an Ibero-American champion of multipolarity since its inception, as has its leader President Lula since his first term began in 2003, but these narratives are now challenged like never before after last week.

Brasil de Fato cited diplomatic sources to report that Brazil vetoed Venezuela’s BRICS partnership request while Putin also acknowledged during a press conference that Russia and Brazil disagree on Venezuela.

This outcome was made all the more scandalous by Lula’s unexpected “head injury” that was allegedly responsible for him not flying to Kazan and Venezuelan President Maduro’s surprise visit to the event. Lula might have either made-up his injury or exaggerated it in order not to embarrass himself any further by arguing in person against his multipolar neighbor’s requested BRICS partnership. He might also have caught wind of Maduro’s plans and thus ducked out in order to avoid a potential confrontation there.

In any case, one of the world’s top energy producers wasn’t able to achieve the consensual support required for partnering with the world’s top financial multipolarity platform, though this analysis here from last month explains how non-members and -partners can still coordinate their associated policies with BRICS. Be that as it may, it was still a blow to Venezuela’s prestige not to be inaugurated as an official partner, but Lula’s PT harmed its own reputation in a much worse way by reportedly vetoing this.

Keeping in mind the abovementioned insight about how any country can voluntarily coordinate its associated policies with BRICS even in the absence of formal membership or partnership status, Brazil could have let Venezuela join in order to keep up the PT’s charade about being a multipolar champion. Instead, it maliciously prevented this, which only served to virtue signal support for the US’ ruling Democrats’ shared policy towards that country at the expense of the trust that Brazil built within BRICS.

It was explained in August how “Ortega’s Condemnation Of Lula’s Meddling In Venezuela Debunks A Top Alt-Media Lie”, which hyperlinked at the end to a list of over 50 related analyses from October 2022 till then about Lula’s post-imprisonment ideological alignment with that aforesaid imperialist party. In brief, he and his party were never true multipolar champions like they presented themselves as, but were always more akin to “social democrats” or what’s been called the “compatible left” by traditional leftists.

All the while, however, the PT’s social media influencers and cultish clique of supporters across the world aggressively gatekept the false narrative that their “heroes” pushed. This most often took the form of viciously “canceling” anyone who dared to even remotely question this debunked dogma. This charade was thus kept up until last week when it became impossible to deny that Lula’s PT had betrayed regional multipolar leader Venezuela solely to curry favor from what might soon be the US’ outgoing ruling party.

There shouldn’t be any question about the veracity of Brasil de Fato’s diplomatic sources either after Venezuela’s Foreign Ministry came out with an official statement slamming Lula’s veto. They described it as an “immoral aggression” that “reproduce[ed] the hatred, exclusion and intolerance promoted from the centres of power in the West.” They then added that “The Venezuelan people feel indignation and shame” after what Lula just did. These are very strong words that should be taken very seriously.

Readers should also know that while Lula hasn’t acknowledged Maduro’s re-election, Putin proudly thundered during last week’s event that “Venezuela is fighting for its independence, for its sovereignty…We believe that President Maduro won the elections, won fairly. He formed a government.” His words threw the PT onto the horns of yet another narrative dilemma by suggesting that Brazil’s stance is against another fellow Global South country’s “independence” and “sovereignty”.

The Venezuelan Question is therefore a black-and-white issue: one either supports Lula and Biden’s regime change efforts in Venezuela, with each advancing this in their own but still coordinated way, or they support Maduro and Putin’s defense of Venezuela’s independence and sovereignty.

There’s no middle ground no matter what lies top PT influencers might soon spew. Honest members from the Alt-Media Community will accurately report this while dishonest ones will keep covering up for the PT.

Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong says we are getting down to the wire with the 2024 Election, and the Deep State Dems are in panic mode. 

Could we have a false flag, martial law, debt crisis, default, war or all of the above? 

Armstrong says,

“They want war.  There is no question about that… Lindsey Graham was on Face the Nation a couple of months ago, and he slipped and told the truth for once. 

I was shocked that he actually slipped and told the truth for once.  He said there was a $10 trillion to $12 trillion natural gas asset under Crimea, and we can’t allow Russia and China to get that…

This is like Iraq.  We are going after the oil.”

On martial law, Armstrong says, “I am very concerned about martial law…”

“They (Supreme Court) have kind of hinted that martial law is a common law type thing.  When the courts are closed, then you have martial law.  It is justified under ‘necessity.’  This is what the Supreme Court has said.  So, I am very concerned that these neocons are so desperate that they are definitely going to try to create some sort of a false flag or anything they can do perhaps the last week in October going into the election.”

On the war front, we just had Israel bomb Iran, and NATO is still poking Russia.  Armstrong says,

“NATO is a retirement home for neocons.  It should have been shut down.  They are trying to take the world into World War III. 

They are now raising a $100 billion so they can continue the war against Russia in case Trump is elected.”

Armstrong is still seeing Trump winning in 2024 in a “landslide.”  Kamala Harris is going the other way.  A few months back, Armstrong said Kamala’s real approval rating was 10.5%.  Armstrong says he just ran new Kamala Harris approval ratings with his Socrates computer program. 

Armstrong says, “It’s actually down to 6.5% to 7.5%.  It’s really appalling.”

Armstrong says Kamala has “negative coattails,” which will spell big losses for Democrats down ballot in November.

On the economy, Armstrong says,

“We are in this debt Ponzi scheme where they issue new debt every year to pay off the old debt.  People say the debt is $34 trillion, but the level of the debt does not matter.  It could be a quadrillion dollars…

China holds 10% of America’s debt.  They sold $53 billion at the beginning of the year.  This is where the danger comes.  If you don’t have someone to take up what China is not buying, guess what?  You can’t pay, and when you can’t pay, that’s when a default comes.  This is why they want war . . . so they can default on everything…

They take us to war, and there goes Social Security and everything else.”

On the 2024 Election, Armstrong says,

“The 2024 Election will be the last election. . . . The US will break up into three or four sections. . . .

We are committing suicide. . . . This is how governments die. . . .

Gold goes up when people lose confidence in government.  This is why central banks want gold. 

They are afraid of governments defaulting on their debt in war…

In the war, we lose it next time.  They want terrorism so they can lock us down.  This is the future we face.”

There is much more in the 1-hour and 3-minute interview.

Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with Martin Armstrong as he gives his analysis on martial law, debt default and world war for 10.26.24.

*  *  *

To get a “Medical Emergency Kit” or “Contagion Emergency Kit” from The Wellness Company and get at least $30 off, click here.

To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here

If you want to attend Armstrong’s 2024 World Economic Conference in Olando, FL, Nov. 8, 9 & 10, 2024, or register for streaming of the event, click here.

There is free information, analysis and articles on ArmstrongEconomics.com.