Fourth Branch Rules

PUBLISHED: 3:27 PM 6 Jul 2021

Unelected Fourth Branch Of Government Is Ruling US, Systematically Removing Republic

This is a great explanation of what is happening in the country, and what every elected official is ignoring.

This is being ignored... deliberately. (Source: YouTube Screenshot)

This weekend, as many people were astonished that their cities and towns gleefully changed Independence Day celebrations (many were held on July 3, NOT July 4), one gifted writer was outlining the current state of the republic like no other has had the courage to do. Sundance, of Conservative Treehouse explained that the unelected “fourth branch” of government is the intelligence branch, and they are firmly in control.

He wrote:

After many years of granular research about the intelligence apparatus inside our government, in the summer of 2020 I visited Washington DC to ask specific questions.

My goal was to go where the influence agents within government actually operate, and discover the people deep inside the institutions no-one pays any attention to.

It was during this process when I discovered how information is purposefully put into containment silos; essentially a formal process to block the flow of information between agencies, and between the original branches. While frustrating to discover, the silo effect was important to understand because comprehension of communication networks leads to our ability to reconcile conflict between what we perceive and what’s actually taking place.

In the next few days I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works: (1) to control every other branch of government; (2) how it functions as an entirely independent branch of government with no oversight; (3) how and why it was created to be independent from oversight; (4) what is the current mission of the IC Branch, and most importantly (5) who operates it.

When we understand how the Fourth Branch works, questions about our dysfunctional U.S. modern government are answered. Additionally, the motives and intentions of people inside the institutions start to reconcile. Before beginning a deeper explanation, here’s an example almost everyone overlooked.  Remind yourself of a question raised in March of 2017 by Elise Stefanik, and a set of follow-up questions that were never asked.

In April of 2016 the FBI launched a counterintelligence operation against presidential candidate Donald Trump.  The questioning about that operation is what Rep. Stefanik cites in March of 2017, approximately 11 months later.

Things to note:

♦ Notice how FBI Director James Comey just matter-of-factly explains no-one outside the DOJ was informed about the FBI operation. Why?  Because that’s just the way things are done.  His justification for unilateral operations was “because of the sensitivity of the matter“, totally ignoring any constitutional or regulatory framework for oversight; because, well, quite simply, there isn’t any.  The intelligence apparatus inside the DOJ/FBI can, and does, operate based on their own independent determinations of authority.

♦ Notice also how FBI Director Comey shares his perspective that informing the National Security Council (NSC) is the equivalent of notifying the White House. The FBI leadership expressly believe they bear no responsibility to brief the chief executive.  As long as they tell some unknown, unelected, bureaucratic entity inside the NSC their unwritten responsibility to inform the top of their institutional silo is complete.  If the IC wants to carve out the Oval Office, they simply plant information inside the NSC and, from their perspective, their civic responsibility to follow checks-and-balances is complete.  This is an intentional construct.

♦  Notice how Comey obfuscates notification to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), by avoiding the fact James Clapper was the DNI from outset of the counterintelligence operation throughout the remainder of Obama’s term.  When I get deeper into the process we will understand how the Intelligence Branch has intentionally used the creation of the DNI position (established post 9/11/01) as a method to avoid oversight, not enhance it.   Keeping an oblivious doofus like James Clapper in position held strategic value [Doofus Reminder HERE].

Also, watch this. Another reminder… and it is likely many readers have forgotten… and watch closely:

That video of James Comey being questioned by Elise Stefanik was the first example given to me by someone who knew the background of everything that was taking place preceding that March 20, 2017, hearing.  That FBI reference point is a key to understand how the Intelligence Branch operates with unilateral authority above congress (legislative branch), above the White House (executive branch), and even above the court system (judicial branch).

After four days of research and meetings in DC during 2020; amid a town that was serendipitously shut down due to COVID; I found a letter slid under the door of my nearly empty hotel room with an introduction of sorts.  The subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After hours of specific questions and answers on specific examples I realized why our nation is in this mess.  That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.

The intelligence branch is an independent functioning branch of government, it is no longer a subsidiary set of agencies within the executive branch as most would think.  To understand the intelligence branch we need to drop the elementary school civics class lessons about three coequal branches of government, and replace that outlook with the modern system that created itself.

The intelligence branch functions, much like the State Dept, through a unique set of public-private partnerships that support it.  Big Tech industry collaboration with intelligence operatives is part of that functioning; almost like an NGO.  However, the process is much more important than most think.  In this problematic perspective of a corrupt system of government, the process is the flaw – not the outcome.

There are people making decisions inside this little-known, unregulated and out-of-control branch of government that impact every facet of our lives.

None of the people operating deep inside the Intelligence Branch were elected; and our elected representative House members genuinely do not know how the system works.  I know this because I have talked to House and Senate staffers, including the chiefs of staff for multiple House committee seats.   They are clueless.  That is part of the purpose of me explaining it, with examples, in full detail and sunlight.

There will be a new ‘category’ in the site search feature labeled “Fourth Branch of Govt” for all these research outlines which will show specifically how the Intelligence Branch operates…

Until we fix this modern bastardization of government it doesn’t matter who we elect into office.  Politicians are irrelevant, albeit useful, gnats from the perspective of the people in control of the Intelligence Branch.  If you doubt that, go watch Comey’s testimony again.

In the second installment, he added:

First things first, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding fourth branch of government.  Such an effort would be exhausting and only take our discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.

History has provided enough warnings from Dwight D Eisenhower (military aspect), to John F Kennedy (CIA aspect), to Richard Nixon (FBI aspect), to all modern versions of warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell.  None of those prior reference points are invalid and all prior documented outlines of historical reference are likely true and accurate.

A historic affirmation is not the point of these outlines, nor is it useful.

Here we pick up the intelligence issues as they manifest after 9/11/01, and highlight how the modern version of the total intelligence apparatus has now metastasized into a fourth branch of government.  If we take the modern construct we can highlight how and why the oversight or “check/balance” in the system has become functionally obsolescent.

Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in their favor.  The checks create silos of proprietary information that works around oversight issues. That’s part of the problem.

Ironically the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been prevented.  The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the 9/11 commission.

The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside the executive branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to analyze threats to the U.S.   This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.

The DNI office created a problem for those who operate in the shadows of proprietary information.  You’ll see how it was critical to install a person uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the Intelligence Branch of government.

♦ The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George W Bush.  Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing resolutions and individual spending bills.

Why does this matter?  Because many people think defunding the IC is a solution; it ain’t… not yet.  Worse yet, the corrupt divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign entities).

♦ When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007, they took office with a plan.  Nancy Pelosi became Speaker and Democrats controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader.  Barack Obama was a junior senator from Illinois.

Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting.  Baseline budgeting means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the next year budget.  All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within baseline budgeting.

Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation.  This is the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect.  TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery Program), auto-bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were all part of the non budget spending.  The federal reserve assisted with Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.

Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process since September of 2007.

♦ While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S. military was cut but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded.   We were all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican party wanted to keep us that way.  However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.

The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control over specific elements inside the U.S. government.  Eric Holder played a key role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.

AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were aware of the larger institutional objectives.  One of those objectives was weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the DOJ that had no inspector general oversight.  For most people the DOJ-NSD weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting candidate Donald Trump many years later.  However, by then the Holder crew had executed almost eight full years of background work.

♦ The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI.  Why was that important?  Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone who needs or holds a security clearance.  The removal of security clearances could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they were assembling.  Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security clearances were easy to justify.

Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this filtration within the security clearance process.  How does that issue later manifest?… just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency has become, specifically including the FBI.

♦ At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making room for the next phase was being assembled.  Names like Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.

Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional objective.  Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his first foreign trip.  The State Department worked with grassroots organizers (mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya.  Obama leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan for contacts and support.

Why does this aspect matter to us?  Well, you might remember how much effort the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources for the various mid-east rebellions the White House and DoS supported.  This was the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech social media.

In many ways the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.  The U.S. intelligence community working with social media platforms and political operatives.

Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“.  Where does this contractor activity manifest?  In the FISA Court opinion of Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or MOU.

Hopefully you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was.  None of this was accidental, all of this was by design and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally allowing most of this to take place.

That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the modern IC was created.  Next we will go into how all these various intelligence networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the President from knowing their activity.