Armstrong Economics Blog/Economics
Re-Posted Feb 10, 2018 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION:
Hi Martin–
QUESTION:
Hi Martin–
Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel appears on Tucker Carlson TV show to discuss the decision by the FBI and DOJ not to declassify the Democrats’ rebuttal memo without redactions; and the report U.S. deep state operatives paid $100K to a Russian agent for damaging information on President Trump.
The minority members (Democrats) of the House Intelligence Committee, ie the legislative branch, submitted a 10-page memo for declassification by the executive branch. The comensurate process involves the National Security Council, Office of Legal Counsel and all executive agencies within the national security apparatus (CIA, NSA, ODNI, State Dept., DoD, FBI, DOJ) to review the request prior to declassification approval.
Apparently the U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division, do not approve of the current submission without redactions. WH response letter:
Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand is leaving the Department of Justice. Ms. Brand was the #3 official in main justice holding a position immediately behind Rod Rosenstein.
Rachel Brand was to FISA surveillance what Tom Selleck is to reverse home mortgages. Indeed almost all of Ms. Brands’ exclusive recent responsibility has been to advocate for national surveillance authority within the DOJ. She was a very effective spokesperson.
Ms. Brand is now going to be the legal head of Wal-Mart as the global governance director.
Good luck with that Wal-Mart workers. Enjoy your future microchip. All your biometrics are belong to us…
Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 9, 2018 by sundance
Yesterday the news broke of Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman, Mark Warner, seeking covert contact with ‘Clinton-Steele Dossier’ originating entity Christopher Steele.
Within the March/April 2017 communication, the back-and-forth centered around Chris Steele wanting a written request signed by both the Vice-Chair (Warner) and the Senate Committee Chairman, Richard Burr.
Without that bi-partisan request, Steele was not willing to engage with Warner unilaterally. If you consider the timing of the attempted communication (March ’17), and you overlay the expressed concerns therein; against the backdrop of the 2016 DC severe ideological effort the push for a special counsel probe based on false pretense against newly-elected President Trump; a picture emerges of Christopher Steele recognizing his endeavors within the enterprise carried considerable risk.
Vice-Chairman Warner didn’t want a ‘paper trail’ and transparently didn’t want the political opposition (republican members), to know of his political intent. Therefore Warner never asked Chairman Burr for his signature upon the letter requested by Steele. Ultimately Mr. Steele was correct in his suspicions, and prudent in his risk avoidance.
All of that is true, however, very few have stopped to ask: how did we, the viewing public, discover the Warner messaging and communication story in the first place?
How did the story of the Warner text messaging get into the media bloodstream? Who was the ‘entity’ who investigated, discovered, and eventually released the Warner messaging?
The answers to those questions are similar to the questions that have been demonstrably overlooked ever since early December when we discover the story of Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Bruce Ohr. Each of the aforementioned ‘small group’ officials was removed from responsibility, disciplined and currently remains in stasis.
Within the overwhelming deluge of information that flowed as a consequence no-one paused to ask: How did we, the viewing public, find out about them, all of them, and their activity?
The December 2017 Strzok, Page and Ohr revelations gave rise to massive downstream consequences:
Questions:
How did we discover the original text messages?
How do we discover Page/Strzok changing the wording of the Clinton exoneration “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”?
How do we discover Bruce Ohr being in contact with Fusion GPS; or working with Peter Strzok; or meeting with Christopher Steele?
How did we find out in December about Nellie Ohr, Bruce’s wife, working with Fusion GPS?
How do we find out about text messages for the “insurance policy”; or intentionally incomplete “FD-302’s”?
Most importantly – As the deluge of information now floods the geography around us, has anyone looked up to see who was the shadowy figure atop the damn who triggered the collapse?
Every current story is well down-stream from those initial releases of information into the public sunlight. Not a single story of consequence is disconnected from the origin. None of the FISA revelations, or anything else, would have happened without the initial December 2017 information release…
…And just like yesterday’s news about Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, no-one apparently knows where all this originating information came from.
Many vague and inferential references have been made toward the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General, and the investigative oversight of Michael Horowitz via his year-long DOJ investigation, as the impetus of the information flow.
I don’t disagree with that presentation a single bit.
It is virtually a guarantee that IG Horowitz and his team of investigators inside the apparatus are the ones who collected every bit of the evidence that has led to these and other revelations yet to come.
But that still doesn’t answer the question: How do WE find out about them?
The dutiful Michael Horowitz has a boss.
Michael Horowitz’ boss is most certainly in the loop.
His boss is:
Carry on…
Mid-January House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte sent a letter to FISA Court presiding judge Rosemary Collyer requesting all the documents presented by the DOJ in their application for a “Title-1” FISA surveillance warrant over Carter Page. The House Judiciary Committee holds primary statutory oversight over the Justice Department and the FISA Court.
The DOJ has the Carter Page surveillance application (the DOJ also has the authority to declassify the FISA appliction). However, other than Chairman Goodlatte, the DOJ would only permit one person from each side of the House Intel Committee (HPSCI) to review the application. Trey Gowdy and Adam Schiff were those two reviewers.
[*NOTE: We cannot confirm but strongly suspect – due to DOJ conduct and ongoing DOJ motives, Goodlatte wants to rule-out the possibility of two versions: an original application to the FISC, and an application the DOJ may have modified for congressional review. Hence, Goodlatte wants to see the application in the hands of the court.]
While Chairman Goodlatte is focused on the application, HPSCI Chairman Nunes is requesting the FISA Court transcript from the DOJ/FBI application hearing. Nunes is seeking to understand how the “Title-1” application was presented to the court.
WASHINGTON – House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., is seeking transcripts from a top secret national security court regarding the FBI and Justice Department’s application for a surveillance warrant for a Trump campaign aide, according to a congressional letter obtained by Fox News.
Writing to Rosemary M. Collyer, the presiding judge at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Nunes asked for transcripts of “any relevant FISC hearings associated with the initial FISA application or subsequent renewals related to electronic surveillance of Carter Page.”
[…] Transcripts from the application hearings could speak to a central issue in the debate: to what extent the FBI and DOJ relied on the dossier. (read more)
.
A man in Terre Haute, Indiana flipped off a police officer and got… A ticket? Was the police officer right or was the offender just using his right to free speech?
Hello, I would like to talk to you about Islam, but in particular, I would like to talk to you about political Islam and explain to you why the religion of Islam is of no concern to you, unless you’re a Muslim. But let’s ask a more basic question, is there some way that we can use rational, fact-based reasoning on Islam? Because notice carefully that the current methods are very subjective. How do people learn about Islam? Well, they go to an expert and this expert hopefully is a Muslim and then they tell ’em what Islam is, but notice something, you get the answer about what Islam is, depending on who you ask, if you ask a Jihadist, you get one answer, if you ask a professional engineer at work, you get another answer, so this method is subjective and I want to propose to you, that there is a completely objective way to answer all questions about Islam.
Now then, the most important question to ask about Islam is, what is Islam? No, it is not a religion found in the Quran, well, a little of that’s true, but actually, Islam is a complete way of life, it is a complete civilization, it is a religion, it’s a political system, it’s a culture, it’s a civilization and there’s no act so small as a human being, that Islam doesn’t have something to say about it.
So, what is Islam? Well, let’s begin with what every Muslim knows, there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger, this is called the Shahada and where do we find Allah? Well, we find Allah in the Quran, but there’s something peculiar about the Quran, it does not contain enough information to practice the Five Pillars of Islam. However, there’s a trapdoor built into the Quran and it’s the 91 verses, that say that Muhammad is the perfect pattern of a divine life.
So, where do we find Muhammad? Because if we’re going to imitate Muhammad, we need to know Muhammad. Muhammad is found in The Sira, his biography and in the Hadith, his traditions. So, Islam is the doctrine found in the Quran, the Sira and the Hadith, if it is in the Quran, the Sira and the Hadith, it is Islam, equally important, if something is said to be Islam, but it can’t be found inside the Quran, the Sira, and the Hadith, it is not Islam. So, Islam is Muhammad and the Quran or Muhammad and Allah, so if you’re speaking with the voice of Muhammad or the voice of Allah, then you’re talking about Islam.
Now there’s something sort of peculiar about this, the Quran and the Sira, the Hadith are mostly about the non-Muslim, the kafir, someone like myself and possibly you, the part that deals with the kafir is, I call it, political Islam, why? Because the Quran is defined as being completely outside of the religion, so if you’re not a Muslim and the Quran is concerned with you, it is not because you’re a Muslim, but because you’re just a human being. Now then, ways to talk about religious Islam, you’ll notice that it involves Paradise and Hell, whereas the political Islam is about how to treat the kafir.
What does the Quran say about the kafir? That the kafir is lower than an animal, filthy, cursed, mocked, can be enslaved, tortured and deceived and, yes, even raped. My most unfavorite part of the Quran is the part, 12 verses that say that a Muslim is never the true friend to the kafir.
Now then, if you’re going to talk about Islam, we have to talk about the tricky part, which is the confusion, because everyone’s heard this, everyone’s heard a good thing about Islam and a bad thing about Islam and so the question comes up, what is the real Islam? Well, the clue is this, it’s found in Muhammad’s career, after he became the messenger of Allah, he preached the religion of Islam for 13 years in Mecca and converted about 150 people, then he went on to Medina, where he became a politician and a Jihadist. Now then, Muhammad preached the religion of peace and converted 150 people, but as a Jihadist and a politician, he was a complete triumph, so what is Islam?
Well, it is the religion of peace and the verses of Jihad, so that’s what it is, it is both items, there’s two Qurans, the Meccan Quran, which is very religious and the Medinan Quran, written later, which is all about Jihad and politics, let’s be clear, there is no Jihad in Mecca, but 24% of the Quran written in Medina is about Jihad, Jihad is a systemic doctrine, it’s not about a verse or two, so Islam always has two meanings and this is very convenient, because it gets what it wants.
Now then, let’s talk about Jihad a bit, because it’s confusing, Jihad is not Holy War, Jihad comes in four flavors, Jihad of the Sword, Speech, Writing and Money, now let’s be clear, Jihad is not meaning war, it means struggle. Jihad uses pressure in all areas, food, migration, headscarves, education and the fact that you’re not allowed to criticize Islam, so Jihad is pure political Islam, Jihad is political action, designed to install a new civilization, based on Islamic principles, Sharia principles.
So there is an objective way to talk about Islam, as long as you’re listening to one of two experts, Muhammad or Allah, Islam is both a religion of peace and the politics of Jihad, which one is the real one? They’re both equally real. The religion of Islam is only important to Muslims, but the politics of Islam are important to all peoples, my advice to you is don’t discuss Muslims, but instead, talk about Muhammad and Allah.
We’re involved in a civilizational war, our civilization is based on critical thought and a unitary ethic, the unitary ethic is that all people should be treated as equal, Islam does not have those two principles, it has the authoritative thought, instead of critical thought and it practices dualistic ethics, instead of unitary ethics, the ethical system depends on who you are as to how you’re treated.
We can and must defeat political Islam, the religion of Islam is of no consequences to you, unless you’re a Muslim, this is a war of ideas and civilizations and there can be no compromise, our very existence depends on us asserting our ideas and our ideals. Thank you.
It is no secret that I have no respect for George Soros and that is aside from the fact that we would often be on opposite sides of the market. I never saw Soros as a great trader. Even the reputation that he broke the Bank of England was nonsense. The “Club” was all on that trade and it was a guaranteed trade where if the peg broke, you made a fortune and if you were wrong, you got your money back. I was on the opposite side back then being called in by those in the British government. After a 7-year bull market in equities, Soros finally threw in the towel ending his bets on the stock market crash only after being wrong for so long.
Soros lost big time on the Russian manipulation when the “Club” was bribing the IMF to keep the loans to Russia going so they could make a fortune in interest rates. That failed and ended up in Long-Term Capital Management debacle. Soros lost $2 billion on that one. I believe he also lost when the “Club” was targeting the Japanese yen in 1999. So I never saw Soros as some fantastic trader. I believe he was just simply on the right side of a few big plays orchestrated by the “Club” and never by himself.

I personally find him very dangerous politically. He stands for control of the people and is always plotting for the manipulation of society. He is always on the side of Marxist/Socialism and disturbs me greatly. This is just his political philosophy. There has been a rising movement against Soros on a global scale. This is one person who the world will celebrate his death – not morn it.
The Telegraph is now reporting that Soros “is one of three senior figures linked to the Remain-supporting campaign group Best for Britain who plan to launch a nationwide advertising campaign this month, which they hope will lead to a second referendum to keep Britain in the EU.” Soros is on the wrong side. Europe has no chance of the EU Project actually succeeding long-term. The entire structure is completely unsound and the political process is anti-Democrat. The EU was purposefully designed to be as close to a dictatorship where the people are not trusted to make any decision and are too stupid to even know how to spend their own money. Nobody in the Troika ever stands for an election and they are the people who rule with an iron fist over the economy.
Every police officer is armed and rarely will they ever be found guilty of killing citizens. In London, the police were unarmed and there was far less violence. A criminal in the state knows he may have to shoot his way out because the police are armed.
Nonetheless, there is also a growing trend of what is being called “Suicide by Cop” where people lack the courage to commit suicide so they look for other means. Inside prison, they will typically pick a fight with someone they know would kill them
Outside, people who are already contemplating suicide but lack the courage, decide that provoking a policeman into killing them is the best way to achieve that goal. These individuals may even commit a crime with the specific intention of provoking the police into a lethal confrontation.
Still, others who are committing a crime but have been in prison before may choose to shoot it out and prefer death to prison.
The question becomes, should every police officer carry a gun? Should there be special forces that are called in? If they know the police are not armed, as, in London, they don’t shoot them. Interesting question!
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending