Ex-USAID employees describe how, before January 20, they moved internal groups off government systems and into encrypted Signal chats, then quickly linked with foreign partners and NGOs after the inauguration. This attempt at creating a color revolution isn't new news; this part was already reported in NOTUS earlier this year.

But what's not reported is the international aspect. One participant explicitly frames it as "a global anti-authoritarian movement," connecting U.S. officials with "colleagues from around the world who have dealt with this directly."

They reference coordination with Johns Hopkins, "international democracy and conflict mitigation spaces," and efforts to mobilize across borders against what they perceive as domestic authoritarianism.

At what point does this become treason?

As always, patience as I pull together this thread.I urge you to read the entire thread and listen to the video clips. There's some very disconcerting stuff here; the clips presented people appear to be engaged in an effort to (at least) conceal their international contacts and conversations from the legally constituted authority - namely, President Trump.

Look at this:

During that conversation, the speaker said in part:

We don't have to be intermediaries, either. We can bring in actors, or colleagues from around the world, that dealt with this directly, very specific issues (inaudible.) Whether that's on tackling corruption or how to respond to corruption, mobilizing around corruption, we can bring those folks in, and kind of be those facilitators. And so, again, I think those coordinations and structures are just starting to take place.

OK, now I'm not wild-eyed conspiracy theorist, but having a bunch of disgruntled former USAID employees talking in a Signal chat about "tackling corruption" is more than disconcerting, it's downright unsettling. This appears to be Trump Derangement Syndrome mobilizing for battleBut here's the part that should have your eyebrows tobogganing off the top of your skull:

This speaker says:

The foment of our current constitutional crisis is our opportunity to catalyze and synergize a dynamic change-making. A dynamic change, making fractal ecosystems capable of co-generating the emergence of the new (driving them together? Unclear) based social-political-economic governance systems. That is a long sentence.

It's a long sentence because of all the bureaucratic jargon layered on thicker than butter on country biscuits. But if you strip away all that, what you're left with looks a lot like a group of people, at the very least, planning to drive some major changes to "social-political-economic governance."

Also, what constitutional crisis? I'm not aware of any constitutional crisis. President Trump was elected and inaugurated in accordance with the Constitution. His administration cabinet officials and other appointees were nominated and confirmed in accordance with the Constitution. Whenever a judge, no matter how transparently biased, has ruled that the Trump administration should stop taking a given action, they have stopped, pending further judicial action.

Hide Comments | Add Comment