The Homeland Security coup

This is a coup: the Homeland Security takeover of US elections

On a scale of importance from 1 to 10, with 10 being the most important, this breaking development is a 500.

Jon Rappoport

JonRappoport

January 8, 2017

On Friday, the traditional day of the week for quietly releasing big news that will hopefully be ignored by the public—and also obscured by the Fort Lauderdale Airport shooting—the chief of Homeland Security announced that his office will be taking over US elections.

If you can’t see the coup in progress, you need to keep looking until the message comes through.

Read carefully—ABC News reports. My comments are in brackets:

“Citing increasingly sophisticated cyber bad actors and an election infrastructure that’s ‘vital to our national interests’, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced Friday that he’s designating U.S. election systems critical infrastructure…”

[Also known as: “we’re taking over.”]

“’Given the vital role elections play in this country, it is clear that certain systems and assets of election infrastructure meet the definition of critical infrastructure, in fact and in law’,” Johnson said in a statement. He added: ‘Particularly in these times, this designation is simply the right and obvious thing to do’.”

[Also known as: “we’re taking over.”]

“The determination came after months of review and despite opposition from many states worried that the designation would lead to increased federal regulation or oversight on the many decentralized and locally run voting systems across the country. It was announced on the same day a declassified U.S. intelligence report said Russian President Vladimir Putin ‘ordered’ an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election.”

[Also known as: “we needed an excuse, a fake cover story for our takeover, and Russia is it.”]

“Such a change [in who controls the US election process] does not require presidential action [or Congressional approval], and only requires the secretary [of DHS] to first consult with the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism.”

[Also known as: “this is a coup by the White House.”]

“Johnson said election infrastructure included storage facilities, polling places and vote tabulation locations, plus technology involved in the process, including voter registration databases, voting machines and other systems used to manage the election process and report and display results.”

[Also known as: “We’re taking over every significant aspect of the national election process.”]

“The designation [of US elections as critical infrastructure] allows for information to be withheld from the public when state, local and private partners meet to discuss election infrastructure security — potentially injecting secrecy into an election process that’s traditionally and expressly a transparent process. U.S. officials say such closed door conversations allow for frank discussion that would prevent bad actors from learning about vulnerabilities. DHS would also be able to grant security clearances when appropriate and provide more detailed threat information to states.”

[Also known as: “we can intercede in the election process and determine its outcome without any need to pretend we’re being transparent; only people we approve will know the details of how we run elections; secrecy works.”]

“The Obama administration has proposed international cyber rules for peacetime that would expressly note that countries shouldn’t conduct online activity targeting critical [US] infrastructure, which will now also include election systems.”

[Also known as: “in case there is any doubt, elections systems in America will be property of the federal Executive Branch.”]

This is a coup.

This is equivalent to declaring a national state of emergency, including martial law: the DHS, if it deemed it necessary, could utilize armed agents to enforce the new directive and take over states’ offices that resist.

Election-processes belong to the states. But not anymore.

And of course, with this awesome new power, the DHS could intercede, behind the scenes, in the voting process and rig elections.

There is an additional aligned factor at work in this op: the proposed elimination of the Electoral College—yet another measure designed to “federalize” the election process.

Most people are entirely ignorant of the fact that the Constitution was a pact among states. With reluctance, the independent states agreed to relinquish certain specified powers to the newly created central government, while retaining all other powers.

The Electoral College was, therefore, a natural invention, because the states would maintain crucial influence in determining the outcome of presidential elections. State Electors would cast their presidential votes based on which candidate won in their state.

Eliminating the Electoral College now would add one more layer of federal control over the whole country, and take control from the states. More centralization.

Imagine it. Only the popular vote counts. The states are dumped. And on top of it all, the Dept. of Homeland Security has the power to run the election process as a piece of “critical infrastructure.”

Rigging the vote in New York and California, plus a few other populous states, would decide the election. And in time, no one would think about “New York” or “California” as separate entities—because they wouldn’t be. They would just be “more land and people” that are part of “wholly unified” America.

---

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

---

This is perfect for the “unity politicians” who spout empty rhetoric every chance they get—“we’re all in this together.” As I tirelessly point out, such slogans are nothing less than covert ops, and their goal is roping in as many dullards as possible under a messianic banner of A Better Life for All under a Beneficent Government.

Also known as: we the rulers decree, you the people submit; your survival depends on us; we give and take as we will, and that shall be the whole of the law.

Eventually, why have presidential elections at all? Just allow the DHS to determine which candidate will best serve the needs and desires of the controllers.

It’s cleaner, simpler, and more direct.

It’s a coup.

Will Trump cancel it?

Obama is basically challenging him to do it—which would create one more firestorm in the press directed at Trump.

“See, the new president just stopped the DHS from protecting our sacred free elections. Trump is exhibiting more treasonous cooperation with his Russian masters…he’s leaving the door wide open for their secret invasion against our liberties…”

The timeline is clear. One: Hillary will surely win the election. Two: Trump won the election. Three: Trump won because Russia “hacked the election” in his favor. Four: We must protect our national election process from foreign hacking. Five: Homeland Security must put itself in charge of national elections.

Stay tuned.

A coup just occurred.

Jon Rappoport

A 'constitution-free' zone

Judge rules: Most of U.S. has no protection from search by DHS

Digital Journal,

1 January, 2014

A federal court Judge ruled that the so-called “constitution exemption zone” is legal. The zone extends 100 miles from any U.S. border, which covers roughly two-thirds of citizens.

The ruling stems from an American Civil Liberties Union challenge to the practice three years ago.

U.S. District Judge Edward Korman in New York issued the decision that upholds the federal government policy referred to as the “border exemption” for the Fourth Amendment protections of the Constitution. The exemption is typically used to search electronic devices without explainable cause or a warrant. The ruling allows the policy to continue without restriction.

American Civil LIberties Union

The ACLU generated this map of areas governed by the border exemption.

The judge ruled:

Laptops have only come into widespread use in the twenty-first century. Prior to that time, lawyers, photographers, and scholars managed to travel overseas and consult with clients, take photographs, and conduct scholarly research. No one ever suggested the possibility of a border search had a chilling effect on his or her First Amendment rights. While it is true that laptops may make overseas work more convenient, the precautions plaintiffs may choose to take to ‘mitigate’ the alleged harm associated with the remote possibility of a border search are simply among the many inconveniences associated with international travel.

While Korman’s ruling was specific to situations that occur when crossing a border, the policy is not restricted simply to border crossings, but covers a strip of land that extends 100 miles from any border or coastline. This strip of land includes the residences of over 197 million U.S. citizens. Most major cities including Miami, Boston, New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Seattle are completely inside the zone.

Catherine Crump, the ACLU attorney who argued the case, said

We're disappointed in today's decision, which allows the government to conduct intrusive searches of Americans' laptops and other electronics at the border without any suspicion that those devices contain evidence of wrongdoing

The outcome of this case may weigh on efforts to end a similar policy of subjecting innocent travelers to vaginal and anal cavity searches. The victim of one of these searches was reportedly subjected to six hours of probing against her will and then billed $5,000 for the examinations that yielded no contraband. These searches are conducted under the same policy as the unjustified searches of electronic devices that was just upheld by Korman.

Laptops have only come into widespread use in the twenty-first century. Prior to that time, lawyers, photographers, and scholars managed to travel overseas and consult with clients, take photographs, and conduct scholarly research. No one ever suggested the possibility of a border search had a chilling effect on his or her First Amendment rights. While it is true that laptops may make overseas work more convenient, the precautions plaintiffs may choose to take to ‘mitigate’ the alleged harm associated with the remote possibility of a border search are simply among the many inconveniences associated with international travel.

While Korman’s ruling was specific to situations that occur when crossing a border, the policy is not restricted simply to border crossings, but covers a strip of land that extends 100 miles from any border or coastline. This strip of land includes the residences of over 197 million U.S. citizens. Most major cities including Miami, Boston, New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Seattle are completely inside the zone.

Catherine Crump, the ACLU attorney who argued the case, said

We're disappointed in today's decision, which allows the government to conduct intrusive searches of Americans' laptops and other electronics at the border without any suspicion that those devices contain evidence of wrongdoing

The outcome of this case may weigh on efforts to end a similar policy of subjecting innocent travelers to vaginal and anal cavity searches. The victim of one of these searches was reportedly subjected to six hours of probing against her will and then billed $5,000 for the examinations that yielded no contraband. These searches are conducted under the same policy as the unjustified searches of electronic devices that was just upheld by Korman.

Financial Meltdown

Martial Law and the Economy: Is Homeland Security Preparing for the Next Wall Street Collapse?

Ellen Brown

Global Research,

7 October, 2013

Reports are that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is engaged in a massive, covert military buildup. An article in the Associated Press in February confirmed an open purchase order by DHS for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. According to an op-ed in Forbes, that’s enough to sustain an Iraq-sized war for over twenty years. DHS has also acquired heavily armored tanks, which have been seen roaming the streets. Evidently somebody in government is expecting some serious civil unrest. The question is, why?

Recently revealed statements by former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown at the height of the banking crisis in October 2008 could give some insights into that question. An article on BBC News on September 21, 2013, drew from an explosive autobiography called Power Trip by Brown’s spin doctor Damian McBride, who said the prime minister was worried that law and order could collapse during the financial crisis. McBride quoted Brown as saying:

If the banks are shutting their doors, and the cash points aren’t working, and people go to Tesco [a grocery chain] and their cards aren’t being accepted, the whole thing will just explode.

If you can’t buy food or petrol or medicine for your kids, people will just start breaking the windows and helping themselves.

And as soon as people see that on TV, that’s the end, because everyone will think that’s OK now, that’s just what we all have to do. It’ll be anarchy. That’s what could happen tomorrow.

How to deal with that threat? Brown said, “We’d have to think: do we have curfews, do we put the Army on the streets, how do we get order back?”

McBride wrote in his book Power Trip, “It was extraordinary to see Gordon so totally gripped by the danger of what he was about to do, but equally convinced that decisive action had to be taken immediately.” He compared the threat to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Fear of this threat was echoed in September 2008 by US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, who reportedly warned that the US government might have to resort to martial law if Wall Street were not bailed out from the credit collapse.

In both countries, martial law was avoided when their legislatures succumbed to pressure and bailed out the banks. But many pundits are saying that another collapse is imminent; and this time, governments may not be so willing to step up to the plate.

The Next Time WILL Be Different

What triggered the 2008 crisis was a run, not in the conventional banking system, but in the “shadow” banking system, a collection of non-bank financial intermediaries that provide services similar to traditional commercial banks but are unregulated.  They include hedge funds, money market funds, credit investment funds, exchange-traded funds, private equity funds, securities broker dealers, securitization and finance companies. Investment banks and commercial banks may also conduct much of their business in the shadows of this unregulated system.

The shadow financial casino has only grown larger since 2008; and in the next Lehman-style collapse, government bailouts may not be available. According to President Obama in his remarks on the Dodd-Frank Act on July 15, 2010, “Because of this reform, . . . there will be no more taxpayer funded bailouts – period.”

Governments in Europe are also shying away from further bailouts. The Financial Stability Board (FSB) in Switzerland has therefore required the systemically risky banks to devise “living wills” setting forth what they will do in the event of insolvency. The template established by the FSB requires them to “bail in” their creditors; and depositors, it turns out, are the largest class of bank creditor. (For fuller discussion, see my earlier article here.)

When depositors cannot access their bank accounts to get money for food for the kids, they could well start breaking store windows and helping themselves. Worse, they might plot to overthrow the financier-controlled government. Witness Greece, where increasing disillusionment with the ability of the government to rescue the citizens from the worst depression since 1929 has precipitated riots and threats of violent overthrow.

Fear of that result could explain the massive, government-authorized spying on American citizens, the domestic use of drones, and the elimination of due process and of “posse comitatus” (the federal law prohibiting the military from enforcing “law and order” on non-federal property). Constitutional protections are being thrown out the window in favor of protecting the elite class in power.

 The Looming Debt Ceiling Crisis

 The next crisis on the agenda appears to be the October 17th deadline for agreeing on a federal budget or risking default on the government’s loans. It may only be a coincidence, but two large-scale drills are scheduled to take place the same day, the “Great ShakeOut Earthquake Drill” and the “Quantum Dawn 2 Cyber Attack Bank Drill.” According to a Bloomberg news clip on the bank drill, the attacks being prepared for are from hackers, state-sponsored espionage, and organized crime (financial fraud). One interviewee stated, “You might experience that your online banking is down . . . . You might experience that you can’t log in.” It sounds like a dress rehearsal for the Great American Bail-in.

Ominous as all this is, it has a bright side. Bail-ins and martial law can be seen as the last desperate thrashings of a dinosaur. The exploitative financial scheme responsible for turning millions out of their jobs and their homes has reached the end of the line. Crisis in the current scheme means opportunity for those more sustainable solutions waiting in the wings.

Other countries faced with a collapse in their debt-based borrowed currencies have survived and thrived by issuing their own. When the dollar-pegged currency collapsed in Argentina in 2001, the national government returned to issuing its own pesos; municipal governments paid with “debt-canceling bonds” that circulated as currency; and neighborhoods traded with community currencies. After the German currency collapsed in the 1920s, the government turned the economy around in the 1930s by issuing “MEFO” bills that circulated as currency. When England ran out of gold in 1914, the government issued “Bradbury pounds” similar to the Greenbacks issued by Abraham Lincoln during the US Civil War.

Today our government could avoid the debt ceiling crisis by doing something similar: it could simply mint some trillion dollar coins and deposit them in an account. That alternative could be pursued by the Administration immediately, without going to Congress or changing the law, as discussed in my earlier article here. It need not be inflationary, since Congress could still spend only what it passed in its budget. And if Congress did expand its budget for infrastructure and job creation, that would actually be good for the economy, since hoarding cash and paying down loans have significantly shrunk the circulating money supply.

 Peer-to-peer Trading and Public Banks

 At the local level, we need to set up an alternative system that provides safety for depositors, funds small and medium-sized businesses, and serves the needs of the community.

Much progress has already been made on that front in the peer-to-peer economy.  In a September 27th article titled “Peer-to-Peer Economy Thrives as Activists Vacate the System,” Eric Blair reports that the Occupy Movement is engaged in a peaceful revolution in which people are abandoning the established system in favor of a “sharing economy.” Trading occurs between individuals, without taxes, regulations or licenses, and in some cases without government-issued currency.

Peer-to-peer trading happens largely on the Internet, where customer reviews rather than regulation keep sellers honest. It started with eBay and Craigslist and has grown exponentially since. Bitcoin is a private currency outside the prying eyes of regulators. Software is being devised that circumvents NSA spying. Bank loans are being shunned in favor of crowdfunding. Local food co-ops are also a form of opting out of the corporate-government system.

Peer-to-peer trading works for local exchange, but we also need a way to protect our dollars, both public and private. We need dollars to pay at least some of our bills, and businesses need them to acquire raw materials. We also need a way to protect our public revenues, which are currently deposited and invested in Wall Street banks that have heavy derivatives exposure.

To meet those needs, we can set up publicly-owned banks on the model of the Bank of North Dakota, currently our only state-owned depository bank. The BND is mandated by law to receive all the state’s deposits and to serve the public interest. Ideally, every state would have one of these “mini-Feds.” Counties and cities could have them as well. For more information, see http://PublicBankingInstitute.org.

Preparations for martial law have been reported for decades, and it hasn’t happened yet. Hopefully, we can sidestep that danger by moving into a saner, more sustainable system that makes military action against American citizens unnecessary.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, president of the Public Banking Institute, and author of twelve books, including the best-selling Web of Debt. In The Public Bank Solution, her latest book, she explores successful public banking models historically and globally. Her 200-plus blog articles are at EllenBrown.com.

Human Rights

ALL MUSICIANS EVERYWHERE -- READ THIS

It has been enforced already in Crestone. HOMELAND SECURITY want to be in a position to shut down any gathering or assembly where live music might be played.

Imagine the fascists breaking up an impromptu Woody Guthrie performance at a union organizing rally...

---Mike Ruppert

The Department of Homeland Security says it is illegal to freely play music in The United States.

I Am Not Anonymous,

20 July, 2013

Fact:

The Department of Homeland Security (An agency enacted through the Patriot Act) is now demanding through enforcement from The State Fire Marshalls that ALL LIVE MUSIC PLAYED IN THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE A PERMIT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

This is an outrage to freedom and the ideals of The American people and our quickly evaporating rights.

This is just the start to the reality of what The Department of Homeland Security is going to do to the American citizens. The DHS is actually saying it is illegal to play music or operate a business where music is played for any reason without paying The Department of Homeland Security, and giving them much personal and private information. If The DHS can regulate the performance of a song where do you think they will stop? The fact is they won’t!

The Department of Homeland Security does not have the jurisdiction to enforce laws in The United States. They have purposefully and misleadingly attached themselves to The Fire Marshall to circumvent American constitutional rights and automatically give themselves jurisdiction in every business in The United States. This is enforced through the Fire Marshall’s inspection of commercial public businesses.

Please stand with me, American Citizens everywhere, and business owners in demanding that we will not allow The Department of Homeland Security in our businesses and homes. We need all US Citizens and our elected officials to stand united against the unlawful abuses of The Department of Homeland Security and this increasingly fascist government. The Patriot Act is the only reason The Department of Homeland Security has any jurisdiction. This is intentional. This is the first bold and aggressive move by them. Please stand with us! Our children and grandchildren need us!

I and my business Folly Moon (a restaurant in downtown Muncie, IN) have a hearing with The Department of Homeland Security at The Indiana State House on Friday Aug. 2nd at 10a.m.