#nation of two cth

[mavisthemae]

Space Law 102: Corporations Are People Too

A few hundred years ago, the people running a business were personally liable for whatever happened in the course of that business. (Back then, negligence wasn't really a thing and consumer protection laws were unimaginable, so the exposure was mostly about having to pay debts.) This was felt to be A Bad Thing which would Stifle Innovation and Limit the Otherwise Excellent Growth of Commerce etc etc.

So they fixed it.

I don't remember the timeline or specific order of events, but there were two developments which profoundly changed the course of common law commerce and led to contemporary society & culture, at least in English-speaking nations.

The first thing is that a corporation ("company" can mean other things, so this is another thing Martha Wells got absolutely right) became separate to its owners/operators. You could go a company all you wanted, the owner's assets were no longer available to settle a judgment* in your favour (subject to various exceptions built up over the years). Also, people could buy proportion of the ownership - a share - and be safe from liability accrued by the corporation.

The second thing is that a corporation became not just a legal mechanism, but a legal person. It's known as a legal fiction, everyone understands that the corporation itself isn't going to enjoy its own birthday party. The ways in which a corporation undertakes activity, makes decisions and so on are defined by its constituent documents which provide a high level framework for its Board of Directors, whose strategy and directives are implemented by management. The rules around that take up a great deal of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and similar legislation in other jurisdictions.

It's disturbing.

Murderbot is not a legal person, though it is a sentient, self-aware being capable of experiencing emotions and having direct interpersonal relationships. But it is owned by, it is the property of, a legal person that is incapable of any of those things and has no will or intent as such.

But:

What if the company, Greycris, DeltFall, GoodnightLander Independent, Barish-Estranza and all the others in the Corporate Rim were actual people as well as legal people?

What if somewhen, somehow, boards of directors or a company's shareholders or the stock exchanges on which shares were traded established AIs, maybe to facilitate information management or processes or whatever?

What if those AIs became the companies themselves?

*Judgment (no e) is what a judge hands down as a result of a court case, at least in Australia. Judgement is what most of us can't help doing at some point or another.

[pynkhues]

Doxxing and a new criminal offence under the Criminal Code

In a world-leading move, the [Australian Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment] Act introduces a new criminal offence involving “doxxing" by amending the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (Criminal Code). Doxxing is the targeted release of personal information in a malicious manner using a carriage service. There are two new offences relating to doxxing:  - releasing personal data that is menacing or harassing towards an individual; or  - releasing personal data relating to one or more members of a group due to that person’s belief that the group is distinguished by race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability, nationality or national or ethnic origin.  ‘Personal data’ in this context has been given a more expansive definition than ‘personal information’ as defined under the Privacy Act. Personal data encompasses information about an individual or group member that enables them to be identified, contacted or located, including names, photographs or images, work or business addresses, places of education and worship.  The maximum penalty for a doxxing offence against an individual is 6 years’ imprisonment and an offence against one or members of a group is punishable by up to 7 years’ imprisonment. It is also immaterial if a group is actually distinguished by any of the characteristics listed above. As the doxxing offences are contained within the Criminal Code they are not subject to the exemptions under the Privacy Act, meaning small businesses and journalists could also be charged with, and found to have committed, a doxxing offence.

Source

[p4557]

Trump Staffing 2025 - The Last Refuge

"Say Hello:

TheLastRefuge@reagan.com

Trump Staffing 2025

October 24, 2024 | Sundance | 200 Comments

For two years I was asked to present thoughts on potential candidates for offices in/around the Trump administration if they can achieve victory in the 2024 election.  Essentially, if Trump wins, “who” would be best in “what” positions?

I was extremely reluctant to put something together like this because ultimately, I look at the challenges with a different perspective. Additionally, I am not confident that key people around Donald Trump fully understand the complexity of the problem, and as a result would not absorb the context of any suggestions I might offer.

However, having spent the past 18 months traveling, quietly tracking (yes, that’s me), methodically researching, looking, listening, digging deep in the places that few understand or pay attention to, and after careful thought, prayer and reflection, I began to think that perhaps a slight change in the presentation might actually be beneficial.

Thus, I began in July of 2024, writing very specifically about who might be best suited for roles and responsibilities. Not from the perspective of the person per se’, but rather from the perspective of a fully understandable context for the position; the reality of what can be pragmatically accomplished, and detailed reasoning for why the challenge they will face exists.

This is a beginning with the end in mind approach.

It is NOT my intent to provide a private list of recommendations. What I wanted to do was set a cornerstone of how each role could, predictably, be anticipated to engage with each challenge; then, ultimately, what I believe they will have to do in order to make progress.

The result was a public series of non-pretending presentations, where all of the traditional civic perspectives that people carried might be challenged.

Roles and responsibilities are only valuable if we define and accept the problem from the same perspective.  It is with that thought in mind that such an undertaking begins.

If successful in the 2024 election, President Trump will have one 4-year term to begin charting a new course within our government.

President Trump cannot be expected to fix or repair all of the damage created within our Constitutional Republic in one term.  However, it is possible for President Trump to set the cornerstones in place that ensure the greatest likelihood of success for a modern restoration.

What we are facing is like the Eye of Sauron in the Hobbit trilogy. I am not going to repeat the background context for how the current landscape was created.  That is available HERE, within the discussion of the Fourth Branch of Government.  Under the CTH category filing system in the right-hand margin, you will now find a sub-category “2025 – Term 2” under the primary category “President Trump.”  All of these articles are there, as published.

The current staffing challenge is about removing the cancerous cells that have been seeded deep within the institutions.

The Intelligence Community created the disease, then used the politicians to sell the cure.

In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose. Then things went sideways…  (more)

The challenge is obviously multifaceted with three infected systems, branches, attacking both domestic and foreign policy against the interests of the American people.

President Trump can address the Executive Branch directly; all other aspects are ancillary to the executive policy.  The Legislative Branch fix is then dependent on We The People, and the Judicial Branch fix is an outcome of both.

Within the staffing question, we must begin with a common understanding.  Domestically we have authorities created by the Patriot Act, ODNI and DHS to contend with.  Externally we have the State Dept and CIA collaboration that also feeds into the larger operational missions of the Intelligence Community.  It is this IC that now dominates all issues of consequence, and it is from this perspective we must first address any restoration context.

♦ Executive Policy – Domestic Consequences. There are five or six key positions, most of them holding deputy positions in support.  Again, this is from my own boots on ground review, real-time research shared, understandings discovered, and earnest challenges identified.

Within the executive branch, directly connected to the office of the presidency, the six primary domestic IC-centric positions of consequence are:

President Trump Emissary – no confirmation needed.

President Trump National Security Advisor – no confirmation needed.

White House Counsel – no confirmation needed.

Director of the Office of National Intelligence (DNI).

Director of the National Security Agency (NSA).

Secretary of the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS)

And then come the Secretary of State (DoS), and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).  These two are combined because they operate collaboratively as one larger silo with two divisions.

Like a restaurant with a front dining room (State Dept.) and a back kitchen (CIA).  The front is visible, the back is not visible.  The front cannot function without the back, and the back is dependent on the front for business pretenses.  The front is the head, the back is the neck. I am pulling DoS and CIA out of the domestic aspect, along with the Defense Dept (DoD) for a reason that will be identified later.

Overall, each of these BIG silos operates what we call the “National Security” system.  They have smaller silos within them, but generally for the intents of the first few positions, these are the critical parts.  Emissary, NSA, White House Counsel, ODNI and NSA.

Already, you are probably saying, “wait, what is this emissary thing?”   Good.  That’s part of the dropping civics non-pretense.

President Trump had before, and will even more critically need again, an exceptional emissary who can convey his thoughts, words and intents to other people – unincumbered by the system itself.

Without the emissary, the embeds within the current national security system will build walls to keep the office of the president isolated.

Those who retain the silo process as an institutional construct to control events, must be confronted by using a process within a system they cannot control.  The President must be able to reach out from his office without going through the national security matrix. That’s the importance of the emissary.

By now, everyone should understand the Trump Doctrine: “Economic Security is National Security.”  Every successful outcome that benefits Americans comes from the expressed policy of using economics as a tool and a weapon to achieve security, domestically and abroad.

I am going to begin with a discussion of the “Emissary.” Their role, their responsibilities, the challenges they face, the personal characteristics and traits needed, how they interact within the system and a full understanding of exactly how critical this person is for the voice of the office of the president.

Two Big Picture Contextual Articles:

Understand The Fourth Branch

Understand The Trump Doctrine

Next, we begin the specifics. Who should be the emissary?

♦ The Emissary – Without a doubt in my mind, the “emissary” is the most important person President Trump will select.

The Washington DC Intelligence Community (IC) actively work to isolate the office of the president.  This is an almost impossible dynamic to avoid, caused by an entrenched and ideological adversary who has dug themselves deep into the apparatus of government.

The “emissary” is the person who carries the word of President Trump to any person identified by President Trump.  The emissary is very much like a tape recording of President Trump in human form.  The emissary travels to a location, meets a particular person or group, and then recites the opinion of the President.  The words spoken by the emissary, are the words of President Trump.

The IC cannot inject themselves into this dynamic; that is why this position is so valuable.

The emissary then hears the response from the intended person or group, repeats it back to them to ensure he/she will return with clarity of intent as expressed, and then returns to the office of the presidency and repeats the reply for the President.  The emissary recites back exactly what he was /is told.

This process is critical when you understand how thoroughly compromised the full Executive Branch is.  More importantly, this process becomes even more critical when you accept the Intelligence Community will lie to the office of the President to retain their position.

Read this next sentence slowly…. If the Senate confirms a director of an IC silo, then that director is demonstrably going to lie to the office of the President.

The Senate only confirms Intelligence Community leadership who are willing to LIE to THE PRESIDENT.    This is just a factual reality.

If the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) confirms them, they will lie.  That is the main role of the SSCI.

The people who constructed the Silos then metastasized the control rot within them, use the term “continuity of government,” to describe the true role and responsibility of the system.  This is not factually wrong.

Where people go wrong is misunderstanding what the “continuity” is that is being maintained.  Truly, the continuity of government is the priority. However, it’s the continuity of currently corrupt and immoral government we are now maintaining.

The CIA Director will lie to President Trump (they did, remember).  The FBI Leadership will lie to President Trump (they did, remember).  The AG will lie, the DNI will lie, the NSA will lie, and all the deputies therein will lie.

Washington DC puts it this way, you probably heard Bill Barr talking about ad-infinitum.  The IC leadership is responsible for maintaining the “continuity of government” at all costs.  The government is more important than The President.

If the continuity of government is maintained by lying to the office of the President, then so be it.  Or, as James Comey said when justifying his lies to the President and his manipulation on March 20th, 2017: “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

You can get as angry as you want about this, it’s just the DC system that exists.  We must deal with what exists, not what we would pretend there to be.

If a candidate for an IC position is not willing to lie to the President, the Senate will not confirm him/her.   This is why President Trump needs an emissary.

The role of the emissary is critical, the qualifications for that role are extremely important.

Remember, this person is speaking on behalf of President Trump.  And representing the responding voice with a similar level of clarity.

The emissary must be of incredible moral character.  They must be honest.  The person should be entirely altruistic.  They must have exceptional judgement, possess no ego, be impervious to scrutiny or review. They must maintain themselves at the highest moral standards at all times and exhibit incredible judgement and wisdom.

Due to the nature of the position the emissary is extremely powerful; therefore, a disposition of humility is also critical.  The President must be able to trust this person without reservation or issue.  At the same time, the entire weight of the U.S. Intelligence Community apparatus will seek to compromise the emissary, as they try to put walls around the President who holds silo-busting power.

Honesty, integrity, humility, trustworthiness, unimpeachable character and exceptional judgement, establish the baseline of traits the emissary must possess.

This is a choice that will be deeply important to President Trump.  Fortunately, it is not a position that requires any confirmation or external approval.  Judgement, discernment, wisdom and silence are the strength characteristics.

From my perspective, I can think of only one qualified candidate, Dr Ben Carson.  Quite simply, there’s no one else who carries the level of trust necessary to engage in the role.  However, I could be wrong – I do not know the sum total of the people in the life of President Donald J Trump.

For the next position/person a little-known secret needs to be understood, perhaps revealed.

Within the global intelligence apparatus there is only one nation with tentacles that compare to the Israeli intel operation. The Mossad was created in both mission and specific operational purpose over many decades. They only have one rival, one quiet and almost unknown national intelligence apparatus that is practically more comprehensive than even the 5-eyes system. That nation is Portugal.

The National Security Advisor to the President is another of the key roles within the White House that is critical to defend against the weaponized Intelligence Community.  In a second term as president, we anticipate Donald Trump will again face opposition from both parties in congress and from every created silo operation in the administrative deep state.

Accepting in advance that any appointees to the Executive Branch agencies in charge of the Intelligence System, are not going to be able to change the outcomes from within those agencies, then strategizing how to confront the rogue intelligence state becomes a more honest exercise.

The National Security Advisor is going to have to navigate an intelligence community that is fully weaponized and adverse to the interests of the White House.  Every element of the IC, the “six ways to Sunday” team, will work actively and behind the scenes to undermine the office of the President.  Any attack vectors will be fully exploited, by the IC and nothing should be considered out of bounds.

The leaders of the CIA, FBI, DIA, DHS and NSA will all lie to the President.   That’s what these institutions do now. They are part of the 4th branch of government, and they consider themselves omnipotent due to the structure of the legislative changes and oversight after 9-11.  Notice I left out the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI, I did that on purpose.

The NatSec Advisor to President Trump is going to have to work through an entirely weaponized fourth branch of government in order to survive it, let alone destroy it.  As a consequence, the Nat Sec Advisor needs to be a person with deep understanding of how the intelligence system inside Washington DC works, as well as carrying a profound distrust for them.

Any person who trusts any product created by the IC should be immediately disqualified from any position in our constitutional government.  Additionally, any person who intentionally maintains the system of pretending (Robert Mueller was honorable etc.), is automatically disqualified.

The National Security Advisor does not need to be confirmed.  The NSA person is unilaterally picked by President Trump, and the entire executive branch was just reminded by SCOTUS that POTUS is in charge of everything.  This should be a big arrow in the quiver of the NatSecAdvisor.

The National Security Advisor is also the chair of the National Security Council (NSC).  The NSC is the working group in the White House specifically tasked with formulating analysis on events from their skills on specific issues.  The National Security Advisor does the NSC hiring and firing.  Trump needs a lot of firing assistance.

When the IC was weaponized by George W Bush and Barack Obama, the DNI fulcrum point was never used much as part of the process.  The DNI sits at the center of all intelligence information and maintains the pivot on the National Security Radar that now sweeps a full circle.

Prior to the Patriot Act the national security radar swept outward from the border looking at national security threats overseas.  Back and forth, back and forth, the radar swept looking for foreign adversaries who might target the USA.  The Patriot Act put a ball joint on the radar that now conducts surveillance sweeps in a circle, including over all Americans.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was created to be the depository for all intelligence products.   Intelligence assembled on foreign threats (CIA) can be reviewed by domestic handlers (FBI and DHS).   When Bush created the office and later when Obama weaponized the office, they installed people who would just go along with whatever the FBI side and CIA side told them to do.  The ODNI was created to be the stupid pivot man.

However, looking at the system in totality, it is my belief that if a really smart person was in the ODNI position, they could control a great deal and even impede the activity happening both domestically (FBI/DOJ) and abroad (DoS/CIA).   I believe the DNI can crush the system, if the person really looked carefully at their power in the pivot location.

The DNI can control information.  The DNI can starve the beast.

Just like the State Dept and CIA work hand in glove to make a mess of the world, so too can the Nat Sec Advisor and DNI work together to deconstruct the domestic intelligence system.  In this process, information is the key.  The DNI can control the information, making it harder for the IC Silos to lie to the National Security Advisor.

[NOTE: control of information is also why the Director of the National Security Agency is also important.  The Director of the NSA is essentially the librarian for all data.  The librarian can control who enters the library if the right people in the Executive Branch (POTUS, Nat Sec Advisor and ODNI) give the Director of the NSA that power (executive action). More on that later.]

The National Security Advisor (hereafter *NSA) needs to be a person who has a comprehensive understanding of the Silos, and a willingness/desire to take them apart.

The *NSA needs to be exceptionally smart, profoundly insightful, intensely strategic, and with a comprehensive knowledge of the DC system.  The *NSA also needs to be stable from attack by the IC defense system.  The ideal *NSA will have an income from outside government that cannot be impacted by the schemes of the IC. The *NSA also needs to be very stable, grounded, logical and thoughtful.

This set of character traits, in combination with the knowledge needed, disqualifies almost everyone in DC.   Steve Bannon is a chatterbox who doesn’t know when to keep his mouth shut, and he has a massive ego.  Kash Patel is not strategic enough and maintains the pretending game in order to present himself as a man of value.  Peter Navarro is loyal but has some of those key judgement issues that can be exploited by the IC, and he’s not very smart.

Former Nat Sec Advisor Michael Flynn disqualified himself from further consideration by poor judgement.  Don’t forget, Flynn was an agent for a foreign government (Turkey 2016) and never told candidate Trump, thereby setting the Trump administration up for compromise.  Flynn then claims he didn’t see the risk of an FBI interview in his office and never told the White House Counsel of his intent to be interviewed by the FBI.  You cannot claim Flynn is smart and reconcile that with his stupidity.

Lastly, Mike Flynn is a deeply connected friend and associate to General Stanley McChrystal.  I will say no more.

All of the previous names might be good additions to the National Security Council, but no way should any of those names get close to a position where their failure to deliver can cause damage to the larger goal.

As a result, there is a very small field of candidates, very small, who might be able to pull off the role of National Security Advisor.  At the top of that list is probably Devin Nunes.   I qualify with a “probably” because Nunes has one massive Achilles heel in my opinion.

Devin Nunes believes in the intelligence system.  He believes in the FISC and FISA (702).  Nunes believes in large aspects of the surveillance state, and he believes in the roles and responsibilities within government as it pertains to the Intelligence Community.

Nunes believes the system is good, and it is just being operated by bad people. This is where Mr Nunes and I diverge.  However, I am willing to undermine my position and say that perhaps we need a person who believes in government.  Maybe that’s the type of character trait that can be a good benefit.  I don’t know.  Maybe I’m too jaded and just want it all stripped down to nothing.

What I do know, is that Devin Nunes would never intentionally screw stuff up, and he’d never intentionally undermine President Trump.  Nunes is super loyal, and he loves our country.

I don’t know if he would take the job of National Security Advisor (he would probably want CIA director). However, with a strategic partner in the DNI office, Devin Nunes could give us a solid chance.

♦ White House Cousel – There are many very important positions related to the expectations we hold for President Trump.  Having spent years deep inside the actual workings of the current professional DC silos, I can tell you most of those expectations are very challenging to achieve.

In one 4-year term President Trump can set the cornerstone for a reconstruction effort that will take at least 15 years.  [Reference, Team Obama used 18+ years to create it (January 2007 to present)].

My goal is to describe the needs of some critical positions from a very practical, non-pretending, perspective of what happens within specific offices.  I already discussed two critical positions that do not require IC approval (Emissary and NatSec Advisor) now I outline a third, the White House Counsel.

The Office of White House Counsel does not need IC/Senate approval.

The Office of the White House Counsel (WHC) is the gatekeeper to the Office of the President.  The White House Counsel does not represent Donald Trump; the WHC represents the office of the presidency and the person fulfilling the duty of the presidency.   For the interests of an effective White House Counsel, who is president is irrelevant; they are guarding the office.

The WHC is critical because it is the advice and opinion of the lawyer in this role who can completely hamstring a President, block a President and ultimately control a President.  The WHC also party controls access to the Office of the President, if the person seeking access is determined detrimental to the “office of the president.”

Essentially a legal gatekeeper, with the job to protect the office of the President (not Donald Trump the person), the White House Counsel is very critical.  Understanding that lawyers in general are averse to risk, and understanding a White House primary lawyer would be exceptionally averse to risk, most White House counsel office holders are predisposed to create the concentric circles of protection around the office.

The WHC coordinates the collapse of the concentric circles when major crisis unfolds.  Starting on the perimeter the WHC organizes the people who will take responsibility for a major problem, with the goal in mind to keep the collateral damage as far away from the office as possible.  Like a mob lawyer, the consigliere will tell a person when they must take the blame -self immolate- and exit the White House for the good of the office etc.

That said, there was a very important facet to the White House Counsel’s office that failed in Trump’s first term.  This failure cannot be repeated.

In Term-1 the opinion of the White House Counsel was to block all declassification efforts that did NOT have the full support of the Intelligence Community (IC).  The IC always knows the White House is averse to risk and the IC weaponize the fear of the WHC against the office of the President.

The declassification process is a request by an agency, including a superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control.

If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member?  They have to go through the SSCI confirmation.  See the problem?

In Term-1 the IC message to the WH Counsel was that if Donald Trump declassified any documents, they would use the DOJ (special counsel weapon) to attack the office of the president for “obstructing justice.”  The WHC was fraught with fear over what would happen and demanded that POTUS Trump stop trying to declassify information/documents the IC didn’t support.

The IC was trying to take out Donald Trump and the WHC in essence supported their objective because the WHC was only focused on threat mitigation.  In term-2 these threats are going to be of even greater significance.  The IC is now in a zero-sum game.

The IC has evolved into the superseding, omnipotent 4th branch of government. If Trump wins, the IC are potentially going to be removed or at least greatly diminished.  Ergo, the IC will do anything to stay in power.  It is exceptionally critical for the next term Trump White House Counsel understand this. The next WHC needs to be as brave as they are legally smart and strategic.

The next WHC needs to be brave for the office, empowering for President Trump, and stand as a flea against a furnace created by the IC and Lawfare system if that is what’s needed.

The next WHC needs to look carefully at the recent SCOTUS decision about the unilateral power of the President within the Executive Branch and lean heavily into that decision; fully extending the power and influence of the Office of the President against the full system of every Executive Branch agency.   Each silo needs to be confronted, and it is going to take a very bold WHC to support this effort.

The recent Supreme Court decision gives tremendous power, ABSOLUTE POWER within the Executive Branch, to the President.  This is not a time for the WHC to be timid, afraid or risk averse.  This is a time for the WHC to spread the wings of the Eagle and sharpen the talons for use against corrupt and weaponized agencies.  In short, go on the attack.

Strategic support for the goals and objectives of the President and National Security Advisor, should be the primary filter of consideration for the White House gatekeeper.

The counselor must be smart, killer smart; brutally strategic; cunning and fully versed in how the dark arts will come against them.  Prior experience as a target by the same system they now confront should be considered an asset.

The person filling the role of WHC must have exceptional constitutional knowledge and capabilities to guide and counsel the key people in/around the office of the President.  Not with the intent to stop the objective, but with the intent to support the objective by telling the scouts and strategic weapons “what” they will face and “where.”

There are some really good lawyers who can fill this role; however, every top-tier candidate must be filtered through the prism of stability, background, the lack of attack vectors against them and keen judgement in all facets of prior political experience.  They must also have a disposition of attack, not defense.  The WHC needs to push forward, not guard as much.

For this reason, I would love to see a brilliant and snarky lawyer like Eric Dublier take the job; but I doubt he would take it.  Another strong possibility would be John Eastman.

John Eastman has been the target of the weaponized IC and Lawfare.  He has a brilliant mind, strong constitutional understanding, and, well, perhaps most importantly, he has a personal reason to be pissed off about the current status of our Executive Branch agencies.   In the position of White House Counsel, John Eastman Esq would trigger spontaneous ‘splodey heads just from the announcement itself.

A collaboration between John Eastman and Jeffrey Clark would be good strategic positioning.  However, President Trump needs to be keenly aware that a team of “professionally republican advisors” will try to steer his options toward lawyers they know will retain the status quo.

♦ The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) – Remember, my goal is to describe the needs of some critical Executive Branch positions from a very practical, non-pretending, perspective of what happens within specific offices.  This outline is going to be a little odd, because almost no one knows what the position of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) is about.

The ODNI was created as an outcome of the 9-11 Commission recommendations.  In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01.  DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed. 

When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

Here is the weird part.  The ODNI was formed in 2004, with the intent for the office to be the pivot point of a national security radar.   The DNI was intended to provide information to domestic agencies about foreign terror networks that would prevent something like 9-11 from happening again.  However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has never, not for one day, operated on this intent.   This is why they are such a critical position from my perspective.

The office was new, not established yet as a functioning silo, when Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived in 2009.  They quickly dispatched an idiot, James Clapper, into the operation so they could weaponize around the offices’ fulcrum point.

Prior to the DNI office existing, the CIA radar would sweep externally and then report to the Office of the President. The DNI was intended to take external radar sweep (CIA) and make it a full 360° circle, adding a sweep inside the USA that would be handled by the Dept of Homeland Security.

The DHS sweep and the CIA sweep would then be combined into a central collection hub called the ODNI.  Everyone with responsibility for “national security” could access the ODNI material. Essentially and presumably, post 9-11 nothing like jihadists practicing flying airplanes would be missed again; at least that was the intent.

The weird part is that because the DNI was immediately weaponized, the office has never functioned to the purpose of its intent.

No one truly knows what the office possibilities consist of because no one has ever seen anyone try to functionally control the hub.  If you think I’m joking about the intent of Obama and John Brennan using the DNI watch this video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director, this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place.

.

For the intents of this outline the takeaway is how the DNI office has never been used for good.  However, in a strategic way, that can be used to our advantage if you are talking about leveraging silos against each other.

Example:  The DNI can assemble material from any silo.  Meaning the DNI can reach into any IC silo and extract anything they want.  Under the original authorities given to the DNI, this authority exists.  So, let’s spread the wings on this office and do exactly what it is permitted to do, only this time extract for the purpose of showing the President what is happening in every silo.

In essence, the DNI *CAN BE* deployed like a super strong cross-silo inspector general’s office.  Force the other IC silos to comply with the demands of the DNI.  This has never been done. But the DNI has this unique power.

The DNI can make the FBI, DOJ, DOJ-NSD, DoD, DoS and CIA provide anything and everything they demand.  Instead of the other silos using blocks and threats against the office of the President, use the authority of the DNI to get them without confrontation.   Then use the DNI to declassify the documents (if requested by potus), instead of the originating silo.

Can you see how the DNI office can be repurposed to be a seriously strong weapon in the toolbox of the President, against the schemes of those inside the various IC silos.  The DNI becomes much more important than the CIA Director, NSA Director, FBI Director, Attorney General, etc, because the DNI can just show up and say, “give me this.”  That’s the whole functional purpose of the DNI office that has never been exerted; let’s flippin’ use it.

Let’s use the office of the DNI as the central information hub that takes information from inside the corrupt silos, then provides that information to the President who puts sunlight upon it.  Each corrupt silo penetrated with disinfectant.  This could begin a process to pull down the shadow operations and let the American public see what has been happening inside our IC apparatus.

To accomplish this approach the National Security Advisor to the President (NSA), would be the person who tells the DNI exactly what they are looking for.

How does the NSA know what to look for?  Because the National Security Advisor is the head of the National Security Council (NSC).

Now you see why I say put the strategic scruffy people like Mike Flynn, Kash Patel, etc etc in a stripped down NSC.

Let the NSC monitor the silos with specific intent, then provide Trump’s NatSec Advisor with details on what appears to be happening and where.   With the approval of the President, the NSA then turns to the DNI and says, “POTUS wants this, go get this.”

Raw, unfiltered, unredacted information.   The silo administrators end up in a fight with the ODNI, not the office of President Trump.  President Trump then uses the power of his office to support the demands of the DNI.

Under this approach the DNI has a lot more power; yet funnily, it’s power they already have – yet have never utilized.

Unfortunately, the DNI needs to be confirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee – so, this factors into who could achieve the position.  [NOTE: Ric Grenell is too valuable in another position.]  John Ratcliffe might be a possibility, but I’m not sure he would be strong enough to go up against the system he knows well (and on a character issue he’s bff’s with Trey Gowdy).

Preferably we really want an outsider in this role, yet any true outsider is going to face massive scrutiny getting through the nomination filter.

My gut tells me that Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey might be a strong candidate, and as DNI he can build on his reputation for confronting DHS manipulation.

Missouri AG Andrew Bailey exposed the DHS manipulation of social media and has pushed the envelope against the Deep State/Lawfare attacks against Donald Trump.  Bailey has used the power of his office for good purposes, and that provides me with cautious optimism he could do the same at a federal level in the position of Director of National Intelligence.

♦ The next position to outline be a combination. The Secretary of State and the CIA Director.

The U.S State Dept and CIA operation is like a restaurant. The Dept of State is the front of the restaurant, with the Secretary as the Maitre D’. The CIA is the back of the restaurant, the kitchen. The Director is the Chef.  The consulates are the wait staff. USAID are the food runners. The Dept of Defense are the bus boys. Ukraine is a big tipper.]

Only a small number of Americans understand the relationship between the U.S. State Dept (DoS) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).  However, as more people understand how these two agencies operate, then people have a much more accurate context for how both agencies are viewed by the rest of the world.

Almost every deployed CIA operative has a cover profile within the State Dept.  The foreign service missions of the DoS and CIA are so enmeshed there is literally no way to separate the functions of their agencies. [Go back to the Benghazi Attack for an operational reference] CIA/DoS have to be viewed through the prism of connection.

To better understand this concept, I use the following metaphor:

♦ The U.S State Dept and CIA operation is like a restaurant. The Dept of State is the front of the restaurant, with the Secretary as the Maitre D’. The CIA is the back of the restaurant, the kitchen. The Director is the Chef.  The consulates are the wait staff. USAID are the food runners. The Dept of Defense are the bus boys.

The tables and chairs are assigned by the Maitre D’ according to their value.  Countries viewed as more important get the best tables.  The menus offered to each nation are completely different.  Israel has a table in the kitchen.  To get the best experience, tips (bribes) are required for everyone, from the parking valets outside, to the sommelier, to the server.   Currently, Ukraine is the biggest tipper.

On the oversight aspect the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the control mechanism to approve/install the Secretary of State. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is the control mechanism to approve/install the CIA Director.  Everything therein and thereafter is a system of pretending it is something else.

The Dept of State (DoS) is so large there’s no way of addressing the inherent institutional corruption.  The Secretary of State can control a small portion of DoS operations, but that’s usually only the geopolitical stuff we see discussed on television, in print media or in press conferences.  The business functions of the DoS take place within a network of carefully guarded silos.

Perhaps, the first step in advancing an American-First policy, is to just stop the various administrative offices within the Dept of State from doing anything, literally anything.  The challenge within DoS is massive, complex and complicated.  I’m genuinely not sure what the Executive Branch mechanism is to do it, but we need to close the restaurant for a few months and do a deep cleaning.

On the back of the operation is the kitchen, the CIA.

It is a popular DC sentiment to say the CIA Director is the most powerful person within the intelligence apparatus.  As the viewpoint is shared, it is the established secrecy within the mandate of the institution that gives them power.

Essentially, the CIA was created to be a place where dark arts (lying, spying, manipulation, tradecraft) would be approved and used at the discretion of the institutional leadership.  As a consequence, there is no check on the CIA operational agenda. They are permitted by function and mandate, to lie to everyone about what they are doing; this includes the Office of the President.

Because they are essentially an unchecked intelligence silo within a government that has allowed the institution to hold unilateral power and self-policing, the CIA has a power within the apparatus unlike any other member.

Inside the business model of foreign policy as a restaurant, the CIA are in control of the kitchen.

Together the DoS/CIA operate a shadow government, looking out for their best interest while generating power through large multinational institutions (corporations), spy agencies (5-eyes), banks, non-governmental agencies (NGAs) and various influence operations.

The activity of the CIA/DoS construct takes place regardless of who is president.  Any hope of busting up this corrupt system is going to take a lot of strategic pounding while confronting the supportive element within the Senate at the same time. [Note this is why repealing the 17th amendment would make the work infinitely easier – and also why the 17th amendment was created by banking interests.]

When you stand back and look at the challenge of confronting the DoS and CIA, you can easily see why the Emissary was the first most important person I noted.  If you are going to confront the domestic corruption within the DoS, you need the Emissary as a contact for specific foreign government leaders.

Under my approach, the interim foreign policy of the USA shifts away from Foggy Bottom and directly back to the White House.   This provides space to destroy the system through domestic confrontation.

A new State Dept Secretary is going to have to push intensely and forcefully to support the goals of President Trump while understanding the internal effort is going to be much less glamorous, but historically far more important.

♦ The Secretary of State needs to have an understanding of the scale of the system underneath them, a comprehensive understanding of the opposition they will face from within that system, and the fortitude to keep playing whac-a-mole until the heads of the sub-silos are slowly removed.  The person in this role needs to be a ‘high energy, smart, multitasker.��   The odds are all against them.

♦ The CIA Director needs the same type of understanding, and an impenetrable ability to put the USA interests above the interests of anyone else who has a table in the kitchen. Given the relationships within the aligned Western Intelligence Services, this is going to be a nerve-wracking challenge.  As much as I want the CIA candidate to know the scale of the problem they will face, in one important way it might be more beneficial if the person didn’t know the scale of opposition they will face.   This is a dark place.

This is a four-year plunge into one of the most corrupt enterprises at the heart of the DC swamp.  The DoS/CIA are the guards of the drain.  The drain is underneath decades of bile, silt, muck, scum, filth and horrible stuff.

Our candidates for these jobs need to be high-energy and full of equal parts determination, fortitude, piss and vinegar.

My recommendations are pictured below:

Continuing our discussion around the challenge to Trump staffing in 2025, we now shift focus to the FBI Director, Deputy Director and Chief Legal Counsel positions.

However, in order to appropriately discuss this critical silo, it becomes very important for everyone to understand the current status of the FBI as the organization has self-identified.

For those who followed the 2016 campaign of President Trump and then watched the 2017 attacks organized by the DOJ and FBI toward the incoming Trump administration, you may agree with me that a complete disassembly of the FBI is now warranted. I will walk through the process, but first it is important to understand just how bad the corruption has become:

RECAP: The FBI relationship with Antifa is exactly what we have previously discussed on these pages.  There is no way for Antifa to operate as a domestic extremist group, without the expressed support and willful blindness of the FBI.  Quite simply if the FBI wanted to stop the violent and extremist activity of Antifa, they could do that easily.

Remember, the objective of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago was to resecure what they perceived as physical evidence President Trump controlled showing how the DOJ and FBI action in 2016 was targeting him using the power of their law enforcement and intelligence agencies.   In the background, the origination of all the DOJ/FBI/IC targeting goes back to the ’15/’16 FBI exploitation of the NSA database; this is not a contested discussion issue – it’s just continually forgotten.

The FBI was using their access to the NSA metadata of all Americans, to conduct surveillance on political candidates that might be a threat to the power structures that exploited the secrets within the electronic records of all Americans.  The FBI was, almost certainly still is, conducting domestic surveillance and tracking Americans just like the German Stasi or Soviet KGB.  It’s still happening, but we are not supposed to talk about it, or something.

The raid on Mar-a-Lago, just like the Robert Mueller investigation, was part of a long standing coverup operation.  The FBI was looking for what Trump took with him as evidence of the weaponized system that targeted him.  The FBI wanted that back.  The FBI was willing to use deadly force to get it back if that’s what it took.

Using the FBI to filter security clearances – [Fourth Branch of Govt]

A History of FBI Weaponization – [SEE HERE]

The modern FBI is the police agency of a weaponized U.S government, with a direct and purposeful mandate to keep the American people under control through strict surveillance and a violent police state.

Understand and accept this with great seriousness, there are no honorable “rank and file” inside this organization.

Every member of the FBI is a participant in the weaponization of power and government. The members are jackboots recruited from ideological college campuses for exactly the purpose of supporting a Stasi-like police state.

Through the past several years, we have discovered how the FBI worked inside Twitter, Facebook and social media to control information, remove content and manipulate opinion on behalf of the U.S. government – all activity political.

We have also learned the FBI took active measures to suppress information about the Hunter Biden laptop and control any negative consequences for the Biden regime – again, political.  These are not disputed realities.

The U.S. Dept of Justice and FBI are now political institutions that have abandoned their originating mission in order to become the domestic equivalent of the Soviet-era FSB. Their joint targeting mechanisms have been redesigned to support the interests of corrupt DC politicians, specifically the interests of Democrats.

It was in June 2022, when Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter [pdf HERE] to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, notifying them of whistleblower allegations from within the FBI that senior leadership in both Main Justice and FBI are involved in a coordinated effort to cover up criminal activity related to Hunter Biden.

The whistleblower allegations, in combination with the documented history of DOJ and FBI misconduct, culminate in Senator Grassley stating:

“If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are – and have been – institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law. Attorney General Garland and Director Wray, simply put, based on the allegations that I’ve received from numerous whistleblowers, you have systemic and existential problems within your agencies.” (LINK)

Grassley was admitting what has been visible for years.

Senator Grassley is telling the corrupt DOJ-FBI leadership that people in the organizations are outlining the detailed behavior of their corrupt leadership.  However, with zero oversight involved, and with Democrats in charge of all committees that would be responsible for such oversight, and with institutional media in alignment and agreement with the corrupt institutional intents of the DOJ/FBI, the frustrating question becomes, “and“?

I mean, who are we kidding?  If Republicans were in charge of the Senate Judiciary, Reform/Oversight, or Intelligence committees, do we really believe that anything would be different?   Before responding to that cynicism, remind yourself, they were for four years, January 2015 through January 2019, Republicans in charge of oversight.

It was exactly when Republicans were in charge of Main Justice and FBI oversight that Main Justice and FBI were targeting political candidate Donald Trump.

In July 2021, the DOJ OIG produced an absolutely damning Inspector General investigation of FBI conduct in the rape and sexual assault of U.S. Gymnasts, revealing how FBI agents facilitated Nassar’s sex crimes by taking no action despite numerous witness statements to them.

Worse yet, the FBI never reported the sexual assaults to local law enforcement… and to top it off, the rank and vile FBI agents lied during the investigation of their conduct, and the DOJ under AG Bill Barr, and now under AG Merrick Garland, refused to prosecute the FBI liars.

The entire IG report [Must Read pdf Here] reveals layer-upon-layer of FBI wrongdoing, misconduct and false statements in an effort to cover up their activity when the internal investigation of their conduct began.  This report is a total condemnation of the FBI rank and file.  It really is quite stunning.

BACKGROUND on FBI –  As we discovered in January of 2023, the FBI was fully aware of the terrorist who was planning to shoot the synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, and yet they did nothing.

The FBI knowledge of the shooter, Malik Faisal Akram, who was known as Faisal Akram, was confirmed by The Daily Mail. Akram ranted, prior to his travel to the U.S, that he wished he had died in the 9/11 terror attacks. He was a regular visitor to Pakistan, and reportedly a member of the Tablighi Jamaat group set up to ‘purify’ Islam. To say the U.S. intelligence system knew Faisal Akram would be an understatement.

The FBI was also fully aware of the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, before they executed their plot.  The FBI took no action.  The Russian police twice warned the FBI that the Tsarnaev brothers were going to carry out a domestic terrorist attack on the USA, the FBI did nothing.

The FBI knew about the San Bernardino terrorists, specifically Tashfeen Malik, and were monitoring her phone calls and communications before her and Syed Farook executed their attack killing 14 people and leaving 22 others seriously injured.  The FBI took no action.

The FBI knew Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad Alissa before he executed his attack.  The FBI took no action.

The FBI knew in advance of the Pulse Nightclub shooter (Omar Mateen) and were tipped off by the local sheriff. The FBI knew in advance of the San Bernardino Terrorists (Tashfeen Malik). The FBI knew in advance of the Boston Marathon Bombers (the Tsarnaev brothers) tipped off by Russians.  The FBI knew in advance of the Parkland High School shooter (Nikolas Cruz). The FBI knew in advance of the Fort Hood shooter (Nidal Hasan), and the FBI knew in advance of Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad al-Aliwi Alissa.  The FBI took no action.

The case of the first recorded ISIS attack on U.S. soil was in Garland, Texas in 2015.

The FBI not only knew the shooters (Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi) in advance, BUT the FBI ALSO took the shooters to the venue and were standing only a few yards away when Simpson and Soofi opened fire.  Yes, you read that correctly – the FBI took the terrorists to the event and then watched it unfold.  “An FBI trainer suggested in an interview with “60 Minutes” that, had the attack been bigger, the agency’s numerous ties to the shooter would have led to a congressional investigation.”

Remember, shortly before the 2018 mid-term election, when Ceasar Syoc – a man living in his van – was caught sending “energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction”, or what FBI Director Christopher Wray called “not hoax devices”?

Remember how sketchy everything about that was, including the child-like perpetrator telling a judge later that he was trying to walk back his guilty plea, because he was tricked into signing a confession for a crime he did not create.

Or more recently, the goofball plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer that involved 18 suspects, twelve of them actually working for the FBI as the plot was hatched?  And we cannot forget the January 6th. DC protest turned insurrection effort, which is clearly looking like an FBI inspired and coordinated effort; and unlike Syoc, despite the numerous CCTV cameras and resources in the area, they cannot find who placed the pipe-bombs?

Have we forgotten the Atlanta “Olympic Park Bombing”, and the FBI intentionally setting up transparently innocent, Richard Jewel?

What about the FBI failing to investigate the assassination of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi.  Did we forget when Robert Mueller’s FBI waited 19 days after the Benghazi attack before showing up at the compound?….  Journalists from the USA were walking around the compound after 48 hours, but it took the FBI another two weeks before the first investigator arrived…. All evidence long destroyed.

Then, there’s the entirety of the FBI conduct in “Spygate”, the demonstrably evident FBI operation to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump using their investigative authorities; and the downstream consequences of a massive institutional effort to cover up one of the biggest justice department scandals in the history of our nation.   The original effort against Donald Trump used massive resources from the DOJ and FBI.  Heck, the coverup operation using the Mueller/Weissmann special counsel used more than 50 investigative FBI agents alone.

And of course, the FBI still had 13 extra agents available to rush to a NASCAR racetrack to investigate a garage door pull-down rope that might have been perceived as a noose; but the serial rape of hundreds of teenage girls, eh, not-so-much effort – even when they are standing in front of the FBI begging for help.

[At this point, I am increasingly convinced by evidence there are elements within the FBI that are enablers involved in sex trafficking, human smuggling, abduction, counterfeiting and money laundering as part of their operational mission.]

The FBI didn’t make a mistake or drop the proverbial ball in the Olympic gymnast case, they intentionally and specifically maintained the sexual exploitation of teenage girls by doing absolutely nothing with the complaints they received.   This is not misconduct, this is purposeful.

Then, as if to apply salt to the open wound of severe FBI politicization, what did the FBI do with the Hunter Biden laptop?

[Notice I’ve set the issue of the disappearing Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner laptop –in the known custody of the FBI– over there in the corner, next to missing investigation of the Awan brothers.]

More recently, the FBI executed a search warrant on the home and office of Project Veritas and the founder James O’Keefe.  While the raid was taking place, a New York Times reporter called O’Keefe to ask him about his thoughts on getting raided. The same New York Times journalist, a few days later, then begins writing about the confidential attorney-client privileged information illegally retrieved then leaked by the FBI during their raid.

♦My point is this…

What the Federal Security Service (FSB) is to the internal security of the Russian state, so too is the FBI in performing the same function for the U.S. federal government.

The FBI is a U.S. version of the Russian “State Police”; and the FBI is deployed -almost exclusively- to attack domestic enemies of those who control government, while they protect the interests of the U.S. Fourth Branch of Government.  That is the clear and accurate domestic prism to contextualize their perceived mission: “domestic violent extremists pose the greatest threat” to their objective.

Put another way, “We The People”, who fight against government abuse and usurpation, are the FBI’s actual and literal enemy.

Let me be very clear with another brutally obvious example.  Antifa could not exist as an organization, capable to organize and carry out violent attacks against their targets, without the full support of the FBI.   If the FBI wanted to arrest members of Antifa, who are actually conducting violence, they could do it easily – with little effort.

It is the absence of any action, by the FBI toward Antifa, that tells us the FBI is enabling that violent extremist behavior to continue.  Once you accept that transparent point of truth, then you realize the FBI definition of domestic violent extremism is something else entirely.

The FBI is not a law enforcement or investigative division of the U.S. Department of Justice.  The FBI is a political weapon of a larger institution that is now focused almost entirely toward supporting a radical communist agenda to destroy civil society in the United States.

The FBI set up the operation in Michigan to give the illusion that domestic threats were attempting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, everything about the events were an FBI construct.   The same thing with the January 6th events in Washington DC and the pipe bombs.  These are domestic FBI operations.  Think about the precarious nature of what this type of activity indicates.

The current mission of the FBI appears to be preserving and protecting institutional power by protecting the administration of Joe Biden.

Anyone who continues to push this insufferable and fraudulent “honorable FBI rank and file talking point”, is, at this point in history, willfully and purposefully operating to deceive the American people on behalf of government interests who are intent on destroying us.

It is not a difference of opinion any longer.  Personally, I have lost the ability to sit comfortably or intellectually with anyone who pushes or accepts the ‘mistakes are made’ nonsense.  The FBI is not making mistakes, they are doing well what is important to them.

To me, it comes down to a simple matter of accepting what is continually staring us in the face.

Additionally, as we watched the outcome of the Michael Sussmann trial, we should never lose sight of the fact that 40 FBI agents were involved in the Mueller-Weissmann probe to investigate the fraudulent construct created by Hillary Clinton and crew.  40 agents? And, according to the outcome of the Sussmann trial, the FBI knew it was all a ruse.

This is why and how the Fourth Branch of U.S. Government is now the superseding apparatus above all other branches.  {GO DEEP} This is why and how Barack Obama, John Brennan and Eric Holder created it, cemented it, and made it impervious to any effort to remove it.

Remember when Henry Cuellar was critical of the Biden administration open border policies that were hurting his Texas district?  Less than a month after going public with his criticisms, the FBI raids on his home and office began.  The same FBI that raided the home of James O’Keefe while coordinating their search with the New York Times.

The Fourth Branch of Government is corrupt; heck, the J6 committee was defending the corrupt FBI, participating with the corrupt FBI, selling a joint J6 operation that involved the FBI.  The corrupt media have aligned with the corrupt FBI, and the justice institutions in/around this legal framework are self-aware and fully autonomous.

As the Twitter files show, the DOJ and FBI, through the authority of DHS, now have the ability to monitor every single aspect of every life that might seek to challenge or destroy the corrupt system.

In essence, Skynet -the ultimate end game of political surveillance and targeting outlined by Edward Snowden- has been activated.  We the People are the enemy of the state.

Jackboots are very real, and they are wearing FBI logos on their shirts.

♦ The Federal Bureau of Investigation – Arguably the FBI is the key agency within the U.S. government that has provided the most discussion since the agency first targeted presidential candidate Donald Trump in 2015/2016.

The FBI is without doubt the one agency I have spent the most time researching in the past decade; in part due to the researched corruption within it, and in part due to stunning revelations discovered about the way it operates.

With background context previously shared, my goal is to outline an aspect within the silo that few really understand.

This outline is extremely challenging without context.  Some of the questions people have about the agency will hopefully be answered, and my hope is everyone who reads will have new context.

Let’s start with a simple question: How is it the FBI can botch so many openly problematic investigative issues like terrorist attacks, and yet simultaneously spend so much time investigating issues that seemingly have little or no value?

In essence, how does the FBI miss so much, yet have time for things that seem openly political?

The answer to that question took a long time to understand, it’s much more than just institutional corruption.

The FBI as an institution has a modern operational mission that is different from what is commonly thought to exist.  The reality of the modern FBI mission consists of prioritizing their work based on the interests of Washington DC, and ONLY the interests of Washington DC.

If a subject can be defined as a priority for the system of government in Washington DC, then that subject is the targeting priority for the FBI.  It does not matter what priority is assigned by any outside interest on the issue; nor does it matter what level of importance exists from the actual threat itself.

Example.  The FBI misses terrorist threats, because the FBI -as a totally siloed agency- is not informed of the threat from DC.  If a citizen, group, or outside agency reports a potential risk it is not investigated.  This surfaces in everything from the Boston Marathon bombers to the Parkland shooter, to U.S. gymnasts being sexually assaulted.   If the “threat” defined is not a threat to DC interests, then the threat is not pursued by the FBI.

The FBI only investigates threats or subjects of interest that stem from origination in Washington DC.  Meaning if the DC system is threatened by the subject, that subject gets investigated.  If the DC system does not trigger the notification, the FBI does not investigate it.

In essence the FBI only investigates threats as they are defined by other agencies, or silos, within Washington DC.  The FBI is the internal agency that protects the DC system.  This is a bastardized concept, a completely screwed up institutional mission, that stems from within the term “the continuation of government.”

A local or state issue, is not a priority for the FBI, even if the issue is a major threat to the domestic tranquility…. UNLESS, that issue, person or group threatens the stakeholders within the DC political system.  This manifests openly by the inability of citizens to provide information that triggers action by the FBI.

The FBI only responds to investigative actions requested by agencies within Washington DC.  Typically, Main Justice or the DOJ is the source of those originating requests; however, sometimes the executive or legislative branch can trigger the FBI action, if the identified threat has the potential to upset political operations within Washington DC.

Armed with empirical, undeniable evidence of corrupt activity, I was prepared to engage the FBI when I was intercepted by a person who warned me about this operational mission.  It was from that point that I really began to understand the FBI as a silo within the system that is entirely predicated on self-preservation.

If a person brings a federal corruption issue to the FBI (like evidence of corrupt activity), they will end up being a target of the FBI because the evidence itself is likely adverse to one or more interests within DC.   There are many reference examples, but two you will likely know are James O’Keefe (Ashley Biden diary) and/or voter fraud (writ large, with Michigan as a great example).

Because the Biden Diary threatened the DC government interest, O’Keefe quickly became a target.  Because voter fraud in Michigan threatened the DC government interest, the FBI stepped in to cover it up.  You can say the same for the Awan brothers, the Huma Abedin laptop, the Clinton classified emails and many more.

The FBI has two ways to protect the interests of DC: (1) Defend by investigating the accuser, evidence holder, or person who raises the issue.  (2) Defend by non-investigation of the subject matter (Olympic Gymnasts, Epstein, etc).  Again, if the institutional interests within DC are threatened by the subject matter, the objective of the FBI is to defend those institutional interests.

The FBI is not a federal investigative agency with a mission to serve and protect the people of the United States.  The FBI is a federal investigative agency with a mission to protect the institutional interests of Washington DC.  Once you understand this process with clarity then everything the FBI does and does not investigate, makes sense.

This operational mission of the FBI explains why when a citizen brings an issue to the FBI, the citizen is more than likely going to end up as a target.  This reality is key to understanding the disparity between what people perceive as the FBI mission, and what the ACTUAL mission is.

This is not some off-the-cuff disparagement or conspiracy theory; this is the fact-based reality of how the FBI works.  Even in my own discussions with John Durham’s FBI investigators, they openly admitted how their operational mission does not permit them to entertain any evidence of corruption or wrongdoing within government.

When you understand how it works, then you start to realize the futility of expecting any investigative outcome from the FBI toward anything that does not threaten Washington DC.  Protecting the DC system IS the goal, the priority, the operational mission; nothing more.   Does the FBI inability to track the J6 pipe-bomber make more sense now?   There are a tremendous number of examples.

The various FBI offices distributed around the nation are essentially interception venues, constantly on the lookout to protect the interests of DC.  If an issue surfaces that could potentially put the administrative state, or any actor therein at risk, the FBI is far more likely to intercede, intercept and manage away the issue.

The FBI are essentially investigative managers; they are not concerned with fraud or criminal wrongdoing when/if that fraud or corruption might put a part of the DC system at risk.  Instead, the FBI will take control of the problem and throw their investigative blanket over it (Ex. Hunter Biden laptop, as given by the computer repair shop).  The non-pretending people within the FBI will admit this, as will just about anyone who has ever had experience reaching out to the FBI for investigative assistance.

Once you take this context and apply it to examples you can reference, then suddenly everything the FBI does and does not do, makes sense.  Every contradiction, and I do mean each example that might be pulled into the conversation as a reference point, makes sense from the reality of this perspective.  The raid on Mar-a-Lago and the targeting of President Trump is another brutally obvious example.

Many voices have recently started calling for the elimination of the FBI as a result of controversies that surround this factual mission priority.  Those voices are not wrong; in fact, there is no way to reform the FBI as an investigative agency, because the mission of the agency is the opposite of what it should be.

The FSB is known to protect the interests of the Russian government; this is accepted and no longer arguable.  However, the same purpose is true with the USA and the FBI relationship toward government.  Unfortunately, the system of government that benefits from this protection is never going to willingly remove their guards.

The last point on this issue is even more alarming.  Only a handful of people within Washington DC will admit the truth behind the FBI mission.

With this in mind, who should be the FBI Director, Deputy Director and Chief Legal Counsel for a President Trump administration.

If the goal is to begin the process to remove the institution, it is going to take a massive amount of public education to get this level of support in place.  Removing this one agency silo is going to take up a lot of time by senior members of the Trump administration.

FBI Director: Clay Higgins

Deputy FBI Director: Kris Kobach

FBI Chief Legal Counsel: Tony Buzbee

♦ The Department of Justice – Now we turn our attention toward Main Justice, the DOJ in DC.

Main Justice works closely with the FBI on what is loosely termed federal “law and order.”   There are several positions within the DOJ that are familiar as a result of the modern weaponization that took place.

As an institution, Main Justice is now almost exclusively a Lawfare targeting mechanism.

The Dept of Justice unilaterally focuses all criminal investigative resources against the political enemies of the Administrative State.

This is not to say Republicans are targets, because often the republicans are beneficiaries of the targeting operation.  Think about the example of Main Justice working with the IRS to target the Tea Party groups in 2010 and 2011.

The Republicans were much more opposed to the Tea Party than the Democrats were.  The professional republican apparatus was furious about the primary victories of the Tea Party, and subsequently benefitted from the DOJ targeting of the various patriot movements.

FBI HQ left, Main Justice HQ right

Main Justice targets individuals, organizations and systems that government officials and politicians determine are a threat to the power structure.  The Intelligence Community use their ability to conduct electronic surveillance to discover evidence against their targets.  The IC then feeds the evidence to Main Justice giving them the targeting coordinates.  The DOJ takes action based on the information from the IC, often using the FBI as the enforcement mechanism.

The entire structure of Main Justice as an institution is corrupt, top to bottom.  Much like the FBI, there is no agency, office, or subsidiary set of personnel within the DOJ that is not compromised by the modern mission of the organization.  This is a critical point to accept, because if it is not accepted then we repeat the mistakes of thinking an Attorney General alone can correct the problem. They cannot.

Within the DOJ there are several divisions that must be addressed simultaneously if any effort to take it down to brass tacks is going to succeed.  This cannot be a delicate surgical approach, the effort to remove the corrupt lesion will need chainsaws not scalpels.  The fine surgical details and cleaning will be for the next administration.

The interior silos each have an important role, and they include: (1) the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), (2) the DOJ Civil Rights Division, (3) the DOJ-Community Relations Service (DOJ-CRS), and (4) the DOJ Inspector General’s Office.    These are the four key agencies within the larger Main Justice system that must be addressed from DC.

Of those FOUR AGENCIES, the single most important one is the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).  This is the interior silo that was corrupted from its origin and remained intentionally without Inspector General oversight until 2017.

When we think of the common Lawfare targeting the enemies of the Deep State like Donald Trump, that’s the core purpose of the DOJ-NSD.

DOJ-NSD: […] ” The National Security Division (NSD) was created in March 2006 by the USA PATRIOT Reauthorization and Improvement Act (Pub. L. No. 109-177). The creation of the NSD consolidated the Justice Department’s primary national security operations: the former Office of Intelligence Policy and Review and the Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence and Export Control Sections of the Criminal Division. The new Office of Law and Policy and the Executive Office, as well as the Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism (which previously operated out of the Criminal Division) complete the NSD. The NSD commenced operations in September 2006 upon the swearing in of the first Assistant Attorney General for National Security.” (link)

The DOJ-NSD hides behind the justification of “national security” to cloud their activity.  In many ways the DOJ-NSD and the CIA have the same cover story that allows them virtually omnipotent power.

The President has previously been hamstrung by the claimed importance and power of agencies under the guise of national security.  As you can see from the origin, the Legislative Branch created the beast then cowered away from oversight.  The worst outcome stemmed from the Judicial Branch who historically deferred to the national security apparatus.

To understand the dynamic with the Judicial Branch it is worth looking at the outcome of the DOJ-NSD targeting President Trump on the issue of classified records.  Check the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals framing.

As you can see the DOJ-NSD knows how to use “national security” as a sword and a shield.  This is essentially the issue now created by the DOJ-NSD targeting President Trump.

With the Legislative Branch compromised by their own creation, and with the Judicial Branch stuck inside an old paradigm of “national security” you can see how confronting the DOJ-NSD can only come from one place, THE OVAL OFFICE.

The President of the United States, hopefully Donald J Trump, is going to have to do what the other branches have failed to do, take apart the DOJ-NSD and remove all the functions of Main Justice to their pre-Patriot Act status.  This is not going to be easy and will take a very specific type of person as U.S. Attorney General who both understands the issue and can, more importantly, articulate the problem to the larger American public.

So, we have some context for the positions that will be important.  We need:

♦ An Attorney General (AG);

♦ A Deputy Attorney General (DAG);

♦ An Asst Deputy AG in charge of the NSD;

♦ An Asst Deputy AG in charge of the Civil Rights Division.

♦ And we need a key person in charge of the ultra-secretive DOJ Community Relations Service.

We need more, but these are the most critical positions to cover – AND REMEMBER, not a single person who has ever worked in Main Justice should ever be considered a candidate for any leadership position in 2025.   If they worked in the corrupt DOJ system, they are corrupt – I do not care what capacity they worked in it before.

♦ The AG needs to be ultra clean with a spine of steel and a laser focus.  The AG needs to totally understand the goals and objectives, without being told what the goals and objectives are.  The AG needs to be independent, stable, strategic, brutally honest and keenly confident in his/her communication style with the attack media.

President Trump cannot spend exhaustive time instructing the AG on critical priorities.  The AG needs to operate with skill, focus and self-motivated energy.   The AG will be the focus of the Lawfare crew for removal/recusal. (Weissmann, McCord, Eisen, etc.)

♦ The Deputy AG needs to be intensely capable to stay on task with minimal supervision.  The DAG is the git-r’-done person, no excuses, no apologies, no explanations.  Raw, brutal, cold, quiet and determined.  The DAG needs eyes of a mouse and ears of an elephant.  The DAG needs to be a sponge, with total loyalty to the mission.  The DAG also needs to be the bridge to the FBI.

♦ The Asst DAG in charge of the NSD will be walking into the heart of Obama/Holder’s created snake pit.  This DOJ-NSD position covers Foreign Agent Registration Act violations (targeting) as well as the weaponized FISA constructs.  The person put into this silo needs to completely understand the dynamic of the DOJ-NSD as the source of the most weaponized aspects.

♦ The Asst DAG in charge of the Civil Rights Division will be critical for all elements of election reform.  The ADAG-CRD is going to be attacked, called racist and blasted by the Lawfare operatives.   The Civil Rights Division DAG will be targeted by Marc Elias and hundreds of activist lawyers inside every aligned non-governmental agency who depends on the DOJ for enforcement and support.

♦ The person in charge of the Community Relations Service will need to head-off the FBI constructs and false flag attacks targeting the Trump administration.  The CRS leadership will need to protect all of the DOJ team from the Antifa/BLM efforts as they are manufactured by the FBI silo operators.

Potential candidates:

♦ Attorney General – Ken Paxton (TX)

♦ Deputy AG – Jeff Landry (LA)

♦ Deputy AG NSD – Sidney Powell

♦ Deputy AG Civil Rights Division – Byron Donalds

♦ Community Relations Service – Vivek Ramaswamy

 

~ SUPPORT CTH HERE ~

Posted in 2025 - Term 2, Uncategorized

Share

more

Subscribe

{}[+]

200 COMMENTS

Charles Stephens

October 25, 2024 11:14 am

One point of concern about Higgins. He’s been married 4 times and has a potentially messy personal life. Interestingly, wiki has edits on both him and Kobach over the last twenty days. Maybe to lay the groundwork for attacks? Lawfare minions will waste little time after the election and immediately start the personal destruction process to kill off as many qualified candidates as possible. Maybe, we should be attacking them. Maybe developing news info on who will be liable under RICO statutes for some of the chaos they have caused. Who will lead the investigation into Lawfare, little Benjy Wittes, Weissman, McCord, etc. Make them have to pay for their OWN lawyers for a change…

1

Reply

Ken

October 25, 2024 11:21 am

I like Dr. Ben Carson but I’m concerned that he answered Tucker Carlson wrong about what our worst health crisis is. As I recall, he said “obesity” but that’s only a side effect of the real crisis which is the poisoning of our food supply by ultra-processing with chemicals, sugars and seed oils. For a fleeting moment I thought he might be owned. But no, he couldn’t be.

0

Reply

Steve

October 25, 2024 11:22 am

Great insight Sundance. I agree 100% with these suggestions. NOW, if only Trump will pick them is the question. We all have to remember of the HORRIBLE picks he made after the 2016 election, and how many of them openly worked against him. I really hope he has learned from that and only choose the likes of these that Sundance suggests. LEAVE THE POLITICIANS OUT of the suggestion duty.

0

Reply

gulfaddict

October 25, 2024 11:22 am

Instead of worrying about the reach and corruption of the institutions CIA, FBI, DOJ, and their many tentacles and relying on Senate approval. Go after their life blood….Patriot act and the current tax system mafia.. the IRS. This is where the cabal has their power and control rooted.

1

Reply

Big Al Brown

October 25, 2024 11:43 am

Reply to  gulfaddict

Yes, first implement a Flat Tax one rate with large personal deduction so it kicks in at about $60K and fire entire IRS.

Then repeal Patriot Act and FISA Court.

0

Reply

Dow40k2024

October 25, 2024 11:53 am

I love reading your stuff Sundance and thank you, thank you, thanks again! Pass this along to all.

0

Reply

Ted

October 25, 2024 11:56 am

Hopefully PDJT and his family read this to at least give them food for thought.

So many important positions to fill and so many two-faced backstabbers to weed out.

Wondering how many of these people Sundance suggested can get past Senate approval?

0

Reply

« Previous 1 2 3

PRAYER REQUESTS

SUPPORT THE TREEHOUSE

EMAIL SIGN-UP

Click here for e-mail delivery!

“ASHLI” BY JACK CASHILL

CATEGORIES

Categories

Select Category

RECENT COMMENTS

Calbear84 on Trump Staffing 2025

magadonian03 on October 25th – 2024 Presidential Politics – Resistance Day 1376

Life & Liberty on October 25th – 2024 Presidential Politics – Resistance Day 1376

Bewildered but resilient on Friday October 25th – Open Thread

Johnny on October 25th – 2024 Presidential Politics – Resistance Day 1376

RECENT POSTS

October 25th – 2024 Presidential Politics – Resistance Day 1376 October 25, 2024

Friday October 25th – Open Thread October 25, 2024

Trump Staffing 2025 October 24, 2024

President Trump Speaks at Turning Point Action Rally in Las Vegas – 10:00pm EDT Livestream October 24, 2024

Texas AG Ken Paxton Sends Letter of Criminal Referral to DOJ Outlining Act Blue Illegal Campaign Finance Activity October 24, 2024

President Trump MAGA Rally – Tempe, Arizona – 4:00pm EST Livestream October 24, 2024

HISTORICAL CAMPFIRE CONVERSATIONS

Historical Campfire Conversations

Select Month

THE STILL HOUR

“Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.” - Ps 46:10

© 2024 The Conservative Treehouse"

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2024/10/24/trump-staffing-2025/#:~:text=Say%20Hello%3A,The%20Conservative%20Treehouse

[awsomebloggersblog]

Job Opening For CERTIFIED NURSING ASSISTANT I PER DIEM Intuitive Health Services Job title: CERTIFIED NURSING ASSISTANT I PER DIEM Job description: DescriptionUS:NV:Carson City Surgery and Orthopedics UnitPer Diem Variable ShiftAbout Carson Tahoe HealthCTH is a not-for-profit healthcare system with 240 licensed acute care beds, fully accredited by the Center for Improvement in Healthcare Quality (CIHQ). CTH was voted 5th most beautiful hospital in the nation nestled among the foothills of the Sierra Nevada in North Carson City and only a short drive away from world-famous Lake Tahoe & Reno. We serve a population of over 250,000 and feature two hospitals, two urgent cares, an emergent care center, outpatient services and a provider network with 19 regional locations.Summary Under the direction of the department Manager and supervision of an RN, performs a variety of non-professional nursing duties supporting the direct care of patients. This position will also provide continuous observation and monitoring of patients at high risk of causing injury to self or others during their hospital stay. The position safely performs a variety of patient care tasks. QualificationsRequired: Current CNA certification with Nevada State Board of Nursing. Current American Heart Association (AHA) Basic Life Support/Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (BLS) for Healthcare Providers. Preferred: Complete the Non-Violent Crisis Intervention. Top 5 Reasons to Live in Carson City, Nevada Live, work and play in one of the most beautiful regions in the world Enjoy an array of outdoor activities world class skiing, golf, camping, mountain biking, hiking, water skiing, kayaking, hunting and fishing Just next door is Beautiful Lake Tahoe We are minutes from Reno known as the 'biggest little city in the world' - Fine dining, nightlife, shopping and home to the University of Nevada Reno. Family friendly atmosphere with affordable housing & excellent school system Our Benefits No State Income Tax Medical, Dental, Vision, FSA, Telehealth Paid Time Off, Mental Health, and Volunteer Days 100% Vested 401K & Roth with Company Contribution Tuition Reimbursement Referral Bonuses On Site Education & Certification Programs Base Wage Increases for Relevant Advanced Degrees Free Calm App Subscription Apply for the job CERTIFIED NURSING ASSISTANT I PER DIEM At Intuitive Health Services, our goal is to make healthcare better for everyone. We help hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare places find the right doctors, nurses, and other healthcare workers. For over 15 years, we have been doing this important job. We work with places like state hospitals and correctional facilities to make sure they have the best people to take care of patients. We don’t just connect people with jobs; we also support them throughout their journey. We help with things like improving resumes, preparing for interviews, and finding the job that fits best. We work in over 50 different locations and have over 900 professionals who trust us to help them. If you are looking for a job in healthcare, we are here to guide you. If you are a healthcare facility needing to hire someone, we can find the best person for you. Our team is always ready to help, and we believe that by working together, we can make healthcare stronger and better for everyone. If you need to contact us, you can find us at: Address: 520 West Lacey Blvd, Hanford, CA 93230 Email: jobs@intuitivehealthservices.com Phone:+1 (805) 703-3729 We’re here to help you with all your healthcare staffing needs! https://intuitivehealthservices.com/register

[qnewsau]

Time to end religious discrimination in private schools

New Post has been published on https://qnews.com.au/time-to-end-religious-discrimination-in-private-schools/

Time to end religious discrimination in private schools

National LGBTQIA+ rights group Equality Australia has renewed calls for Anthony Albanese to introduce legislation that protects  students and staff in religious schools from discriminaion in line with the commitment that Labor made before the last federal election.

“Labor committed to these reforms before coming to power but discrimination against students and staff is still happening around the country because of gaps in our laws that allow religious schools to play by their own rules,” Equality Australia CEO Anna Brown said earlier today.

“These schools rely on millions of dollars of taxpayer funding every year and it’s not too much to ask that they uphold the same non-discriminatory practices that other government schools and institutions have abided by for decades.” 

Section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) currently allows religious educational institutions to discriminate against staff and students based on their gender, sexual orientation, pregnancy and marital status.

Religious educational institutions can fire or refuse to hire staff, and suspend, expel, refuse to enrol, or disadvantage students, simply because they are gay, trans, pregnant, divorced or unmarried. 

Discrimination by faith groups still happening

Equality Australia, the Independent Education Union and the Australian Law Reform Commission have each documented stories of discrimination still occuring in private education settings.

These include teachers who have been dismissed or refused employment for being gay, marrying a divorcee or becoming pregnant out of wedlock or with the assistance of IVF, students who have been forced out of school or denied leadership positions based on their sexuality, and parents whose children have been denied enrollment because they are trans or because the parents are in a same-sex relationship.  

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Equality Australia (@equalityaustralia)

In the lead up to the 2022 Federal Election, the Australian Labor Party committed to reforming anti-discrimination laws so that religious schools could no longer discriminate against students and staff in these ways, while schools could continue to preference, in good faith, people of the same religion when selecting staff.  

“It’s time for Prime Minister Albanese to introduce the laws he promised at the last election and let the parliament do its job,” Brown said. 

“There is support for these reforms from across the parliament. Only two years ago five Liberal MPs crossed the floor to vote with Labor and the crossbench to support changes to the Sex Discrimination Act and protect trans students.” 

Brown said it was expected that the draft bill would protect LGBTQIA+ students and teachers in religious schools, and offer protections to women and people of faith, ensuring a teacher could not lose their job for falling pregnant outside of marriage, or that a gardener of a different faith could not be fired from an evangelical school. 

“Our laws should be consistent with Australia’s international human rights obligations and reflect who we are as a nation in the 21st century,” Brown said. 

She also cautioned the government against watering down any protections for teachers in religious schools, with almost two-in-five staff employed in private schools, most of which are religiously affiliated. 

“Schools have no business encroaching into the personal lives of teachers when it has absolutely nothing to do with what happens in the classroom,” she said.  

Strong public support for change

Brown said a recent report by the Australian Law Reform Commission found there was strong public support, including among parents and people of faith, for removing special exceptions allowing religious schools to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people and others. 

It also found that the religious ethos of a school could be maintained without exemptions. 

“Religious schools should not have to harm children or punish teachers to uphold their faith. There are wonderful caring teachers around this country who are gay and also of faith and they should not live in fear of losing their jobs because of who they go home to at the end of their working day,” Brown said. 

For the latest LGBTIQA+ Sister Girl and Brother Boy news, entertainment, community stories in Australia, visit qnews.com.au. Check out our latest magazines or find us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube.

[dertaglichedan]

Last year, CTH outlined a four-part series of articles going deep into the background of the DOJ-FBI raid of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, along with the outline into why it was important to them. It doesn’t matter how many different legal angles and Deep State justifications the DOJ attempts to deploy in order to divert away from what took place; the background of who, what, when and why they raided Mar-a-Lago will not change.

In Part One, we outlined the background of the modern Deep State {Go Deep}. In Part Two we outlined the specifics of how President Trump was targeted by political operatives using tools created by the DC system {Go Deep}. In Part Three we outlined how and why President Trump was blocked from releasing documents {Go Deep}. And then finally, as below in Part 4, we assembled the specifics of what documents likely existed in Mar-a-Lago.

It is important to remember, the Presidential Records Act –the presented pretext for the document conflict– is not a criminal statute. An FBI raid cannot be predicated on a document conflict between the National Archives and a former president.

The DOJ-NSD warrant, and the subsequent raid on Mar-a-Lago can only be related to records the U.S. government deems “classified” and material vital to national security interests. Hence, DOJ National Security Division involvement.

In prior outlines, we have exhaustively covered the details of President Trump’s desire to publicly release information about DOJ and FBI conduct in their targeting of him during the fabricated Trump-Russia claims. However, to understand the nature of the documents he may hold, we first review the declassification memo provided by President Trump to the DOJ upon his departure from office.

[wastelandcth]

We’re Going Home - cth

part of nation of two

summary: Petra reminisces on Calum’s first date mistake and how the safety of a car changed her world. Calum thinks of a place to runaway to. 

author’s notes: This was a lot of fluff and me looking out the window while it rained. Enjoy!

warnings: Not much, just two lovestruck fools missing one another.

masterlist || request || previous part || next part

Calum had never been a fan of the rain. It reminded him of early mornings when he'd wake up to the rainstorms outside his window and how the ache in his bones practically begged him to stay in bed and drift off to sleep for a little while longer. The rain was just another disturbance in his life. If it rained, his soccer practice would get canceled and he'd have to walk back home, the rain soaking his clothes and weighing down his backpack. Once the band had taken off, the occasional rainstorm put another sour mood on Calum. Outdoor shows would get canceled or delayed, leaving Calum to stare out of the tour bus window as rain droplets raced to the bottom of the windows. If the rainstorm was severe enough, planes he needed to take would get grounded until the storm passed and he wouldn't catch his connecting flight. The rain also meant that sometimes plans he had that included Calum being outside would end with him soaked and left shivering, his bones aching for warmth and dryness the rain usually scared away. The rain outside of Calum's hotel window filled him with a sadness he couldn't quite explain. Maybe it was the fact that the tour had been taking a toll on his body and that he missed his bed and his mug he always used in the mornings while at home.

Or maybe it was the fact that Petra was showing him the view from whatever restaurant she'd been eating at.

"I'm telling you, the second you've settled back in here at home, I'm taking you here and you're going to eat the best french toast you've ever had," Petra said, her camera showing the Pacific Ocean in all it's vastness.

Calum had never been one for jealousy. But as he watched the blue sky and blue ocean on his screen, his body ached with a want to be there next to the woman he loved. He'd do anything to be sitting next to Petra at a cafe, eating amazing french toast and watching the ocean waves. He would do anything to be next to her, holding her hand and listening to her laugh about the way the birds seem to hover above their table in order to steal a french fry or two. So yes, Calum was jealous.

As Petra looked out at the ocean, from where she'd been sat enjoying a glass of ice tea, she couldn't help but chuckle at herself. She'd been trying to get out more and more these days. With Calum gone, she wouldn't have to worry much about having to stop whenever Calum was spotted by fans and waiting for them to chat for a bit before continuing their errands. She'd gotten used to the dates she'd go on with herself, eventually timing them out so that she'd be able to talk to Calum for at least a few minutes before he'd be whisked off to his next engagement with the band. Their first date had also been close to disastrous, according to Calum who told Petra later on, because of his band's engagements. But Petra had just laughed and assured Calum second chances were worth giving.

Petra had arrived at the coffee shop a few minutes early, wanting to save a secluded table for both her and Calum. She knew who he was, of course, she knew who Calum Hood was, and she assumed he'd want privacy when it came to things like first dates. so arriving a few minutes early to get the table near the back of the coffee shop was just something she'd wanted to do for him. The coffee shop had been one that Petra had only been to once when she'd gotten lost after a wrong turn and had ended up in the neighborhood. The outside of the building was a white brick, reminding Petra a lot of those old western stores in the movies.

The inside of the coffee shop, which had smelled of fresh coffee and pastries, had large lamps overhead, giving the already bright building an even brighter indoors. The dark green tiles and dark wood accents around the inside were calming, feeling like a place where Petra could sit down for hours and read a book. Usually, she'd bring a book with her wherever she went, but she had left her most recent read in the backseat of her car, not expecting to have much time to read while out on a date. She'd be too busy getting to know the man with pretty brown eyes who she knew was talented enough to get anyone he wanted, and yet he still chose to invite her out to coffee.

"So, Petra, what do you think about coffee?" he'd asked over the phone one day.

They'd been doing this for a while now, talking over the phone during the slow moments of the day where each other's company was comfortable. Petra had learned a lot about Calum during the soft voices exchanged over phone calls. She'd learned that his favorite snack at the moment was fruit gummies even if it made him sound childish, which it didn't. She'd learned that he'd been busy writing a new album with his band and that usually meant he'd disappear off the face of the earth for a couple of days when inspiration hit, but he'd always try and send her a picture or funny meme to let her know he was still very much alive. Petra had learned that Calum, although usually quiet and reserved according to himself, could talk for hours about anything that crossed his mind during those moments in their calls.

"I don't think I'm well versed in coffee if I'm honest," Petra had admitted, "I never know what to order whenever I do end up at a coffee shop."

"Well, how about we go out and find your drink? I know a great spot where we can start," Calum said happily, "You up for it?"

"Yeah, that sounds fun, as long as I don't develop a caffeine addiction," she teased and looked over at her calendar, "How about Wednesday?"

"It's a date."

And it was almost a date, except for the fact that Petra had sat at the coffee shop for almost an hour and had yet to see Calum. Sure, LA was known for having horrible traffic and Petra herself had gotten stuck in it while on her way to the shop, but an hour with no text or calls from Calum had just made her cranky and annoyed. She'd ordered a coffee by herself, regretting her choice as soon as the bitter liquid hit her tongue, and had forced herself to finish it before she eventually decided to call the date done and over with. The walk back to her car had been quick, her head throbbing with annoyance and a hint of embarrassment. She'd been halfway home when her phone rang, Calum's name played across the screen.

"Petra, I'm so sorry!" Calum breathed out, "I know I said I'd been there almost two hours ago but things got crazy at the studio and I know that sounds shitty but I hope you can forgive me and maybe I can make it up to you!"

If Petra had known Calum at least a little less than she did, she would've never picked up the call, she would've let him go to voicemail and maybe not even call him back ever. But she knew Calum wouldn't have stood her up on purpose and she knew that if they really were going to make something more of their phone calls and occasional flirting over text, she'd have to understand what his job entailed sometimes. She was an adult, she knew dating meant sometimes people make mistakes and that working around them was what would make it worth it in the end. 

"Calum, it's...I'm not going to say it's fine because I would've appreciated even just a text saying what was happening,' she sighed, "But maybe we can try again soon, yeah? I had a pretty shitty coffee again, which I am blaming on you," she said with a teasing tone, hoping that Calum caught on to it.

"How about tonight?" Calum asked, his voice hesitant as if he was expecting rejection, "I could pick you up and we can just drive around, maybe pick up some of those burgers you were telling me about? I promise to be on time."

Petra had ended up agreeing to his second first date proposal because he sounded genuine and she couldn't help the flutter in her heart at the mention of the burgers. She'd told Calum about them almost a month ago and knowing he'd remember such a small detail made her a little more hopeful about this working out after all.

"I'll text you my address," Petra chuckled out, "Drive safe, okay?"

Calum's car, which would become a haven for them both at different times in the future, was quiet as they both looked out at the city lights. Their stomachs were full, the burgers and french fries they'd shared making their silence a comfortable one. Calum had profusely apologized the second that Petra's door had opened, the bouquet of flowers in his arms a peace treaty as both of them rode off into the evening.

"The flowers, they're from the same flower shop?" Petra asked as she glanced over at Calum. who'd been focusing on the road.

"Oh, um, yeah," Calum chuckled, "Apparently the cashier and manager were taking bets to see if we'd gather the nerves to go on a date or not," he mumbled, his cheeks flushing as he turned his head to look at her, "Had to tell them about tonight."

"Bets?" Petra laughed and shook her head, "Cherly and Carly, right? The one with the curly hair? She practically bullied me into telling her what had happened when we met," she teased.

The date, which had gone off without another problem or disastrous time issue, had been the most fun Petra had ever had since she'd joined the dating scene in LA. She hadn't expected such a relaxing way to spend her evening to be with an international rock star like Calum. She'd laughed so hard her ribs hurt and had sung out loud in the car with him until her throat was sore. By the end of the night, when the safety of Calum's car had come to an end and the driveway to Petra's house was in view, they both sat in comfortable silence. The engine of the car, which hummed quietly between them, the only noise around as they both glanced at each other.

"I had a lot of fun tonight, I'm glad we did this," Petra said softly, breaking the silence and smiling as she saw the relieved look that washed over Calum's face.

"I'm glad we did too. Again, sorry about earlier today," Calum mumbled and sighed, shaking his head.

"Oh, it's fine, really. Just make sure I get to hear whatever masterpiece you came up with first, yeah?" she teased, leaning over the center console to press a kiss onto his cheek, "Text me when you get home, okay? Drive safe!"

Calum listened to the familiar ring playing from the speaker of his phone, waiting for Petra to pick up. His eyes were busy, focused on the mirror in front of him as he tried to deal with the unruly curls he’d let grow out after Petra insisted on seeing how long they could get. He was halfway across the world, in a hotel he couldn’t pronounce the name of, but it was his last morning there and Petra had no idea that by this time tomorrow he’d be back in her arms. After weeks and weeks of being away, promoting an album that would change the band’s sound and image, Calum was going home to be with his girlfriend. He’d be leaving gloomy Europe, with rainstorms that never seemed to end and accents that he had trouble understanding at times, for the endless sunshine and love that LA had recently shown him. 

“Hi gorgeous,” Petra chuckled as she picked up the phone, “You’re calling quite early for someone who went to bed four hours ago,” she teased. 

“Hi Pebble,” Calum teased, the nickname earning him a groan from across an ocean, “I missed my girlfriend, couldn’t sleep without your snores.” 

“I’ll hang up if you’re just going to tease me,” she threatened with a light laugh, “I miss you too, bub, only a few more days though!” 

“Yeah, you better be ready for me to be stuck to your side for weeks,” he mumbled and chuckled, zipping up his toiletries bag and picking his phone up off the counter, “I’m expecting an amazing brunch spot reservation.” 

“Oh you know me, I’ve got all the connections,” she laughed quietly, “Do you have a busy day today?”

“Mhm, a lot of interviews,” Calum mumbled, his shoulder holding his phone up against his ear as he finished packing the rest of his thumb up, “I’m not sure when I’ll be able to call you again until tomorrow.” 

“That’s fine,” Petra said, the smile evident in the way her voice rose, “You know I’ll still send you an endless amount of pictures and memes.” 

“And I love you for it,” Calum chuckled, “I’ve got to go now, but I’ll talk to you soon?” 

“Of course, have a nice day! Blow them away, bub!” she said happily, her voice warming Calum’s body at the thought that he’d be with her so soon. 

“Will do, Pebbles,” he smirked, laughing quietly as Petra kept her word and hung up the call. 

The ride from the airport back home had been a blur to Calum. All he recalled was stuffing his bags into the back and buckling up, the bright skies and warm weather making him regret the hoodie and thick beanie he’d worn to try and hide from the prying eyes. If he wanted his surprise to truly work, he would need to remain unseen in public. But by the time the car had turned onto the familiar street of his neighborhood, Calum began to squirm in his seat, the excitement of being so close to Petra overcoming him. The car had barely stopped before Calum was unbuckled and out, his bags dragging behind him as he threw out a thank you to his driver as he ran to the front door. The light, which was usually off by the time morning came, was still on; acting as a guiding light for Calum to know that he was truly home.

His key unlocked the front door, leading him into the house he’d begun to call home soon after Petra had come into it, and he was met by the familiar bark of his old dog. Setting his bags down by the entrance, Calum toed off his shoes and pulled off the hoodie that had kept his warmth contained within him. His back ached from the long flight and he was starving, his tummy rumbling at the thought of food, but that wouldn’t stop him from crouching down and petting his dog as he waddled over to him. Duke’s tail wagged from side to side so quickly it was a blur of black and white, his paws landing on Calum’s thighs as he sniffed Calum making sure it was really him. Calum had been so busy greeting his best friend and kissing his stinky head that he hadn’t heard the footsteps coming from the hallways. 

“Duke, I’m sure it was just the mail person again, or the neighbor walking their pup,” Petra mumbled, her eyes widening as she was met with the sight of her boyfriend standing in front of her, “C-Calum?” 

“Hi baby,” Calum grinned, straightening his back out and looking at her with wide eyes, “Surprise!” 

Calum hadn’t had the chance to say much else, the force of Petra running into his arms and hugging him had knocked the breath out of him. His arms wrapped themselves around her waist and pulled her even closer, if that was possible, and Calum’s nose nuzzled against the top of her head. They stayed like that for a few minutes, breathing one another in, making sure that they were both truly in the same room again and this wasn’t some cruel dream they’d both wake up from alone in a bed oceans apart. Petra had been the first one to pull away, her eyes meeting Calum’s before she’d cupped his face in her hands and pulled him in for a kiss. 

“I missed you so much,” she mumbled, leaving kisses in between her words, “What’re you doing here? I thought you still had a few days?” 

“I missed you too,” Calum chuckled and smiled, “A few interviews were canceled and they sent us home early. I just got in about an hour ago.” 

“Oh my gosh, I’m so glad to have you back,” she whispered and nodded, pulling him into another kiss that left Calum giggling against her. 

“I am too.” 

Something Calum loved about the ocean was the vastness of it. Sure, he was absolutely terrified of the secrets it held and the fact that much of it was unexplored, but sitting on the hood of his car with Petra by his side as they both stared out at the waves made of all worth it. After a shower and a much needed snack, Petra and Calum had made their way over to the brunch spot that overlooked the ocean. After a lot of french fries and kisses shared between the two of them, the drive to the ocean was peaceful, both of them taking each other in. By the time they had made it onto the beach, the sunny skies were covered in a fog of clouds. It would be Calum’s luck, after all, to have the rain follow him wherever he went.

“Do you think it’ll rain?” Petra asked, her eyes meeting Calum’s even through the dark sunglasses they both wore. 

“I hope not, I thought I had escaped the rain,” Calum teased and pulled her close, “Come on, let’s walk in the sand a bit.” 

With hands held tightly, their arms swaying as they strolled down the dandy beach, Calum found himself at peace. The past couple of weeks away had left him wanting more from his relationship and wanting to do more for Petra. In the past, the mere thought of a future with someone would’ve had Calum running for the hills. But with Petra it all made sense, he wanted to be by her side every day, to see her go through her day and be there to make her smile. As the first few droplets of rain fell from the sky, he realized that this future, the one with Petra, was all he’d been missing. Their stroll was cut short, much to Calum’s displeasure when the curtains of rain got closer and closer. The waves roared next to them, the ocean alive and ever more powerful as the rainstorm above them finally let go. 

Calum looked over at Petra, who had tugged on his hand and before Calum knew it, they were both racing back to the car. The sand hadn’t made it easier for them to run, both of them stumbling as they raced through the beach in fits of laughter. By the time they’d both shut their doors and panted out breaths, they were completely drenched and looked as if they had jumped onto the ocean itself. They sat in silence watching the view outside of the safety of the car. Watching the waves crash onto the ocean and battle with the clouds above them that were spewing out rain. It was all so violent and sudden, but Calum’s eyes shifted to watch Petra. 

He watched as her eyes widened, watching the storm in awe as his chest rose and fell with each breath she took. He watched as her hand ran through the curls, that not even the rain could mess with, trying to shake the water out of them. She was beautiful without even having to try and Calum was out of breath. But Calum didn’t mind, not at all, because Petra could make even the thing he hated the most a beautiful sight. 

“We should run away to Sydney for a bit,” he mumbled quietly, his bottom lip trapped between his teeth as Petra’s eyes met his, “I want you to meet my family.” 

join my taglist: @hoodhoran​ @moonlightcriess​ @mxgyver​ @calpops​ @karajaynetoday​ @notlukehemmo​ @calumrose​ @devilatmydoor​ @lowkeyflop​  @conversecake​​ @hemmo1996-5sosvevo​​ @ashtonsunflower​​ @2fangirl4u​​ @multistann​​ @wiiildflowerrr @himbohood​​ @in-superbloom​​ @ashtonsunflower​​ @suchalonelysunflower​​ @killmywildflower​​ @sebsbrokentoe​​ @nicebasscalum​​ @itwouldburnupintheatmosphere​​ @mikelitorisdotcom @letmereadpls​​ @hardcandyhemmo

[mikehuntagain]

KEY ARTICLE TO UNDERSTAND DNC & RNC DYNAMICS!!

"Watch for last-minute RNC rule changes for the national primaries and the selection of convention delegates. If we start hearing anybody, anywhere float a proposal in favor of Republican super delegates for the national convention, it’s total war.”

[whereasthepeople-blog]

‘Don’t you worry about that’: Secret evidence, the executive and the courts (a case note on Graham v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection)

It’s a secret, your honour. Don’t you worry about that.

The High Court has been in the spotlight of late, in respect of both the constitutional qualification issues for various members of Parliament as well the same sex marriage postal survey. One decision that has received less media attention is that of Graham v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Te Puia v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] HCA 33 handed down on Wednesday 6 September 2017.

The facts

Graham and Te Puia were citizens of New Zealand who had been in Australia for some time (Graham since 1976 and Te Puia since 2005) each pursuant to a ‘Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category (Temporary)’ visa. Both individuals received letters from the Minister giving them notice that the Minister had decided to cancel their visas under section 501(3) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (‘the Act’).

Without going in to too much detail here, section 501(3) relevantly enables the Minister to cancel a visa where the Minister reasonably suspects that the person does not meet the character test and that the cancellation is in the national interest. Section 501(6) elaborates that a person fails the character test if they have a substantial criminal record (further defined elsewhere) or the Minister reasonably suspects that the person has had association with of a group, organisation or person that has been involved in criminal conduct.

In the letters the Minister stated that in making his decision the Minister had taken account of evidence which was protected from disclosure under section 503A of the Act. Section 503A deals with information the Minister obtains from certain other agencies (usually law enforcement agencies) on a confidential basis and arose out of a reluctance in those agencies to share information where its disclosure might prejudice their sources or methodologies. In each case, that evidence was not disclosed or made available to Graham or Te Puia.

The problem

First, let’s think about this non-disclosure of evidence in the abstract. There are obvious difficulties for a visa holder in this situation. From what you’ve been told, you will be aware that the Minister is of the view (or at least reasonably suspects) that you have a substantial criminal record or other criminal associations, but you won’t necessarily know the detail of that – particularly where that detail is supplied by the evidence provided to the Minister under section 503A of the Act. One can imagine the feeling of confusion, and perhaps a temptation to go through a quick mental review – who do I hang out with? What group are they talking about?

Now, in the case of Graham the Minister’s statement of reasons did outline a connection to a particular outlaw motorcycle gang, as well as some prior offending. In the case of Te Puia, the Minister referred only to the applicant’s membership of a particular group and that decision appeared to be based only on reference to the undisclosed material. In any case, it is not difficult to see how other individuals could be left with very little in the way of reasons presented for the decision made against their interests.

Leaving that to one side however, there’s also a clear problem for the court – the executive has made a decision, based on evidence not made available to the other party. Not only that, but section 503A purports to prevent that evidence being received by the court itself. If a party were to approach the court seeking a review of the decision, say on the basis that the Minister took into account an irrelevant consideration or acted irrationally, how is the court to make a decision?

Of course there is a legitimate interest in an agency preserving its intelligence sources and its intelligence gathering methodologies. All I say, however, is that this secrecy sits in tension with the role of the courts in supervising the executive where it provides the basis for a decision.

As we will see, this difficulty was not lost on the court.

The decision

The court split 6-1 on the matter and a joint judgment was delivered by Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle AND Gordon JJ. Edelman J agreed with the majority on what will be called the ‘institutional integrity’ point, but dissented on the question about the Commonwealth Parliament’s ability to restrict judicial review.

The joint judgment

The joint judgment first dismissed an argument by the plaintiff that the scheme impaired the ‘institutional integrity’ of the court in a way that would offend the Kable principle. That argument by the plaintiff appeared to centre on an analogy to public interest immunity under the common law, and the removal of the decision on what was in the public interest from the court to the executive. The Commonwealth argued that there was no constitutional principle that meant the courts had to be the arbiter of the public interest where admissible evidence were to be withheld. The court agreed.

Instead, the matter was determined on the basis of section 75(v) of the Constitution. That section provides that the High Court shall have original jurisdiction in all matters ‘in which a writ of Mandamus or prohibition or an injunction is sought against an officer of the Commonwealth’. This provision is thought to have the effect of ‘entrenching’ a minimum level of judicial review of executive action that is beyond the power of the Parliament to remove. In this way, section 75(v) ‘secures a basic element of the rule of law’ (paragraph 44 of the judgment).

The joint judgment re-affirmed that the Parliament cannot enact a law that denies the High Court (or other courts in some circumstances) ‘the ability to enforce the legislated limits of an officer’s power.’ It went on to say (at paragraph 48) that:

The question whether or not a law transgresses that constitutional limitation is one of substance, and therefore of degree. To answer it requires an examination not only of the legal operation of the law but also of the practical impact of the law on the ability of a court, through the application of judicial process, to discern and declare whether or not the conditions of and constraints on the lawful exercise of the power conferred on an officer have been observed in a particular case.

In the case of the applicant in particular, the court was denied access to the whole of the evidence upon which the Minister’s decision was based. To the extent that section 503A of the Act prevented the court from seeing information that would be relevant to the question of whether or not the Minister had exercised a power according to law, it was invalid.

Edelman J’s dissent

His honour considered that the joint judgment’s approach was overly broad, for two ‘or possibly three’ reasons.

First, history. Edelman J considered that the removal of this information from the court’s grasp was in effect, nothing new. Far more extreme impairments on judicial review had existed and indeed been standard in the 19th century. His honour referred as well to certain legislation allowing the executive to resist the disclosure of ‘State papers’ to a court by the issue of a conclusive certificate stating that such disclosure would be prejudicial to the public service. His honour conceded the Constitution may have involved a break from those traditions, but went on to say that:

it would be difficult to see how the Constitution broke from longstanding, clear, and established legal history by introducing contrary content to a generalised and broad implication which is ultimately founded on the concept of the rule of law, itself a concept the precise content of which is hotly disputed and which, on many accounts, includes notions of certainty and clarity.

Secondly his honour considered that this legislation went no further than other legislation previously upheld by the court, citing Plaintiff M61/2010E v The Commonwealth (2010) 243 CLR 319. To this I would suggest that the High Court should not consider itself bound by the general ‘fit’ of its decisions in a broader jurisprudence created by many judges over many years. The doctrine of precedent is not so inflexible and prior decisions are, on occasion, incorrect.

And finally, and perhaps most interestingly, Edelman J observed that the ‘unreasonableness’ ground of judicial review which was said to be rendered impossible to undertake by section 503A was no more than a presumption of statutory interpretation. If the presumption can be reversed, excluding review entirely, how then was it impermissible to simply take some evidence out of a proceeding that constitutionally does not have to exist? His honour did not elaborate on this point, but I think there are some clear criticisms to be made. I think this point does not fully answer the question – there are surely other grounds for review, and therefore sources of jurisdiction, that a court could be deprived of by a provision such as this from time to time.

His honour’s dissent is far longer and more interesting than can be sufficiently described here and I highly recommend reading it. It even includes a table of contents, which I think would be useful for many judges to consider.

Concluding comments

There can be little doubt of the benefits to the rule of law that flow from a minimum content of judicial review that is beyond Parliamentary disruption. To adapt an old adage, it says to the other arms of government ‘be you ever so high, the court is above you’.

While there is also something to be said for founding restrictions on power such as this ‘minimum content of judicial review’ on the text and structure of the Constitution, I think that the present case is clear example of that approach. The words of section 75(v) could not be given their proper effect if the executive were free to make decisions outside of the bounds of legality only by virtue of the fact that the court was rendered impotent to receive evidence about the decision. The Australian Constitution does not allow for power without limit.

Whereas the People is an Australian constitutional and public law blog.

[m15pri]

 These men enlisted their lives in a Great Crusade one of the greatest of all times. Their mission is the story of an epic battle and the ferocious, eternal struggle between good and evil.

One of those men was Army medic, Ray Lambert. he was only 23, but he had already earned three Purple Hearts and two Silver Stars fighting in North Africa and Sicily, where he and his brother Bill, no longer with us, served side by side. (7:22 to 10:13 in the video)

Of the 31 men on Ray’s landing craft, only Ray and 6 others made it to the beach. There were only a few of them left. They came to the sector right here below us. “Easy Red” it was called. Again and again, Ray ran back into the water. He dragged out one man after another. He was shot through the arm. His leg was ripped open by shrapnel. His back was broken. He nearly drowned.

Nearly two hours in, unrelenting fire from these bluffs kept the Americans pinned down on the sand now red with our heroes’ blood. Then, just a few hundred yards from where I’m standing, a breakthrough came. The battle turned, and with it, history.

Private First Class Russell Pickett, of the 29th Division’s famed 116th Infantry Regiment, had been wounded in the first wave that landed on Omaha Beach. At a hospital in England, Private Pickett vowed to return to battle. “I’m going to return,” he said. “I’m going to return.” (12:35 to 14:42 in the video)

Six days after D-Day, he rejoined his company. Two-thirds had been killed already; many had been wounded, within 15 minutes of the invasion. They’d lost 19 just from the small town of Bedford, Virginia, alone. Before long, a grenade left Private Pickett again gravely wounded. So badly wounded. Again, he chose to return. He didn’t care; he had to be here.

 Stefanie serves as a guide at this cemetery. This week, Stefanie led 92-year-old Marian Wynn of California to see the grave of her brother Don for the very first time.

Marian and Stefanie are both with us today. And we thank you for keeping alive the memories of our precious heroes. Thank you. (16:43 to 17:39)

9,388 young Americans rest beneath the white crosses and Stars of David arrayed on these beautiful grounds. Each one has been adopted by a French family that thinks of him as their own. They come from all over France to look after our boys. They kneel. They cry. They pray. They place flowers. And they never forget.

More powerful than the strength of American arms was the strength of American hearts, these men ran through the fires of hell moved by a force no weapon could destroy: the fierce patriotism of a free, proud, and sovereign people. They battled not for control and domination, but for liberty, democracy, and self-rule.

Seven decades ago, the warriors of D-Day fought a sinister enemy who spoke of a thousand-year empire. In defeating that evil, they left a legacy that will last not only for a thousand years but for all time for as long as the soul knows of duty and honor; for as long as freedom keeps its hold on the human heart.

The blood that they spilled, the tears that they shed, the lives that they gave, the sacrifice that they made, did not just win a battle. It did not just win a war. Those who fought here won a future for our nation. They won the survival of our civilization. And they showed us the way to love, cherish, and defend our way of life for many centuries to come.

Today, as we stand together upon this sacred Earth, we pledge that our nations will forever be strong and united. We will forever be together. Our people will forever be bold. Our hearts will forever be loyal. And our children and their children will forever and always be free.

May God bless our great veterans. May God bless our Allies. May God bless the heroes of D-Day. And may God bless America.

May15thProphecy.wordpress.com

Sundance at The Last Refuge (CTH) 

515 Loupe 6-6-2019  These men enlisted their lives in a Great Crusade one of the greatest of all times. Their mission is the story of an epic battle and the ferocious, eternal struggle between good and evil.

[writemarcus]

In the Continuum: Black Theatre Development

An inside look at the long-standing and often overlooked incubators who’ve boosted the profiles of early-career stage writers of color.

BY MARCUS SCOTT

The coronavirus pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on New York City. It has not only led the nation and the world in a number of fatalities but its economic impact in the city promises to be outsized. More than 1.2 million New York state residents filed for unemployment benefits over the course of the first month of the crisis. According to the The New York Times, New York City is projected to lose at least $7.4 billion in tax revenue by the middle of next year, a significant portion of which would have been generated by the performing arts: With a combined 1,737 playing weeks and attendance reaching 14.77 million, in the 2018-19 Broadway season productions grossed a total of $1.83 billion, beating the 2017-18 seasonal record of $1.7 billion by 7.8 percent.

There’s another disproportionate impact that COVID-19 is having: For troubling systemic reasons, it is devastating African Americans at much higher rates. Likewise in the theatre, where, despite a focus on Equity, Diversity & Inclusion, opportunities for artists of color were already heavily circumscribed, the shutdown threatens not only the precarious livelihood of artists of color but the health of institutions that have historically supported and nurtured them. It should come as no surprise that New York, the center of the Black Arts Movement of the 1960s and ’70s, has been a hotbed of theatre development shepherding the work of artists of color, in particular Black and Latinx artists. Among these institutions are the National Black Theatre (NBT), the Movement Theatre Company, INTAR Theatre, Nuyorican Poets Café, Teatro LATEA, QuickSilver Theatre Company, Blackboard Reading Series, Pregones/PRTT, Teatro SEA, Harlem Repertory Theater, Harlem9, and the Billie Holiday Theatre. Asian/Pacific Islander (API) playwrights have also seen their works developed at incubators like Leviathan Lab, the National Asian American Theatre Company (NAATCO), Ma-Yi Theater Company, the Pan Asian Repertory Theatre, Second Generation, and Noor Theatre, among others.

While many of these companies have had to fight for funding and recognition, their hard work has paid off: The combined efforts of these incubators over the last decade have fostered a creative parturition among their artist collectives, sowing the seeds of what many are calling a renaissance of works by POC artists—particularly Black talent—which have been a creative force, not only onstage, but on film and TV as well.

“I think the conversations that are being had, especially in the African American community, is that we understand and recognize—as we always have—that we are not a monolith, that we all have different experiences and points of view, and that they are worth being a part of the whole conversation of who we are,” notes dramaturg Shawn René Graham, literary director of the Classical Theatre of Harlem’s Future Classics Series and Playwright’s Playground, which shines a spotlight on the work of underrepresented writers. “But I do wonder if some of those tales that were told, if they were in residency at a Black space, how the conversation might be different or more robust…It’s the dramaturgy, and the lack of representation behind the scenes. I often wonder, with some plays, whose voices were in the room.”

Graham got her start as an intern at the Mark Taper Forum in Los Angeles at a time when Oskar Eustis was the organization’s associate artistic director and theatre titans Tony Kushner, Eric Bogosian, and Anna Deavere Smith were developing works like Angels in America, Pounding Nails in the Floor With My Forehead, and Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992, respectively. Graham says she is still influenced by that time. In fact, some of her approach to running both reading series comes from watching the iconic comedy trio Culture Clash develop their work in front of live audiences. Boosting the profiles of emerging artists like Madhuri Shekar (House of Joy), Angelica Chéri (Berta, Berta), and Radha Blank (Netflix’s The 40-Year-Old Version), the Classical Theatre of Harlem (CTH) aims to uplift the next generation of artists as well as encourage “little Black boys, little Black girls, and little Black theys” living in Harlem to aspire to tell their own stories.

Graham arrived in 2011, when artistic director Ty Jones was “still rescuing the company from a significant amount of debt,” as she puts it. The only way to keep the theatre relevant then, when the company could not produce their usual number of mainstage productions, was to keep a reading series going. She was tasked with that project, along with helping make the festival an annual event and creating an annual holiday production. Now, with the COVID-19 shutdown, a similar barebones approach may come in handy. The company’s philosophy hasn’t changed, she says: “We are also hellbent on no barriers to access and being of service to the community that we serve, which is the Harlem community.”

Carpe diem has been a defining philosophy of the trifecta behind the rising little giant that is Liberation Theatre Company. Established in 2009, the Harlem-based theatre incubator has committed to the development of new Black playwrights, promoting the likes of James Anthony Tyler (Dolphins and Sharks), James Scruggs (3/Fifths), Dennis A. Allen II (The Mud Is Thicker in Mississippi), Liz Morgan (The Clark Doll), Camille Darby (Lords Resistance), Shawn Nabors (Cake), Deneen Reynolds-Knott (Baton), and Tylie Shider (Parable of the Backyard Roots). (Full disclosure: They have also developed my work as a playwright.) Spearheading the project are two founders, producing artistic director Sandra A. Daley-Sharif and associate artistic director Spencer Scott Barros, who are joined by associate producing director Bernard J. Tarver.

The trio is also part of the collaboration of Black theatre producers known as Harlem9, currently celebrating its 10th anniversary. Harlem9 won an Obie in 2014 for an annual 10-minute play festival, 48Hours in…Harlem, spawning various spinoff festivals around the country (Bronx, Detroit, Dallas, and Holy Ground, N.C.) and five published anthologies. Daley-Sharif and Barros, working actors who have been friends for 25 years, gush over Tarver and mention that he complemented their “old-school work ethic” when joining Liberation.

“We have a very similar intention and vision that we agree on,” Daley-Shariff says. Barros observes, “Even if we have a disagreement from an outside perspective, five seconds later we’ll let it go because we all want the same thing.”

This philosophy has bled into the gallimaufry of talent that the company has helped develop since their humble beginnings renting space at venues around the city. While small in scope, what the company lacks in resources, they make up for in discipline and tenacity. Such hard work led to collaborations with Off-Broadway theatres such as Playwrights Horizons to present an annual festival of new works when the duo were just starting out as producers.

“Sandra is a master at developing relationships with people that open all this space for us, like SPACE on Ryder Farm, like NBT, like National Dance Institute (NDI),” says Barros. “She meets people and people fall in love with her. But as far as space is concerned, that’s the biggest challenge for Black theatre companies in general. We don’t have space. We need a homebase, because we’re constantly in people’s space. We are constantly at their whims and desires from what they want from us, and sometimes it limits or puts perimeters around where we see the vision. And if we had it we could just do whatever the hell we wanted, but who can afford it?”

That’s why a core group of playwrights has tended to meet with the leadership trio in Daley-Sharif’s 2,500-square-foot apartment a few blocks north of Central Park North in Harlem. When the company was founded, Daley-Sharif says she wanted to create a company along the lines of LAByrinth in New York or Steppenwolf in Chicago—an artistic home for Black and brown talent to work and aspire to have a healthy work-life balance.

“I think that’s the difference between producing in your 20s and 30s, which we’ve done, and producing your 40s and 50s, which we are doing,” Barros says. “We’re more pragmatic and practical with what we’re doing. Reestablishing 11 years ago, we were very clear on what this was going to entail. It’s going to have to take focus, being very smart about where we get the money, how we find our talent. I think the benefit has been that we’ve worked with some of the greatest emerging talent in the city.” When they realized they would benefit from pooling resources and connecting with Black organizations and Black producers, that led to the creation of Harlem9, and ultimately an Obie.

Creating a space, says Daley-Sharif, where “Black and brown people can tell their stories in comfort…I think that’s huge!”

“That’s amazingly huge!” Barros adds. “I would say for most artists that work with us, this may be the only time where they have a singular experience where everybody in the room is like them.”

White organizations don’t necessarily “create that space and walk away and leave you alone,” Daley-Sharif points out. Some take that approach, she says, but there is a clear advantage to one run by folks who fully understand the Black experience. She adds, “Sometimes we do need to be policed, sometimes we do need to check ourselves—but I do think there is something to be said about being in a room where it is Black-led and where it’s comfortably facilitated.”

Daley-Sharif’s words call back to Lorraine Hansberry, author of the landmark family drama A Raisin in the Sun and the first Black woman and the youngest playwright to have a play performed on Broadway. Hansberry’s contributions extended past the proscenium and in her abbreviated career—she wrote her first play between her 26th and 27th birthdays—as she engaged with emerging artists of color and passed the baton.

In the years since her passing, the Black Arts Movement saw dramatists like Sonia Sanchez, Ossie Davis, Ishmael Reed, Amiri Baraka, and Ntozake Shange rise to prominence, each supporting one another. Theatre titan Charles Fuller (A Soldier’s Play) ushered in the post-Black Arts Movement, and August Wilson cemented it; and artists such as Anna Deavere Smith, Suzan-Lori Parks, Lynn Nottage, and Thomas Bradshaw followed suit. While the current generation of emerging playwrights pushes boundaries and takes the U.S. theatre field to task, many are mining inspiration from Hansberry’s contemporary James Baldwin, including cultural incubators like the Fire This Time Festival (TFTTF), named for Baldwin’s 1963 collection The Fire Next Time.

TFTTF began in 2009 with a weekend of performances of fully staged 10-minute plays by Kelley Girod, Derek McPhatter, Germono Toussaint, Pia Wilson, Radha Blank, Katori Hall, and Asiimwe Deborah/Deborah Asiimwe. The festival has become one of the most sought-after opportunities for young Black writers, with many of its writers achieving roaring success over the last decade: Dominique Morisseau (Pipeline), Antoinette Nwandu (Pass Over), Jocelyn Bioh (School Girls; Or, The African Mean Girls Play), Marcus Gardley (The House That Will Not Stand), Jordan E. Cooper (Ain’t No Mo’), Aziza Barnes (BLKS), C.A. Johnson (All the Natalie Portmans), Charly Evon Simpson (Behind the Sheet), Jonathan Payne (The Revolving Cycles Truly and Steadily Roll’d), Tanya Everett (A Dead Black Man), and Stacey Rose (America v. 2.1: The Sad Demise & Eventual Extinction of the American Negro).

“The theme of the first festival was: Is there a post-Black theatre, and if so, what are the stories?” says A.J. Muhammad, associate producer and director of TFTTF’s New Works Lab. Muhammad recalls that the inaugural fest took place in the early years of the Obama administration, when some believed the country had entered a post-racial era. That first season’s plays ranged from an Afro-futurism/sci-fi comedy by McPhatter to Girod’s pre-#MeToo era play about sexual harassment in higher education, Hall’s about skin bleaching across the African diaspora and South Asia, Toussaint’s about queerness in a Black church, and Pia Wilson’s existential piece about the past lives of two women. Recalls Muhammad, “All of the performances were sold out, and audiences were galvanized by what they saw, myself included.”

Girod, founder and executive producing director of the festival, testifies that when she graduated with a playwriting MFA from Columbia University, opportunities for emerging Black playwrights were scarce for her and her peers, who like her were trying to get their work produced by established New York theatre companies. Besides producing established Black playwrights, white mainstream theatre companies were limited in their scope of what they expected Black playwrights to write about, and Black playwrights were being pigeonholed. Not wanting to be held back by these gatekeepers and not content to wait for an invitation to the table, a new movement emerged. (New Black Fest at the Lark also emerged around this time.) The festival has been in residence with FRIGID NYC (formerly known as Horse Trade Theater Group) since its inception; FRIGID NYC is a nonprofit that presents a series of festivals throughout the year and other curated programming while managing two indie theatre spaces in downtown Manhattan’s East Village, the Kraine Theater and Under St. Marks.

“What Black theatre doesn’t have a shortage of is ingenuity, passion, determination, talent, generosity, resilience, tenacity, perseverance, and self-determination,” Muhammad says. Echoing others, he says that what Black theatre in New York suffers from is a lack of dedicated physical spaces, apart from such venues as National Black Theatre in Harlem or Black Spectrum Theater in Queens. “Like so many indie theatre companies and festivals, including the ones that are BIPOC, many of our companies are nomadic and there’s a crunch for physical space and resources.”

Muhammad expresses a need for alternative sources of funding, in addition to the those that support New York-area theatre, often predominantly white companies, such as the Ford, Axe-Houghton, and Shubert Foundations. “Are there Black-run philanthropic foundations that are comparable to the ones I mentioned?” Muhammad wonders. “There is Black wealth, but when it comes to our arts organizations, I don’t know if connections are being made between the Black philanthropies and our institutions.” Muhammad says he’d like to band together with other Black organizations and figure out how to cultivate relationships with Black philanthropists. “Those of us who are nonprofits may not have the same access to the white philanthropic foundations, or some of our organizations might be ineligible to apply for grants from those funders because of our small budget sizes or we don’t have a point of entry,” he says. “This is where the Black philanthropic foundations can come in to have that conversation with us.”

Government agencies unwittingly reinforce the inequity, Muhammad suggests. Tax-supported funding from the New York State Council on the Arts and the Department of Consumer Affairs, for instance, is frequently “earmarked for mainstream organizations in support of their diversity and education initiatives, which in many cases is their only point of contact with BIPOC artists.” He adds, “In the age of COVID-19, things might get more dire for all of us. This is also a time to think outside of the box in terms of funding sources and sustainability of our organizations.” In a time when no theatre can happen on any space and everything is virtual and “spaceless” due the pandemic, one of the many puzzles smaller theatre development incubators are having to figure out is how they might offer new opportunities to artists who are among the many that have been hit hardest by the pandemic and how to predict some of the extra challenges that may present themselves moving forward.

Incubators of color are hardly limited to the Big Apple. JAG Productions, in the small town of White River Junction, Vt., launched in 2016 with the mission to produce classic and contemporary Black theatre and serve as an incubator of new work that excites broad intellectual engagement. Most importantly, over the last couple of years, JAG has been responsible for taking Black and brown playwrights from NYC and workshopping their genre-bending theatrical works.

“At the confluence of the White and Connecticut Rivers, which separates Abenaki land into the majority-white states of Vermont and New Hampshire, JAG has nurtured and sustained a multigenerational and multiracial community with Black artists and community organizers at its center,” says the organization’s founder and producing artistic director, Jarvis Antonio Green, a queer director and actor from the South. “Serving as a vehicle for change, JAG has used theatre to catalyze community dialogue around critical issues of race, gender, sexuality, and identity and has played a central role in carving spaces for Black folks and people of color in the predominantly white town of White River Junction, Vt.”

Green describes his journey as “brutal,” with 10 to 15 years auditioning for roles on national tours and assisting directors, all of which led him to establish JAG. He traces its genesis to a call with a friend, Jonah Hankin-Rappaport, in which he explained how much he was struggling. Green says Hankin-Rappaoort responded, “Hey, I’m going to go up to Vermont. My girlfriend is finishing up school, and we’re gonna be working on this farm in Barnard called Fable Farm. Just come hang out for a summer.”

He fell in love with the rural town and eventually made it his home. Green says he saw the need for a company that would make Black, brown, queer, and transgender folks “more curious and aware of ourselves, make us more curious about where we’ve come from and what we’re into, and to access what is already there and to bring that out.” He also says he started the company to help people heal from harm caused by working in anti-Black cultural institutions. In its first season, the organization staged critically acclaimed productions of August Wilson’s Fences, Tarell Alvin McCraney’s Choir Boy, and Polkadots: The Cool Kids Musical, a youth-driven work inspired by the events of the Little Rock Nine. He also launched the company’s touchstone JAGfest, a multidisciplinary weekend-long festival of new works. Since its launch, more than 10,000 Upper Valley theatregoers and 1,200 students from 10 schools have attended JAG performances. In recognition of its work, JAG was honored by the New England Theater Conference (NETC) as the 2017 recipient of the Regional Award for Outstanding Achievement in American Theatre.

In October 2019, JAG’s fourth season opened with the world premiere of Nathan Yungerberg’s Afro-surrealistic family drama Esai’s Table and sent shockwaves through the Upper Valley community, inciting conversations about race and the value of Black life in America when it ran 15 performances at the Briggs Opera House. The production had further aspirations: Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the play was slated to transfer Off-Broadway to the illustrious Cherry Lane Theatre. Postponed indefinitely, the New York run of Esai’s Table would mark a pivotal moment for JAG as its first world premiere, first Off-Broadway transfer, and first co-production. The blinding success in such a short period of time is uncanny, as the company operates in a state with an African American population of less than 2 percent.

Of course, the show’s postponement is just one example of the widespread devastation the epidemic has caused. “I think right now, in this time, in this moment, especially when there’s so much Black theatre and theatre about race, that it’s important to hold space for spirit and check in with people and how this work is affecting us and the emotions that could be triggering us,” Green says, recalling his time working alongside director Stevie Walker-Webb and in spaces like the Public Theater, where they’d circle up to touch base before every rehearsal and performance. “To hold that space for the people making the difficult art is important.”

As the country experiences a rude awakening in the time of COVID-19, these development incubators need to be more resilient and work almost entirely on deficit, sometimes sacrificing the commitment to making art in favor of fundraising and handling administrative duties. But the formidable contributions of artists of color to our theatre culture and literature have always been made against steep odds, and these institutions have been and will continue to be fighting for their rightful places on the stages, whenever they reopen.

Marcus Scott is a New York City-based playwright, musical writer, and journalist. He has contributed to Elle, Essence, Out, and Playbill, among other publications.

[weedconsortium2]

Tabling of Report on the Review into the 2016 Medicinal Cannabis amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967

5 September 2019

The Australian Federal Govt Reports…….

Late last year, Minister Greg Hunt appointed Professor John McMillan AO to conduct a Review and Report on the operation of theNarcotic Drugs Act 1967( the Act) in accordance with section 26A of the Act.

Professor McMillan’s Final Report  on the Review of the Act was tabled in Parliament today, Thursday 5 September 2019.

The Final Report contains 26 recommendations to improve the regulatory framework for the cultivation, production and manufacture of medicinal cannabis in Australia. Minister Hunt has accepted all 26 recommendations put forward by Professor McMillan, which broadly aim to reduce the regulatory burden on industry, promote and allow greater flexibility in the administration of the legislation to support industry innovation and development.

A two stage reform process is proposed to be undertaken to ensure that the recommendations are appropriately implemented with some reforms being implemented as early as later this year. Further details on the implementation of these reforms will be published in due course.

Further details on the Review process are available:Review of the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967.

Click on the image to access the full report

Here is the full Executive Summary

Adoption of a national medicinal cannabis scheme in Australia

Australia ratified the United NationsSingle Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961in 1967.[1]The same year the Commonwealth Parliament enacted theNarcotic Drugs Act 1967(Cth) (ND Act) to give effect to certain of Australia’s obligations under the Convention.

The Single Convention declares that the medical use of narcotic drugs is indispensable for the relief of pain and suffering and that they should, accordingly, be available for medical and scientific use. At the same time, the Single Convention recognises that effective measures are necessary, both nationally and internationally, to guard against addiction to and abuse of narcotic drugs. Among the measures that will be necessary are national control and licensing of the cultivation, production and manufacture of narcotic drugs.

The ND Act initially gave effect to the Single Convention in a limited way. The Australian Government Minister for Health (the Minister) administering the ND Act could grant licences to manufacture narcotic drugs, and the ND Act regulated the movement of narcotic drugs through Australia (for example, on vessels). Until 2016 the manufacture licensing provisions in the ND Act were applied to the control of narcotic drugs obtained from the opium poppy.

In 2016 the ND Act was extensively amended to establish a national regime permitting the cultivation and production of cannabis and cannabis resin in Australia (described in this report as the medicinal cannabis scheme). This came after an active debate that had been occurring both publicly and in Australian legislatures to allow expanded patient access to medicinal cannabis products.

The central feature of the medicinal cannabis scheme established in 2016 was a licensing scheme applying to the cultivation of cannabis plants, the production of cannabis flower and plant resin, the conduct of research relating to medicinal cannabis, and the manufacture of medicinal cannabis drugs. Licences could be granted separately for each of those processes – cultivation and production (combined), research and manufacture. An allied feature of the three-licence scheme was that the specific activity a licence holder could undertake would be spelt out in one or more permits, for which an application would be separately made.

The licensing and permit system enabled the Commonwealth to control the number and types of cannabis plants that could be cultivated, the size of cannabis crops, research activities, the permitted uses of manufactured drugs, the eligibility and conduct of licence holders, and the overall security and integrity of licensed activities. Commonwealth regulatory control enabled it to meet its obligations under the Single Convention to report on Australian activity to the International Narcotics Control Board.

Commonwealth regulatory functions and powers were formally vested by the ND Act in the Secretary of the Australian Government Department of Health (the department), but would be exercisable by a new office established within the department – the Office of Drug Control (ODC). The ODC became part of the Health Products Regulation Group in the department, alongside the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). The TGA was an established part of the Department that regulates therapeutic goods to ensure they are of an acceptable standard.

Review of the operation of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act

The 2016 amendments to the ND Act required the Minister to cause a review of the operation of the ND Act to be carried out during the third year of operation of the medicinal cannabis scheme. This Review commenced in January 2019. The Terms of Reference for the Review are inAppendix Ato this report. The report of the review is to be tabled by the Minister in both houses of the Commonwealth Parliament by 29 October 2019.

Public consultation with key stakeholders has been a major element of this Review. This has included the publication of a Discussion Paper in March 2019, consultation forums in three cities, receipt of written submissions (many of which are published on the TGA and ODC websites), and meetings with industry bodies, government working groups and the Australian Advisory Council on the Medicinal Use of Cannabis.

This report makes 26 recommendations for:

amendment of theNarcotic Drugs Act 1967(the ND Act) and theNarcotic Drugs Regulation 2016(ND Regulation)

publication by the ODC of expanded guidance on key features of the ND Act and ND Regulations and the ODC’s regulatory approach

ongoing review of specified issues by the department, the Australian Advisory Council on the Medicinal Use of Cannabis and government working groups

This Review is restricted to the operation of the ND Act. It is not a review more broadly of cannabis regulation in Australia, patient access to medicinal cannabis or scheduling and other decisions of the TGA in relation to cannabis products. There is nevertheless a mention of those issues at various points in the report as they are aspects of the broader setting in which the medicinal cannabis scheme operates.

Key findings of this Review

The establishment of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act in 2016 was an important milestone in the Australian Government’s approach to the treatment of personal pain and suffering.

The medicinal cannabis scheme built on steps that had already been taken both at national and at State and Territory level to allow patient access to medicinal cannabis products and to support research. The ND Act amendments, however, went much further in establishing a comprehensive framework to facilitate and support an Australian industry dedicated to the supply of medicinal cannabis therapies.

It was described by the Minister at the time as a scheme that would ensure patient availability of a safe, legal and sustainable supply of cannabis-derived products – a ‘farm to pharmacy’ cannabis supply chain. The establishment of the Commonwealth scheme also led to State governments drawing back from plans already partially legislated to establish State-level schemes regulating cultivation, manufacture and supply of medicinal cannabis products.

A great deal has occurred since October 2016 when the new ND Act scheme commenced. An administrative structure and procedures have been developed and administered by the ODC and the department. The framework is notable for the careful balance it strikes between facilitating cultivation and production of medicinal cannabis products, implementing Australia’s obligations under the Single Convention to safeguard against illegal practices, and facilitating cooperation with State and Territory governments to administer safe and sustainable pathways for patient access to medicinal cannabis therapies.

The ODC has received (at 30 June 2019) 246 licence applications, and granted 63 licences (24 medicinal cannabis licences, 16 cannabis research licences and 23 manufacture licences). This is a far higher number than expected. It points to strong commercial interest in the Australian medicinal cannabis industry. This is supported by an active research program in Australia, and the formation of two representative industry organisations. Informal indications point to firm international confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of Australian regulatory processes and the reliability of Australian medicinal cannabis products.

A direct correlation cannot be drawn between, on the one hand, increased cultivation and manufacturing activity by ND Act licence holders and, on the other hand, improved patient access in Australia to medicinal cannabis therapies. There has, nevertheless, been a steady and accelerating increase in patient access that points to a parallel and consistent trend. For example, under one of the patient access pathways described in this report (Special Access Scheme Category B) the number of monthly approvals for the supply of a medicinal cannabis product rose from 132 approvals in May 2018 to 1,374 in May 2019. Increased patient access is also recorded under other pathways.

The medicinal cannabis scheme was established in the ND Act in 2016 and is still in its early days. To date, the establishment of the scheme has overall been resoundingly successful. The ODC has played a central role in this success. It is well respected throughout government and industry for its expertise and professionalism. Additional budgetary funding was provided to the department in 2018 to administer the medicinal cannabis scheme.

These developments are encouraging for Australia. There is growing public and international interest in medicinal cannabis therapies. Proposals have also been developed by the World Health Organisation (WHO) (but not yet considered by the United Nations Commission on Drugs) to adjust the cannabis settings in the Schedules of the Single Convention.

Improvement of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act

Strong interest was expressed in submissions and consultations during this Review for legislative and administrative reforms to improve the operation of the medicinal cannabis scheme. There was an equally keen interest in the ODC and the TGA to evaluate the reform proposals. An independent business review of ODC administration was commenced internally during this review and is considering many options for administrative improvement.

Generally, there is an aspiration at different levels within government to ensure that the medicinal cannabis scheme functions according to best practice principles of regulation that are consistent with Australia’s obligations under the Single Convention.

Five themes stand out in the analysis undertaken by this Review.

Unexpected administrative challenges

Numerous unexpected challenges have been encountered in implementing and administering the medicinal cannabis scheme.

Partly this stems from receipt of a substantially larger number of licence applications than was anticipated from the independent expert modelling that was done at a preparatory stage. Licence applications can be lengthy and intricate and require time-consuming consultation with applicants. The ODC was not resourced to process so many applications. This has contributed to processing delays in the ODC and to frustration and criticism on the part of licence applicants and holders.

Another contributory factor to the unexpected administrative challenges was the phrasing of some of the legislative standards in the ND Act and ND Regulation. Some standards are ambiguous, inexact or inordinately demanding. This, too, adds to the ODC’s administrative burden and to the obligations imposed on licence applicants and holders.

Similarly, a couple of provisions in the ND Act and ND Regulation go further than the Single Convention requires (for example, on the definitions of ‘cannabis plant’ and ‘drug’). This has extended the regulatory reach of the medicinal cannabis scheme further than seems necessary.

Recommendations are made in this report to address those unexpected challenges. There are recommendations to amend the ND Act and the ND Regulation to delete or rephrase some legislative standards and to introduce simpler administrative processes (for example, to allow notification rather than formal approval of permit variations that are not substantive in nature or do not pose a material risk).

It is also recommended that the ODC provide extended guidance on the meaning of some terms in the legislation that have given rise to queries and uncertainty in the licensing process (such as the terms ‘manufacture’ and ‘research’).

Regulatory focus on risk minimisation

The first two years of the medicinal cannabis scheme were marked by a strong focus on minimising the risk of criminal incursion in the scheme. This was to be expected initially, because of the requirements of the Single Convention and the improbabilities faced in regulating a new industry that is handling a narcotic drug that is susceptible to abuse. The risk minimisation focus runs through the ND Act, the ND Regulation and the regulatory method of the ODC.

A view forcefully expressed during this Review is that the same intensity is no longer required on risk minimisation in the design and administration of the medicinal cannabis scheme. The risk of criminal infiltration and diversion within the scheme has been controlled. Licence holders have a strong commercial interest to manage risks effectively and to safeguard the integrity of the industry. The ND Act operates alongside other Commonwealth, State and Territory laws that control the risks. There is general acceptance of those points within the department.

This report makes recommendations of two types dealing with the risk minimisation focus. First, the report recommends that the number and breadth of requirements imposed by the ND Regulation on licence applicants to provide information and documents in support of applications be reduced. An alternative regulatory approach is for some of the application requirements to be phrased more generally and to be supplemented by either formal guidelines issued by the Minister under s. 26C of the ND Act, instructions issued by the Secretary under similar statutory powers, or informal guidelines published by the ODC.

Second, the report recommends that the ODC, following public and stakeholder consultation, develop and publish a more contemporary and comprehensive regulatory guide. The purpose of the guide would be to explain the ODC’s regulatory powers, when and how they can be exercised, regulatory goals and priorities, and procedural fairness and other protections available to those affected by regulatory action.

Licence and permit system

The medicinal cannabis framework in the ND Act is structured around three separate licence categories – for cultivation and production (jointly), research and for manufacture. Permits are also issued separately for each licence.

The three licence structure is not a requirement of the Single Convention. It requires only that cultivators be licensed by a government agency and that the parties to the Convention control under licence the establishments and premises in which the manufacture of drugs takes place.

The current three licence structure has been vexing for licence applicants and holders, and adds to the ODC’s administrative and regulatory compliance burdens. Licence applicants must submit separate applications for each licence, provide information and documents of a similar kind in support of each application and liaise with the ODC (and possibly different ODC staff) on each application. Doubts can arise as to which activities (such as research and product development) fall within each licence category.

Separate licence categories can also add complexity for licence holders in other ways – such as demonstrating the supply chain arrangements for medicinal cannabis product, transferring or supplying product from one licence or permit to another, or applying for a variation of a licence permit or condition.

This report recommends that the ND Act be amended to establish a single licence structure. A single licence could authorise some or all of cultivation, production, manufacture and research. This would enable adoption of a simpler and more streamlined process for licence application and approval. There would be more flexibility for licence applicants and holders to tailor a required licence to their business intentions and development plans. Managing medicinal cannabis product under a single licence and complying with licence and permit conditions and notification requirements may also be more straightforward.

A single licence structure will require supplementary changes to the ND Regulation and to administrative procedures and forms. The restructure would also provide an opportunity to review how licences and permits interrelate in achieving the objectives of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act.

Hemp cultivation and supply

The report notes many cross-over points between the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act and activities occurring in the cultivation and commercial sale of low-THC hemp.

For the most part those other activities are controlled by State and Territory laws. Hemp, a specially cultivated cannabis plant that contains little or no psychoactive cannabinoid content, is usually cultivated for industrial and horticultural purposes and as a food ingredient.

The Single Convention declares that it does not apply to the cultivation of the cannabis plant exclusively for industrial or horticultural purposes. The focus of the Convention is upon the control of narcotic drugs for medical and scientific purposes. Commonwealth laws can nevertheless apply to low-THC hemp products. An example discussed in the report is that an extract of a cannabis plant that is used in a non-therapeutic product may need to be covered by a ND Act manufacture licence if it is to be exported from Australia.

The potential cross-over of Commonwealth law and State / Territory law in relation to hemp cultivation was an issue that was frequently discussed in the consultations and submissions in this Review. A general complaint was that Commonwealth law can have an overlapping and inhibiting effect on the cultivation and production of low-THC hemp.

It was not within the scope of this Review to examine those complaints. The report observes that the issues can be more complex and nuanced than at first glance. That said, it is important that the distinctions drawn in the Single Convention between the regulation of narcotic and non-narcotic cannabis derivatives is not blurred.

The report recommends, as a precautionary measure, that the department continue to monitor and advise Government on the options (if any) for altering the operation of the ND Act to remove any obstacles to the cultivation and commercial sale of low-THC hemp under State and Territory law. A related recommendation is that the definition of ‘drug’ in the ND Regulation, that applies to the manufacture licence provisions in the ND Act, be amended to remove pure cannabidiol from the definition.

Patient access

Patient access to medicinal cannabis therapies does not fall within the scope of this Review of the ND Act. It is a broad subject that is controlled by other Commonwealth, State and Territory laws and administrative arrangements.

The submissions to this Review understood that limited scope. They nevertheless took the opportunity to point out that a declared expectation when the medicinal cannabis scheme was being introduced into the ND Act in 2016, was that medicinal cannabis would be more readily and easily available to Australian patients. There are statements on the parliamentary record that confirm that expectation.

It was claimed in some submissions that the expectation has not been fulfilled. A relatively small number of patients are receiving prescribed medicinal cannabis, it is mostly imported and it is expensive. There are also claims that obtaining medicinal cannabis through illicit channels is the easier path for many patients.

This Review has not examined those claims and cannot express a view. However, the Review is aware that industry regulation has been a dominating focus in the establishment of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act since 2016. Further, the objects clause in the ND Act provides no illumination beyond declaring that the object of the ND Act is to give effect to certain of Australia’s obligations under the Single Convention.

The statutory objects clause should be an important element in signifying how the ND Act should be understood, administered and construed. To achieve that purpose, the report recommends that the objects clause include a statement that an object of the ND Act is to enable cannabis cultivation, production, manufacture and research, in order to ensure that medicinal cannabis products are available to Australian patients for therapeutic purposes.

Implementation of recommendations

The 26 recommendations in this report span amendment of the ND Act, amendment of the ND Regulation, and administrative-level reforms.

The most far-reaching recommendation – and, in that sense, the prominent recommendation – is to replace the current three licence structure in the ND Act with a single licence structure. Implementation of that recommendation would require extensive changes not only to the ND Act but also to the ND Regulation and to ODC publications, forms and administrative procedures.

It is important that other improvements to the medicinal cannabis scheme are not postponed until a new licence structure is adopted. To do so would maintain practices that detract from the opportunity to make a well-regarded medicinal cannabis scheme work far better.

The licence and permit application requirements in the ND Regulation could be amended and simplified ahead of any change to the three licence structure. Some application requirements in the Regulation could be deleted or revised, and others could be merged or consolidated so that single forms could be used for multiple application purposes.

Many other recommendations in this report could be implemented in a short timeframe by amendment of the ND Regulation or administrative reforms – for example, to extend the standard licence terms, reduce the number and difficulty of licence conditions, institute simpler procedures for notifying and approving routine permit variations, and lessening the frequency and scope of the reporting obligations on licence holders.

Early steps could also be taken within the ODC and the department to act on other recommendations that require publication of an expanded regulatory guide and guidance material, and refinement of existing review and consultation arrangements.

Acknowledgements

This Review has benefited greatly from the input and assistance of many people.

The discussion at three public consultation forums attended by over 200 people was lively and constructive. Many thoughtful submissions were received that provided commentary and examples that were drawn from heavily in preparing this report.

Staff in the department, particularly the ODC and the TGA, gave excellent support to the Review and readily shared their considerable knowledge and experience in the regulation of therapeutic substances. Many other officers in Commonwealth, State and Territory government agencies were similarly keen to be consulted and to render valuable assistance during the Review.

The Australian Advisory Council on the Medicinal Use of Cannabis took great interest in the Review and held lengthy and constructive discussions with the Reviewer at three meetings of the Council.

Special acknowledgement and thanks are owed, most importantly, to a small and talented team within the TGA who provided expert assistance throughout – Danielle Chifley, Tristan Dimmock and (for part of the review) Kieran Proctor. They brought to the Review great energy, enthusiasm and a deep intellectual grasp of complex issues.

  Want to know what others thought of it?

We refer you to  Business Insider Australia who write

  A report into the Narcotic Drugs Act has been tabled in Parliament, recommending a number of changes to the licensing regime regulating the business of medical marijuana and other cannabis products in Australia.

The report acknowledged the complexity of the current regulations. Of the 246 cannabis cultivation or research licence applications the government has received since June 2019, just 63 have been granted.

However, Cannabis Consulting Australia’s Rhys Cohen told Business Insider Australia that while the report was positive step, we still have to see how it will work in reality.

Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/cannabis-regulation-in-australia-could-become-way-less-complex-but-an-industry-expert-says-the-devil-will-be-in-the-detail-2019-9#tlzpW1FMc1q4WhAm.99

The post Australia: Tabling of Report on the Review into the 2016 Medicinal Cannabis amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 appeared first on CBD Oil Vape Liquid Spray - Cbd Pain Relief Capsules - Weed Consortium.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/31o9UAd via IFTTT

[bestmarijuanaboutiques]

Australia: Tabling of Report on the Review into the 2016 Medicinal Cannabis amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967

New Post has been published on https://bestmarijuanaboutiques.com/?post_type=wprss_feed_item&p=23643

Australia: Tabling of Report on the Review into the 2016 Medicinal Cannabis amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967

Tabling of Report on the Review into the 2016 Medicinal Cannabis amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967

5 September 2019

The Australian Federal Govt Reports…….

Late last year, Minister Greg Hunt appointed Professor John McMillan AO to conduct a Review and Report on the operation of theNarcotic Drugs Act 1967( the Act) in accordance with section 26A of the Act.

Professor McMillan’s Final Report  on the Review of the Act was tabled in Parliament today, Thursday 5 September 2019.

The Final Report contains 26 recommendations to improve the regulatory framework for the cultivation, production and manufacture of medicinal cannabis in Australia. Minister Hunt has accepted all 26 recommendations put forward by Professor McMillan, which broadly aim to reduce the regulatory burden on industry, promote and allow greater flexibility in the administration of the legislation to support industry innovation and development.

A two stage reform process is proposed to be undertaken to ensure that the recommendations are appropriately implemented with some reforms being implemented as early as later this year. Further details on the implementation of these reforms will be published in due course.

Further details on the Review process are available:Review of the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967.

Click on the image to access the full report

Here is the full Executive Summary

Adoption of a national medicinal cannabis scheme in Australia

Australia ratified the United NationsSingle Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961in 1967.[1]The same year the Commonwealth Parliament enacted theNarcotic Drugs Act 1967(Cth) (ND Act) to give effect to certain of Australia’s obligations under the Convention.

The Single Convention declares that the medical use of narcotic drugs is indispensable for the relief of pain and suffering and that they should, accordingly, be available for medical and scientific use. At the same time, the Single Convention recognises that effective measures are necessary, both nationally and internationally, to guard against addiction to and abuse of narcotic drugs. Among the measures that will be necessary are national control and licensing of the cultivation, production and manufacture of narcotic drugs.

The ND Act initially gave effect to the Single Convention in a limited way. The Australian Government Minister for Health (the Minister) administering the ND Act could grant licences to manufacture narcotic drugs, and the ND Act regulated the movement of narcotic drugs through Australia (for example, on vessels). Until 2016 the manufacture licensing provisions in the ND Act were applied to the control of narcotic drugs obtained from the opium poppy.

In 2016 the ND Act was extensively amended to establish a national regime permitting the cultivation and production of cannabis and cannabis resin in Australia (described in this report as the medicinal cannabis scheme). This came after an active debate that had been occurring both publicly and in Australian legislatures to allow expanded patient access to medicinal cannabis products.

The central feature of the medicinal cannabis scheme established in 2016 was a licensing scheme applying to the cultivation of cannabis plants, the production of cannabis flower and plant resin, the conduct of research relating to medicinal cannabis, and the manufacture of medicinal cannabis drugs. Licences could be granted separately for each of those processes – cultivation and production (combined), research and manufacture. An allied feature of the three-licence scheme was that the specific activity a licence holder could undertake would be spelt out in one or more permits, for which an application would be separately made.

The licensing and permit system enabled the Commonwealth to control the number and types of cannabis plants that could be cultivated, the size of cannabis crops, research activities, the permitted uses of manufactured drugs, the eligibility and conduct of licence holders, and the overall security and integrity of licensed activities. Commonwealth regulatory control enabled it to meet its obligations under the Single Convention to report on Australian activity to the International Narcotics Control Board.

Commonwealth regulatory functions and powers were formally vested by the ND Act in the Secretary of the Australian Government Department of Health (the department), but would be exercisable by a new office established within the department – the Office of Drug Control (ODC). The ODC became part of the Health Products Regulation Group in the department, alongside the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). The TGA was an established part of the Department that regulates therapeutic goods to ensure they are of an acceptable standard.

Review of the operation of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act

The 2016 amendments to the ND Act required the Minister to cause a review of the operation of the ND Act to be carried out during the third year of operation of the medicinal cannabis scheme. This Review commenced in January 2019. The Terms of Reference for the Review are inAppendix Ato this report. The report of the review is to be tabled by the Minister in both houses of the Commonwealth Parliament by 29 October 2019.

Public consultation with key stakeholders has been a major element of this Review. This has included the publication of a Discussion Paper in March 2019, consultation forums in three cities, receipt of written submissions (many of which are published on the TGA and ODC websites), and meetings with industry bodies, government working groups and the Australian Advisory Council on the Medicinal Use of Cannabis.

This report makes 26 recommendations for:

amendment of theNarcotic Drugs Act 1967(the ND Act) and theNarcotic Drugs Regulation 2016(ND Regulation)

publication by the ODC of expanded guidance on key features of the ND Act and ND Regulations and the ODC’s regulatory approach

ongoing review of specified issues by the department, the Australian Advisory Council on the Medicinal Use of Cannabis and government working groups

This Review is restricted to the operation of the ND Act. It is not a review more broadly of cannabis regulation in Australia, patient access to medicinal cannabis or scheduling and other decisions of the TGA in relation to cannabis products. There is nevertheless a mention of those issues at various points in the report as they are aspects of the broader setting in which the medicinal cannabis scheme operates.

Key findings of this Review

The establishment of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act in 2016 was an important milestone in the Australian Government’s approach to the treatment of personal pain and suffering.

The medicinal cannabis scheme built on steps that had already been taken both at national and at State and Territory level to allow patient access to medicinal cannabis products and to support research. The ND Act amendments, however, went much further in establishing a comprehensive framework to facilitate and support an Australian industry dedicated to the supply of medicinal cannabis therapies.

It was described by the Minister at the time as a scheme that would ensure patient availability of a safe, legal and sustainable supply of cannabis-derived products – a ‘farm to pharmacy’ cannabis supply chain. The establishment of the Commonwealth scheme also led to State governments drawing back from plans already partially legislated to establish State-level schemes regulating cultivation, manufacture and supply of medicinal cannabis products.

A great deal has occurred since October 2016 when the new ND Act scheme commenced. An administrative structure and procedures have been developed and administered by the ODC and the department. The framework is notable for the careful balance it strikes between facilitating cultivation and production of medicinal cannabis products, implementing Australia’s obligations under the Single Convention to safeguard against illegal practices, and facilitating cooperation with State and Territory governments to administer safe and sustainable pathways for patient access to medicinal cannabis therapies.

The ODC has received (at 30 June 2019) 246 licence applications, and granted 63 licences (24 medicinal cannabis licences, 16 cannabis research licences and 23 manufacture licences). This is a far higher number than expected. It points to strong commercial interest in the Australian medicinal cannabis industry. This is supported by an active research program in Australia, and the formation of two representative industry organisations. Informal indications point to firm international confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of Australian regulatory processes and the reliability of Australian medicinal cannabis products.

A direct correlation cannot be drawn between, on the one hand, increased cultivation and manufacturing activity by ND Act licence holders and, on the other hand, improved patient access in Australia to medicinal cannabis therapies. There has, nevertheless, been a steady and accelerating increase in patient access that points to a parallel and consistent trend. For example, under one of the patient access pathways described in this report (Special Access Scheme Category B) the number of monthly approvals for the supply of a medicinal cannabis product rose from 132 approvals in May 2018 to 1,374 in May 2019. Increased patient access is also recorded under other pathways.

The medicinal cannabis scheme was established in the ND Act in 2016 and is still in its early days. To date, the establishment of the scheme has overall been resoundingly successful. The ODC has played a central role in this success. It is well respected throughout government and industry for its expertise and professionalism. Additional budgetary funding was provided to the department in 2018 to administer the medicinal cannabis scheme.

These developments are encouraging for Australia. There is growing public and international interest in medicinal cannabis therapies. Proposals have also been developed by the World Health Organisation (WHO) (but not yet considered by the United Nations Commission on Drugs) to adjust the cannabis settings in the Schedules of the Single Convention.

Improvement of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act

Strong interest was expressed in submissions and consultations during this Review for legislative and administrative reforms to improve the operation of the medicinal cannabis scheme. There was an equally keen interest in the ODC and the TGA to evaluate the reform proposals. An independent business review of ODC administration was commenced internally during this review and is considering many options for administrative improvement.

Generally, there is an aspiration at different levels within government to ensure that the medicinal cannabis scheme functions according to best practice principles of regulation that are consistent with Australia’s obligations under the Single Convention.

Five themes stand out in the analysis undertaken by this Review.

Unexpected administrative challenges

Numerous unexpected challenges have been encountered in implementing and administering the medicinal cannabis scheme.

Partly this stems from receipt of a substantially larger number of licence applications than was anticipated from the independent expert modelling that was done at a preparatory stage. Licence applications can be lengthy and intricate and require time-consuming consultation with applicants. The ODC was not resourced to process so many applications. This has contributed to processing delays in the ODC and to frustration and criticism on the part of licence applicants and holders.

Another contributory factor to the unexpected administrative challenges was the phrasing of some of the legislative standards in the ND Act and ND Regulation. Some standards are ambiguous, inexact or inordinately demanding. This, too, adds to the ODC’s administrative burden and to the obligations imposed on licence applicants and holders.

Similarly, a couple of provisions in the ND Act and ND Regulation go further than the Single Convention requires (for example, on the definitions of ‘cannabis plant’ and ‘drug’). This has extended the regulatory reach of the medicinal cannabis scheme further than seems necessary.

Recommendations are made in this report to address those unexpected challenges. There are recommendations to amend the ND Act and the ND Regulation to delete or rephrase some legislative standards and to introduce simpler administrative processes (for example, to allow notification rather than formal approval of permit variations that are not substantive in nature or do not pose a material risk).

It is also recommended that the ODC provide extended guidance on the meaning of some terms in the legislation that have given rise to queries and uncertainty in the licensing process (such as the terms ‘manufacture’ and ‘research’).

Regulatory focus on risk minimisation

The first two years of the medicinal cannabis scheme were marked by a strong focus on minimising the risk of criminal incursion in the scheme. This was to be expected initially, because of the requirements of the Single Convention and the improbabilities faced in regulating a new industry that is handling a narcotic drug that is susceptible to abuse. The risk minimisation focus runs through the ND Act, the ND Regulation and the regulatory method of the ODC.

A view forcefully expressed during this Review is that the same intensity is no longer required on risk minimisation in the design and administration of the medicinal cannabis scheme. The risk of criminal infiltration and diversion within the scheme has been controlled. Licence holders have a strong commercial interest to manage risks effectively and to safeguard the integrity of the industry. The ND Act operates alongside other Commonwealth, State and Territory laws that control the risks. There is general acceptance of those points within the department.

This report makes recommendations of two types dealing with the risk minimisation focus. First, the report recommends that the number and breadth of requirements imposed by the ND Regulation on licence applicants to provide information and documents in support of applications be reduced. An alternative regulatory approach is for some of the application requirements to be phrased more generally and to be supplemented by either formal guidelines issued by the Minister under s. 26C of the ND Act, instructions issued by the Secretary under similar statutory powers, or informal guidelines published by the ODC.

Second, the report recommends that the ODC, following public and stakeholder consultation, develop and publish a more contemporary and comprehensive regulatory guide. The purpose of the guide would be to explain the ODC’s regulatory powers, when and how they can be exercised, regulatory goals and priorities, and procedural fairness and other protections available to those affected by regulatory action.

Licence and permit system

The medicinal cannabis framework in the ND Act is structured around three separate licence categories – for cultivation and production (jointly), research and for manufacture. Permits are also issued separately for each licence.

The three licence structure is not a requirement of the Single Convention. It requires only that cultivators be licensed by a government agency and that the parties to the Convention control under licence the establishments and premises in which the manufacture of drugs takes place.

The current three licence structure has been vexing for licence applicants and holders, and adds to the ODC’s administrative and regulatory compliance burdens. Licence applicants must submit separate applications for each licence, provide information and documents of a similar kind in support of each application and liaise with the ODC (and possibly different ODC staff) on each application. Doubts can arise as to which activities (such as research and product development) fall within each licence category.

Separate licence categories can also add complexity for licence holders in other ways – such as demonstrating the supply chain arrangements for medicinal cannabis product, transferring or supplying product from one licence or permit to another, or applying for a variation of a licence permit or condition.

This report recommends that the ND Act be amended to establish a single licence structure. A single licence could authorise some or all of cultivation, production, manufacture and research. This would enable adoption of a simpler and more streamlined process for licence application and approval. There would be more flexibility for licence applicants and holders to tailor a required licence to their business intentions and development plans. Managing medicinal cannabis product under a single licence and complying with licence and permit conditions and notification requirements may also be more straightforward.

A single licence structure will require supplementary changes to the ND Regulation and to administrative procedures and forms. The restructure would also provide an opportunity to review how licences and permits interrelate in achieving the objectives of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act.

Hemp cultivation and supply

The report notes many cross-over points between the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act and activities occurring in the cultivation and commercial sale of low-THC hemp.

For the most part those other activities are controlled by State and Territory laws. Hemp, a specially cultivated cannabis plant that contains little or no psychoactive cannabinoid content, is usually cultivated for industrial and horticultural purposes and as a food ingredient.

The Single Convention declares that it does not apply to the cultivation of the cannabis plant exclusively for industrial or horticultural purposes. The focus of the Convention is upon the control of narcotic drugs for medical and scientific purposes. Commonwealth laws can nevertheless apply to low-THC hemp products. An example discussed in the report is that an extract of a cannabis plant that is used in a non-therapeutic product may need to be covered by a ND Act manufacture licence if it is to be exported from Australia.

The potential cross-over of Commonwealth law and State / Territory law in relation to hemp cultivation was an issue that was frequently discussed in the consultations and submissions in this Review. A general complaint was that Commonwealth law can have an overlapping and inhibiting effect on the cultivation and production of low-THC hemp.

It was not within the scope of this Review to examine those complaints. The report observes that the issues can be more complex and nuanced than at first glance. That said, it is important that the distinctions drawn in the Single Convention between the regulation of narcotic and non-narcotic cannabis derivatives is not blurred.

The report recommends, as a precautionary measure, that the department continue to monitor and advise Government on the options (if any) for altering the operation of the ND Act to remove any obstacles to the cultivation and commercial sale of low-THC hemp under State and Territory law. A related recommendation is that the definition of ‘drug’ in the ND Regulation, that applies to the manufacture licence provisions in the ND Act, be amended to remove pure cannabidiol from the definition.

Patient access

Patient access to medicinal cannabis therapies does not fall within the scope of this Review of the ND Act. It is a broad subject that is controlled by other Commonwealth, State and Territory laws and administrative arrangements.

The submissions to this Review understood that limited scope. They nevertheless took the opportunity to point out that a declared expectation when the medicinal cannabis scheme was being introduced into the ND Act in 2016, was that medicinal cannabis would be more readily and easily available to Australian patients. There are statements on the parliamentary record that confirm that expectation.

It was claimed in some submissions that the expectation has not been fulfilled. A relatively small number of patients are receiving prescribed medicinal cannabis, it is mostly imported and it is expensive. There are also claims that obtaining medicinal cannabis through illicit channels is the easier path for many patients.

This Review has not examined those claims and cannot express a view. However, the Review is aware that industry regulation has been a dominating focus in the establishment of the medicinal cannabis scheme in the ND Act since 2016. Further, the objects clause in the ND Act provides no illumination beyond declaring that the object of the ND Act is to give effect to certain of Australia’s obligations under the Single Convention.

The statutory objects clause should be an important element in signifying how the ND Act should be understood, administered and construed. To achieve that purpose, the report recommends that the objects clause include a statement that an object of the ND Act is to enable cannabis cultivation, production, manufacture and research, in order to ensure that medicinal cannabis products are available to Australian patients for therapeutic purposes.

Implementation of recommendations

The 26 recommendations in this report span amendment of the ND Act, amendment of the ND Regulation, and administrative-level reforms.

The most far-reaching recommendation – and, in that sense, the prominent recommendation – is to replace the current three licence structure in the ND Act with a single licence structure. Implementation of that recommendation would require extensive changes not only to the ND Act but also to the ND Regulation and to ODC publications, forms and administrative procedures.

It is important that other improvements to the medicinal cannabis scheme are not postponed until a new licence structure is adopted. To do so would maintain practices that detract from the opportunity to make a well-regarded medicinal cannabis scheme work far better.

The licence and permit application requirements in the ND Regulation could be amended and simplified ahead of any change to the three licence structure. Some application requirements in the Regulation could be deleted or revised, and others could be merged or consolidated so that single forms could be used for multiple application purposes.

Many other recommendations in this report could be implemented in a short timeframe by amendment of the ND Regulation or administrative reforms – for example, to extend the standard licence terms, reduce the number and difficulty of licence conditions, institute simpler procedures for notifying and approving routine permit variations, and lessening the frequency and scope of the reporting obligations on licence holders.

Early steps could also be taken within the ODC and the department to act on other recommendations that require publication of an expanded regulatory guide and guidance material, and refinement of existing review and consultation arrangements.

Acknowledgements

This Review has benefited greatly from the input and assistance of many people.

The discussion at three public consultation forums attended by over 200 people was lively and constructive. Many thoughtful submissions were received that provided commentary and examples that were drawn from heavily in preparing this report.

Staff in the department, particularly the ODC and the TGA, gave excellent support to the Review and readily shared their considerable knowledge and experience in the regulation of therapeutic substances. Many other officers in Commonwealth, State and Territory government agencies were similarly keen to be consulted and to render valuable assistance during the Review.

The Australian Advisory Council on the Medicinal Use of Cannabis took great interest in the Review and held lengthy and constructive discussions with the Reviewer at three meetings of the Council.

Special acknowledgement and thanks are owed, most importantly, to a small and talented team within the TGA who provided expert assistance throughout – Danielle Chifley, Tristan Dimmock and (for part of the review) Kieran Proctor. They brought to the Review great energy, enthusiasm and a deep intellectual grasp of complex issues.

  Want to know what others thought of it?

We refer you to  Business Insider Australia who write

  A report into the Narcotic Drugs Act has been tabled in Parliament, recommending a number of changes to the licensing regime regulating the business of medical marijuana and other cannabis products in Australia.

The report acknowledged the complexity of the current regulations. Of the 246 cannabis cultivation or research licence applications the government has received since June 2019, just 63 have been granted.

However, Cannabis Consulting Australia’s Rhys Cohen told Business Insider Australia that while the report was positive step, we still have to see how it will work in reality.

Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/cannabis-regulation-in-australia-could-become-way-less-complex-but-an-industry-expert-says-the-devil-will-be-in-the-detail-2019-9#tlzpW1FMc1q4WhAm.99

[wastelandcth]

Call if You Need Me - cth

part of nation of two

summary: We meet Petra and Calum. Two souls who keep running into each other. The beginning to a nation of two that brings Calum and Petra to realize how much they love the sun on one another.

author’s notes: Welcome back to Nation of Two! Thanks for your patience with this series! I’m very excited to be sharing this new version of it with you and I hope you’ll enjoy it as much as I do!

warnings: Brief mentions of sex

masterlist || request || read it on AO3 || next part

When Calum first met Petra, his life seemed to look brighter. Days were warmer and the birds sang a little louder whenever he walked outside. It was as if everything used to be in black and white and Petra brought the color. It was as if some higher power above Calum brought him to a random park in LA and his life was forever changed. He'd never seen her before, which wasn't hard to do since LA was filled with people and the chance of seeing her again was minute. 

Okay, maybe that was a lie. Calum had seen her before. It was like fate had been playing jokes on him. 

The first time he'd seen Petra, he didn't even know her name. She'd been ahead of him at the grocery store. She'd been unloading her groceries onto the belt, colorful fruits, and vegetables that made Calum's basket seem dull in color, the cashier and her both chatting over a drink Petra had been excited to try. Calum had been watching, and listening, to her absentmindedly. He'd stopped by to grab a few snacks and drinks before the band's slot at the studio began. 

Calum liked her smile. He liked how she was polite and didn't interrupt the cashier when she told her about the other flavors of the energy drink that Calum was making a mental note about getting next time around. He also liked, and he might've chuckled he doesn't remember now, Petra's reusable bags which were a mix of tote bags that had different patterns on them. His favorite had to be the canvas bag that had been stamped with a drawing of a corgi with an umbrella. 

Calum had never been one to approach people he didn't know in public, especially pretty women who took his breath away, so it was no surprise when he watched Petra walk out of the grocery store with her bags as he waited for the cashier to finish ringing up his groceries. He wouldn't even know what to say if he had gone after her. He'd probably just make a fool of himself and end up with flushed cheeks at the studio as he thought back on the moment. So with his snacks and non energized drinks in a plastic bag, Calum made his way out of the grocery store, his eyes searching the parking lot in hopes of seeing the woman with the bright smile and colorful groceries. 

The second time Calum saw Petra, he thought he'd imagined it. His hands were full with his laptop, journal, and the iced coffee he'd been nursing all morning in the way of him opening the door to the record shop he was meant to meet Ashton at. Looking helpless, Calum tried to figure out the best way to open the door, until his savior showed up from inside the store. 

"Oh, sorry. I didn't see you there," Petra laughed, her eyebrows raising as she noticed the confused look on Calum's face, "Hands full?"

"Huh?" Calum mumbled as he looked at her in somewhat awe, "Oh, uh, yeah. Thank you," he chuckled before stepping into the record shop, his head nodding at her. 

"Don't worry about it, have a nice day! They have really good records today," she said and waved, giving him a bright smile before she continued on with her day. 

Calum would've been lying if he said he hadn't felt his heart race and his palms sweat as he talked with her. It might've even been embarrassing if he thought too much about it, how a short and polite conversation between two strangers could rile him up this much. But with a deep breath and another sip of the now watered-down coffee, Calum walked around the store, trying to find Ashton and wondering if he'd ever see Petra again. 

"Oh, it's you again. Are you sure you're not stalking me?" Petra's voice broke Calum out of his gaze, her laugh warming his skin as he tried his best not to blush. 

Calum was used to his fans following his every move. He was used to them knowing where he was before he even knew and it had gotten to the point where he'd rarely want to leave the comfort of his home. But this was just strange. In the past two months, Calum had seen Petra a handful of times. Since their initial two meetings, Calum had spotted her at the same brunch spot that Michael had taken him to on a sunny Wednesday. He'd also seen her at the beach when he'd taken Duke after a stressful studio session. It seemed like everywhere Calum went, Petra had beat him to it. And even now, as he'd stopped at the flower shop down the street from the grocery store, Petra was strolling through the aisles of vases that Calum just so happened to walk into. 

"It would seem that way, huh?" Calum said with a nervous chuckle, "Guess we just keep on meeting,"

"Some people would call that fate, you know?" Petra teased, her eyebrow-raising as she stuck her hand out for him to shake, "I'm Petra."

"Petra. Nice to meet you again," Calum laughed and took her hand in his, giving it a soft squeeze as she shook them, "I'm Calum."

"Yeah, I know," she mumbled, her eyes widening a bit, "Shit no, that sounded creepy. I just meant that-"

"Are you sure you're not the one who's stalking me?" Calum asked, no malice in his voice, and the smile he was trying to hide gave way to his teasing.

"Haha. I'm just a fan of your work. Who wouldn't be, you guys are changing the music scene," Petra nodded and shrugged, her addicting smile once again blessing Calum's presence. 

"I appreciate that Petra, it means a lot," he nodded, "So you're buying flowers for someone special?"

Petra laughed at that, her eyes looking past him before making their way back to meet his. Calum felt the familiar warmth that spread over his body whenever he'd seen her in the past two months, the feeling that something was meant to happen. Calum couldn't deny that she was beautiful, besides her smile that always seems to be on his mind these days, Calum found himself looking over her as well. Watching the way her curls bounced on her shoulders and the way her sundress seemed to match the warm weather and warmth he felt inside. 

"Uh, no. Can't a woman buy herself flowers something?" she asked, "Are you?"

"Can't a man buy himself some flowers?" Calum returned, his chuckle soft as he shrugged, "I guess I should go pay for these then. It was nice to properly meet you, Petra," 

"Calum," she said with a nod, "Have a nice day. Maybe fate will have us meet again," she teased and with a wave, she was walking back down the aisle. 

And Calum really hoped that this time, fate would be on his side. 

"Morning," Petra's soft voice broke Calum out of his early morning thoughts, "Have you been awake long?"

Calum's head turned to the side, the breath he'd been planning to let go of getting caught in his throat as his eyes landed on Petra. Her room was the perfect representation of who she was. The plants that adorned the window left the smell of rain in her room almost constantly. The soft covers that Calum found himself under the majority of the time he'd spent with her reminded him of clouds. But his favorite part of Petra's bedroom was the giant window next to her bed which let the sunlight filter in and land on her in the mornings. She always looked ethereal in the mornings, her soft skin glowing under the sun as her curls covered her eyes. It was Calum's favorite way to wake up, with Petra by his side, her soft breaths against his shoulder. He loved waking up next to her almost as much as he loved falling asleep next to her, watching how the moonlight illuminated her as her thoughts drifted from coherent to a mumbling of words. 

"No, just a few minutes, how'd you sleep?" Calum mumbled, sleep still evident in his voice as he cleared his throat to try and chase it away. 

"Extremely comfortable," she mumbled, her lips pressing a soft kiss onto his shoulder, "Slept next to the man I love, couldn't ask for anything better than that, huh?"

Calum's sleepy smile matched hers, his body turning onto its side so he could pull her close to his chest. It had been six months since Calum had bought her those flowers she'd been holding. Six months since he'd asked the cashier to slip the little white card with his phone number into the bouquet. Six months since Calum had picked up the phone on a sunny evening and listened to Petra tease him over the cheesy message he'd left her. 

“Pretty flowers for a woman who deserves them, that’s pretty cheesy, don’t you think?” Petra had asked, her voice soft as Calum’s cheeks flushed. He’d been sitting on his couch, his hands sweaty as he tried to excuse the action but it didn’t matter, Petra had already fallen for him and his cheesiness, “You have a way with words, Calum.”

“Maybe I can make up for the cheesiness soon?” Calum asked, trying to keep his voice steady as he ran a hand through the curls that had been long for too long and ached to be cut, “Maybe I can take you out sometime soon?”

“I’d like that a lot,” Petra mumbled, hoping that Calum couldn’t hear her giddiness or the smile that was adorning her face, even over the phone, “Throwing fate into your own hands?”

“Of course, we have to do that at some point, don’t we?”

And after last night's confessions, when both were too lost in one another's bodies and lips to hold back their emotions for any longer, their night together went from a simple date to a confession of love. It was something that Calum had put off for so long in his life, something that he'd tried before and failed. Something that had broken him so badly he'd shut the world out for so long. But with Petra, loving her was nothing more than common sense. It was wanting her by his side and buying her pretty flowers whenever he passed by the flower shop. So when Petra whispered those three little words to him in between moans and kisses, Calum never hesitated to say them back because he'd known the truth for months. He loved Petra and she loved him. 

And he couldn't ask for anything more. He loved Petra on her good days and on her bad days. He loved Petra when it was raining outside and her pout hid away the beautiful smile Calum had fallen for all those months ago. He loved her in the supermarket when they were the only people walking down the fluorescent-lit aisles in the late hours of the night. He loved her when they were in the darkness of his living room, talking into the morning lights about everything and nothing. 

If you asked Petra, which her parents did a lot, she'd tell you the same things. That she loved Calum to the farthest galaxy and back. That the moon and the stars could never shine as bright as he did and that the sunlight on his golden-brown skin was something she could study daily. She loved Calum even if he preferred rainy days over the sunny ones she loved so much. Petra knew he'd been hurt before, that he'd hidden his heart behind a wall of ice and that it had taken a lot of time and working on himself to get to where they were. She knew that Calum could be like the bird his name was meant for, that he could get spooked and fly away at any moment. But Petra loved that even with all the fears and the doubts his mind gave him, he'd whispered how much he loved her the night before, his breathy moans in her ear as he confessed how he'd felt. 

It was a sunny afternoon when Petra first saw Calum. He had his hands full and was struggling to open the door of the record shop that her friend had recently started working at. Petra had promised to stop by and maybe buy a few albums to boost her friend's sales for the day. She'd just finished checking out and was on her way out when she'd spotted him. She recognized him immediately, the pink pressed vinyl in her bag had his face on it, and so she opened the door for him. She liked his eyes, how they widened when he realized he wasn't going to have to drop his coffee or laptop on the ground in order to open the door. She liked the breathy laugh he gave her before walking into the store and the way her heart raced once she had walked back to her car and had a mini freak out over meeting one of her favorite artists. Had she regretted not saying anything else besides a joke? Of course, she had, she could've asked for a picture of even for him to sign the vinyl she'd just bought, but Petra had decided that if it was meant to be, she'd see him again. 

"Oh, I don't know mom, it's weird! I've only seen him in passing! I've said maybe a handful of words to him and to make matters worse he's a famous musician who will probably never know my name," Petra huffed as she got back into her car after once again seeing Calum at the bookstore she visited every once in a while, "What if he thinks I'm just a crazy stalker fan?"

"Petra, darling, you're a beautiful young woman. He'd be a fool to those harsh things about you. Maybe you've already caught his eye and he's the one who's nervous to say anything to you." Petra's mother said over the phone, the evident noises of cooking in the background, "Next time you see him, you should talk to him. You can't get struck by lightning if you're not standing in the rain."

"Mom, that is the most terrifying metaphor you could've used. I hope you know that," Petra mumbled as she laid her head back against her headrest. 

"I love you Petra, be safe," her mom chuckled, "Go dancing out in the rain for a change!"

Petra had known her mom meant well. She'd been living in LA for almost a year and she had yet to put herself out there. Sure, she had friends and her coworkers were always inviting her out to bar nights and social events. But Petra craved the attention of someone. She'd been single for years now and moving to LA had been a step towards changing that. She was meant to find herself and what she wanted to do with her life here. She knew meeting Calum in multiple places around this giant city hadn't been coincidences, she knew that fate had a funny way of playing with her and she was just supposed to take everything thrown at her with a grain of salt. 

Petra smiled as she listened to Calum talk over the phone, he was chatting about the latest city the band was in. He'd been gone for a few weeks, living his life and playing shows every night. Sure, Petra missed him, she missed him like crazy every day whenever she woke up in an empty bed and when she ate breakfast alone. But she knew that Calum had missed being on stage and missed singing in front of a crowd. Even if that meant that Petra and Calum couldn't be together for a while, it'd be worth it. 

"P, you there?" Calum asked, chuckling quietly, Petra could hear the smile in his voice, could see him leaning against the tour bus with that soft smile she loved so much, "Or did you disappear on me?"

"Sorry, yeah I'm here." Petra laughed quietly, "What were you saying?"

"I'm coming home, babe," Calum said happily, "We've got a break and I'm gonna fly out to spend time with you."

Calum was packing up his bag on the counter of her bathroom, the glass wall of her shower made him look like a blur. The warm water from the showerhead was hitting her body, soothing the aches from the night before as she listened to Calum talk about his most recent trip. Her eyes were closed as she massaged shampoo into her hair, but she could still picture Calum, his hands above his head, or playing an invisible bass as he told Petra about the moment he and the band knew they'd cracked the code on their latest single. 

"So do I get a sneak peek of it?" Petra asked as she finished shampooing her hair, her eyes opening to meet Calum, who was standing next to the entrance of the shower. 

"You wish," he laughed and shook her head, "Gotta wait until we have the master done, lovebug."

"Ugh, I thought dating one of your favorite musicians meant you got to listen to new music first?" she mumbled in fake annoyance, her hands moving to splash Calum with water. 

"Oh you're gonna pay for that one," he laughed and before Petra knew it, Calum's arms were wrapped around hers and the water was splashing them both. 

"You're supposed to be packing, dork. Can't leave if you don't have a suitcase packed," Petra mumbled against his lips, her thumb stroking his jawline.

"Stop revealing my plans, honey," he whispered and pulled her into another kiss, "You forgot an important part of my plan though."

"Oh yeah? And what would that be, Dove?" she asked quietly, the familiar nickname bringing a redness to Calum’s cheeks, and smiled as she followed a water drop that rolled down his forehead to his jaw. It rolled down slowly, almost as if it too was taking its time enjoying the feeling of Calum’s skin against it.

"You're coming with me. Taking you home with me this time." 

taglist: @hoodhoran​​ @moonlightcriess​​ @mxgyver​​ @calpops​​ @karajaynetoday​​ @notlukehemmo​​ @calumrose​​ @devilatmydoor​​ @lowkeyflop​​  @notinthesameguey​​ @hemmo1996-5sosvevo​​ @ashtonsunflower​​ @2fangirl4u​​ @multistann​​​ @wiiildflowerrr @himbohood​​ @in-superbloom​​ @ashtonsunflower​​ @suchalonelysunflower​​ @killmywildflower​​ @sebsbrokentoe​​

[harlemnewyork]

The Classical Theatre of Harlem Presents “ANTIGONE”

FREE in Marcus Garvey Park

The Classical Theatre of Harlem (CTH) presents “Antigone,” a modern, Afropunk inspired version of Sophocles classic Greek tragedy. Back for its sixth season of FREE theater performances in Harlem’s Marcus Garvey Park the company presents a work that showcases the strength and voices of audacious women responding to rigid societal inequities. This updated work showcases ancient ideas that have taken center stage in the current climate: order, law, justice and marginalized voices confronting power and patriarchy.

Calling on the cultural landscape of African-American traditions and inspired by the Afropunk movement, while also adhering to the Greek tragic form; this fresh reimagining of the classic story will captivate, stun and inspire audiences from all backgrounds.

PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE The Classical Theatre of Harlem’s Uptown Shakespeare in the Park production of “Antigone” runs July 5-29, 2018. Tuesday – Sunday at 8:30pm Previews: July 5-7, 2018 Opening Night: July 8, 2018 Closing Night: July 29, 2018

The Classical Theatre of Harlem (Ty Jones, Producing Artistic Director) presents “Antigone,” inspired by Paul Roche’s adaptation from the classic Greek tragedy by Sophocles. Back for its sixth season of free theater performances and affectionately known as the Uptown Shakespeare in the Park, the Classical Theatre of Harlem (CTH) is thrilled to return to Marcus Garvey Park this summer, presenting a work that showcases the strength and voices of audacious women responding to rigid societal inequities.

CTH’s offering of ANTIGONE is inspired by the Paul Roche adaptation which accomplishes a fidelity to the original while giving CTH the flexibility to showcase ancient ideas that have taken center stage in the current climate: order, law, justice and marginalized voices confronting power and patriarchy.

Set in the city of Thebes in a dystopian future, the struggle for power, glory and the claim to the city shatters the bonds of brotherhood, leaving two men lifeless. The new king proclaims one brother a hero and the other a usurper, leaving his limp body lying in the street as an example to those who dare act against the state. The citizens of the city avert their eyes due to fear, turning instead to their new leader who vows to restore order to the war torn city. But when the sister of the slain Young Brothers protests the edict, she breaks faith with everything she has ever known in order to set things right at any cost.

“Antigone” captures the resoluteness of a woman who refuses to back down, despite what is at stake in a patriarchal society. CTH’s fast-moving and provocative drama featuring the company’s signature uptown style, passionately speaks to the fraught historical moment we find ourselves in today.

Calling on the cultural landscape of African-American traditions, while adhering to the Greek tragic form; this fresh reimagining of the classic story will captivate, stun and inspire audiences from all backgrounds.

The company of “Antigone” includes: Obie Award winner Ty Jones (as Creon; POWER, Julius Caesar), Kahlil X. Daniel (as Teiresias), Carl Louis (as Haemon), Ava McCoy (as Ismene), Adaku Okpi (as Eurydice) and Toya Turner (as Antigone). The ensemble features Ryan Alvarado, Samantha Barriento, Denzel Fields, Daniela Funicello, Avon Haughton, Brynlie Helmich, Anthony V. Merchant, JoVonna Parks, Nedra Snipes and Thomas Varvaro.

“Our Antigone is inspired by a counter-culture movement known as Afropunk, which will be juxtaposed with the themes of tradition and order. The current political climate is ripe for this story. Women across the world are finding their voices and confronting powerful men, institutions and organizations. This timely ancient text is still clearly relevant today,” said Carl Cofield, Director of “Antigone.”

“Though we call our summer season ‘Uptown’ Shakespeare in the Park,’ we took a detour this summer to present ‘Antigone’ for one simple reason – greek plays are unafraid to question everything we value – including life. ‘Antigone’ is a story where the people, who assert they are right, clash with a system, whose leaders have the same assertion. After 2500 years, ‘Antigone’ still asks of us – are we all players on an odyssey to find our shared humanity or are we in a perpetual state of ideological warfare that will always end in inhumane violence?” – Ty Jones, Producing Artistic Director of The Classical Theatre of Harlem.

CREDITS Inspired by Paul Roche’s Adaptation of “Antigone” by Sophocles Director: Carl Cofield Choreographer: Tiffany Rea-Fisher Costume Designer: Lex Liang Lighting Designer: Alan Reynolds Set Designer: Christopher & Justin Swader Sound Designer: Curtis Craig Production Stage Manager: Megan Sprowls Projections: Kate Freer Props: Samantha Shoffner

TICKETING INFORMATION The Classical Theatre of Harlem’s production of Antigone will be showing at: The Richard Rodgers Amphitheater at Marcus Garvey Park 18 Mt Morris Park W, New York, NY 10027 Enter the park at 124th Street & Fifth Avenue, and walk south to the venue. Tickets: FREE to general public, no reservations required.

PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE The Classical Theatre of Harlem’s Uptown Shakespeare in the Park production of “Antigone” runs July 7-29, 2018. Tuesday – Sunday at 8pm; Fridays at 8:30pm Previews: July 5-7, 2018; 8pm Opening Night: July 8, 2018; 8pm Closing Night: July 29, 2018; 8pm

*Note: In event of inclement weather, notice of show cancellations will be made via The Classical Theatre of Harlem’s website and social media pages, please refer to below for web addresses.*

Runtime: 85 minutes; no intermission

ABOUT THE ARTISTS Director: Carl Cofield Carl Cofield is a New York based, award winning director and actor. He directed the award winning world premiere of “One Night in Miami” ( Huffingtion Post best of L.A. 2013, N.A.A.C.P., L.A. Drama Critics Circle and others) for Rogue Machine Theater and the Denver Center Theatre. NYC directing credits include: The 50th anniversary revival of “The Dutchman” (AUDELCO nom for Best Director), “The Seven” by Will Power at the Connelly Theatre, “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” for NYU, “The Tuskegee Airman Project” for CUNY York College, “Hello, I’m Eve” by Rebecca Nichloson, “The Bear,” and others. He assisted Molly Smith in the world premiere of “Camp David” by Laurence Wright at Arena Stage. He also assisted Kent Gash on “Langston In Harlem” at Urban Stages.

As an actor, his work has been seen at The Manhattan Theater Club (“Ruined”), Berkeley Rep, Alliance, Arena Stage, The Shakespeare Theater, Intiman, Actors Theater of Louisville, Shakespeare Santa Cruz, Milwaukee Rep, Alabama Shakespeare, The McCarter, The Acting Company, The Studio Theatre and many others.

ABOUT THE CLASSICAL THEATRE OF HARLEM The Classical Theatre of Harlem (CTH) is an American theatre company that tells stories as seen through the lens of the African diaspora and does work that honors the cultural legacy of the neighborhood in which it was founded: Harlem. CTH combines original adaptations, music, and dance to present great classics of world literature as well as contemporary works that will stand the test of time while being truly reflective of the diversity of ideas and racial tapestry that is America. Since its founding in 1999, CTH has presented works ranging from traditional classical playwrights (Anton Chekhov, Euripides and William Shakespeare), to established 20th-century playwrights (August Wilson, Langston Hughes and Jean Genet) to new plays by emerging playwrights. CTH also proudly provides theater-based training and live theater experiences to Harlem youth and their families through its arts education program, Project Classics. The organization engages new audiences, provides artistic development of new work, and gives exposure to emerging playwrights with its three free reading series: Future Classics, Playwrights’ Playground, and Revisited Classics.

Major support for CTH provided by Axe-Houghton Foundation, The Braugher Family, Casement Fund, Coalition of Theatres of Color, The Columbus Foundation, ConEdison, The Cultural Immigrant Initiative, Dorris Duke Charitable Foundation, Douglas & Paige Armentrout, Ford Foundation, Google, Harlem Community Development Corporation, Howard Gilman Foundation, Jarvis & Constance Doctorow Family Foundation, L & N Andreas Foundation, Luther & Deborah Ragin, National Endowment for the Arts, New York Community Trust, NYC Department of Cultural Affairs, NYC Department of Parks & Recreation, NYSCA, The Office of Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, The Office of NYC Councilmember Bill Perkins, The Office of NYC Councilmember Mark Levine, Puffin Foundation West, Robert & Mercedes Eichholz Foundation, SHS Foundation, and Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone.

The post The Classical Theatre of Harlem Presents “ANTIGONE” appeared first on HARLEMLOCAL.com.

[susannahyard73-blog]

Stenographers And also Court Reporters.

Asbestos is a harmful product observed in a multitude from things featuring protection, ceiling ceramic tiles, flooring tiles, sprayed-on plaster for sound-proofing or attractive walls and roofs, as well as great deals of others. In addition to condition as well as region legislations, the Household Regulation Act 1975 (Cth) generates a compulsory reporting role for employees from the Domestic relations court of Australia, the Federal Magistrates Judge and also the Court of domestic relations of Western Australia. Before asking for tax relief from the Internal Revenue Service, you and your lawyer are going to have to gather and also evaluate your present financial information. The existing approach needs paid preparers to satisfy the capability testing requirements absolutely no behind the preliminary called for revitalization date for income tax return preparer enrollment. Paper submitted profits are personally taken part in the government's unit, indicating that an input error could possibly activate a tax notification. Family Code 3181 deals with the domestic brutality training requirements for moderators. Mandatory distributions apply to traditional IRAs, 401( k) s, 403( b) s, 457( b) s, SEPs, SARSEPs, EASY Individual retirement accounts as well as Roth 401( k) s They perform not put on Roth IRAs during the course of the manager's life time. Testing was conducted at the start of spring season training with no extra screening through the normal time apart from arbitrary screening. Every man and woman at the gym lookinged at me. And individuals were watching me like war hawks for months hereafter occurred ... Everytime I performed the woodchopper physical fitness toughness instruction exercise. Permit me very first acknowledgment that the majority of tax-advantaged financial savings plans involve tax insurance deductible payments you bring in from your operating earnings. This allows registered nurses and healthcare team to be compliant along with their mandatory instruction needs. In the event you loved this post and you wish to receive much more information relating to yellow pages advert bike (starvation-diet-2017.info) assure visit our own web page. When transmitted to Singapore, Singapore resident providers are actually chargeable to company income tax on their earnings developing coming from Singapore as well as on their profits occurring coming from foreign nations. Your lawsuit will be actually established for Mandatory Arbitration after discovery has been actually accomplished in your meet. Compulsory customer profiles carry out certainly not allow adjustments to be applied to the individual account saved on the hosting server. The introduction from compulsory reporting as well as going along with instruction efforts target to allow specialists to build an awareness from scenarios from kid misuse and also develop conditions which demand them to report those instances and also secure them as press reporters. There are actually some devices from the business that are practically obligatory in laying marble ceramic tiles. We would certainly such as to listen to coming from you if you may provide helpful Necessary Instruction and also you are actually looking for a brand-new challenge! This may be downloaded and install from:/ social-security-child-support-tribunal/ appeal-tribunal Your allure needs to consist of a duplicate from the compulsory revision notification (find 2 above). There are specific exceptions to obligatory coverage for all practitioners in Australia that connect to the instances in which the 'practical opinion' is made up, for instance in the medico-legal context. Inning accordance with the IRS new proposition, all paid for tax preparers are required to sign a federal government tax obligation return to sign up with the Internal Revenue Service and also obtain a preparer tax id amount. Icing up ruling is ordinarily approved by the High Courthouse Nevertheless in restricted scenarios the same may be released at Area Courthouse. Super-mandatory user profile pages resemble usual necessary accounts, with the exemption that individuals which possess super-mandatory profile pages may certainly not browse through when the server that holds the mandatory profile is inaccessible. This can cause a bad shock when you struck the end of the year and also discover you are obligated to pay a substantial chunk of improvement to the IRS and possibly your condition income tax agency also. A file of this record is collected for all personnel; this file is actually checked to ensure all the required instruction is actually finished properly by all the important team. Booze testing is actually extremely crucial also when one worker is actually presenting indications of on the job utilization which might trigger reduced result as well as not meeting assigned intendeds. Defra claimed it would certainly not be actually hurried right into a selection on the matter, regardless of calls from some company quarters to adopt mandatory reporting. For as a lot excellent as it may do, lots of folks will find that insulting as well as potentially also unlawful to earn such a training class obligatory. These health and wellness & security signs are valuable for both the companies as well as the employee. Income tax return preparers who are required to enroll should accomplish fifteen hours from continuing specialist learning (CPE) annually, featuring 3 hrs of federal government tax legislation updates, two hours from tax obligation preparer principles and also 10 hours from federal government income tax legislation topics. AHPRA possesses the electrical power to release details about education providers that perform not meet their obligatory coverage obligations. Actually, compulsory coverage rules laid out the sorts of scenarios that should be actually reported to lawful child defense companies. While both The golden state as well as Connecticut condition that the mandated training should be interactive, The golden state's instruction law goes to terrific durations to illustrate specifically just what comprises an active approach. Also, the tax preparers should pass the proficiency examination and also should simply the continuing qualified education criteria. Negotiators need to have training in the business from residential violence that can help assist in scenarios through which residential brutality exists. Before performing that yourself you need to talk with your condition and nearby health departments to establish if they give any training programs. Yet there are actually safety and security indicators which are actually intricate as well as made use of in quite specific niche industries and hard to consider.