The Spanish government has shown to the entire world that it denies human rights and has absolutely no democratic principles whatsoever. The next step is for the pretend elected government to declare a perpetual state of emergency and suspend all elections nationwide to complete what is rapidly becoming a dictatorship. Thousands in Catalonia have now rise4n up in protest against the Spanish government once again as the arrested the five leaders of the independence movement. The mood in Catalonia is turning more anti-Madrid and based upon the emails we are getting from Spain, many are now beginning to see that how the Spanish government is treating those in Catalonia means that the government views them as well as having no rights.
Clashes with police are being reported with at least 24 demonstrators injured, according to rescue workers. Independent journalists are reporting that policemen in Barcelona were using batons against demonstrators approaching the regional government building. Some demonstrators in Barcelona were even burning pictures of King Felipe VI, which is a crime in Spain. They were also burning photographs of judge Pablo Llarena, who ordered the arrests. The protesters waved Catalan flags and shouted “freedom for political prisoners”.
Spain refuses to respect human rights and Brussels has refused to defend the people because they too seek a dictatorship. The irony here is they have the guts to point the finger at Putin and China as suppressing democracy?
While Trump is being portrayed and the insane President hellbent on destroying world trade, the truth is the tariffs on steel and aluminum account for 0.2% of GDP or just 2% of actual trade flows of $2.4 trillion. On top of that, every president at least since Jimmy Carter has imposed protectionist tariffs on some portion of trade flows. Indeed, Trump has an old-world view of trade as just about every world leader. They look at trade only from a job perspective and NEVER from the viewpoint of the consumer. Anytime a country imposes a tariff to stop what they think is “unfair” competition, in reality, they are creating unfair competition. Why pay $3 for a head of lettuce if you can import it for 25 cents? This only makes the consumer pay more reducing their standard of living. Nobody ever looks at that side of the coin.
In Switzerland, we have the perfect example of the old saying – a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. We have activists who are clearly living in a world they comprehend no less than the financial system. These people have managed to get a referendum on changing in the financial system with the same promises of Karl Marx that this will end all financial crisis to come forever. The referendum is scheduled for June 10th, 2018 after they got 100,000 signatures. The organizers are calling this the Full-Money Initiative. They understand that the bulk of the money is actually created by banks through lending. Their solution is to bar private banks from lending on any leveraged basis by setting limits on lending. They will be unable to lend money beyond what they actually have on deposit. They cannot create money by new loans. This is the most stupid Idea I think I have ever heard. They have no idea what the Full-Ramifications will be of such a proposal.
The promoters are advertising this will make the monetary system more secure and preventing financial crises. “Now we are stepping up our efforts to explain to people where their money really comes from and what the risks are in the old system,” said Emma Dawnay, a member of the organizing team, according to Reuters. They are promoting this Sovereign Money Initiative to stop the financial crisis cycle that they have no idea of how such events are even created.
According to their plan, banks will only grant loans to the extent that they have previously received funds from savers, other institutions or the central bank. For the creation of money then only the central bank would be responsible. However, she rejects that their initiative will create an economic upheaval introducing tremendous uncertainties. Clearly, she is qualified for government service because this is the precise attitude which creates the very thing she is pretending to prevent.
Obviously, she may have a Ph.D. in other fields, but that does not qualify her for anything else. She thinks that banks lending money which leverages the system is the CAUSE of a financial crisis so she wants to hand the power to create all money to the government – the very people who are incapable of balancing a budget or managing even a bubblegum machine. When they are out of bubblegum, they just go steal some more and open shop again since they spent all the money they took in before.
Government is the single biggest borrower in society. So how will they sell their debt without creating more money? Then we have the problem that if the government has to create the money and approve all loans, then politics will enter the scene and you will be unable to borrow if you are part of the opposition. Andrew Jackson destroyed the Bank of the United States BECAUSE they lent money to the opposite political party to defeat him. There was no magnanimous effort to save the country.
Then this idea shows truly their underlying ignorance for if you cut off lending, well guess what! They will be unable to sell their homes and the value will crash because the only buyer will be someone with cash. The town I grew up in, Maple Shade, New Jersey, was once the suburb of Philadelphia. The real estate developer was Barlow who built his mansion (pictured here) in town where my parents met before World War I.
One of my father’s friends had cash during the Great Depression. He bought most of Main Street back then for pennies on the dollar for there was a shortage of money with no bank lending. This is precisely the outcome of this Sovereign Money Initiative if it actually passed. Switzerland would be the greatest short of all time. No bank would survive and the government would suddenly find NO BID for its new debt.
These people are dangerous for they are just like those who want to shut down the Federal Reserve with simply stupid ideas that demonstrate they too fail to understand even how the world economy functions. The first world financial crisis took place in the Panic of 1857. This was the first Panic to appear as a global contagion. The 1720 collapse of the Mississippi Bubble in France and Southsea Bubble in England was a contagion set in motion within Europe. However, the 1857 Panic was set in motion by the declining international economy because of the interconnectedness of the world economy during the 1850s. The financial Panic began in late 1857 in Britain when the Palmerston government circumvented the requirements of the Peel Banking Act of 1844, which required gold and silver reserves to back up the amount of money in circulation. In that instance, the government lifted restrictions because the banks were in trouble.
Of course, then there is the example of the Silver Democrats. They thought that they could raise the price of silver about world levels thanks to the silver miners who bribed them. They soon discovered that people were bringing their silver to the States where it was over-valued and used it to buy gold and export it back home. They kept this arbitrage up and then the Panic of 1893 began and by 1896, J.P. Morgan organized British banks to lend the USA $100 million to prevent it from complete bankruptcy in 1896. President Cleveland was a Democrat and he warned that his own party had imposed unsound finance. The same type of people who could not understand the world monetary system accused Morgan of making a profit on the deal. They refused to see that their ideas were brain-dead back then as well. They preferred to blame Morgan for their own stupidity.
Financial Panics are global contagions. This movement is Switzerland would destroy the country and the depth of the depression would be far worse than the Great Depression. There was such a shortage of money back during the 1930s, that cities began to issue their own scrip to try to save the economy and allow people to economically carry on, which they could not due to the contraction in the money supply. Contracting the money supply as these people propose, would send asset values to virtually zero in Switzerland. They reject any such criticism because they just do not want to believe this solution is completely brain-dead.
History proves one thing – stupid people really mess up the world and then blame others. I keep warning, we are all connected. No country can move counter-trend for their will rapidly find their crisis comes from a contagion outside their control. Even communism failed despite its attempt to maintain isolation. Economics wins at the end of the day. Both Keynes and Marx have seriously inflected the world.
Senator Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo. 99.99% of the interview is country club Senator Graham repeating the same South Carolina white wine spritzer talking points he’s famous for. That is to say lots of words amounting to nothing. The gastric equivalence of cucumber and mayonnaise triangle sandwiches on crust-less Wonder bread with a side of celery.
However, there is a reminder at 09:50 of a key and important point that tries to surface yet continues to get whacked down by the annoying duplicity of swamp creatures and a media that completely ignores the obvious. Lindsey Graham claims Christopher Steele lied and told the FBI he never talked to media.
We do not know this to be true, and neither does he.
.
It is far more likely the FBI:… #1) Ignored Chris Steele talking to media because they needed his Clinton-Steele dossier for a false FISA application; and #2) the FBI later told congress they didn’t know about Steele talking to media, but they really did; and #3) the FBI falsified FD-302 reports of their interview with Chris Steele to cover their tracks.
Here’s how we know:
Christopher Steele had no motive to lie to the FBI about his media contacts.
The FBI had tons of motive to lie about their knowing Steele talked to the media.
It’s just common sense.
Christopher Steele wasn’t meeting in secret with the media, it was well known. He was traveling around to meet them in August and September 2016. Why would he lie to the FBI about such transparently well known action in October? Answer: He wouldn’t.
Toward the end of December, the FBI provided the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, with FBI investigative documents (likely FD-302’s) from their contacts with Christopher Steele. According to most reasonable timing we can discover Steele met with FBI officials sometime around October 1st, 2016.
From the U.K. lawsuit against Christopher Steele (pdf here), Steele admits to having shopped the Clinton-Steele dossier to U.S. media outlets “in person” in late September (New York Times, WaPo, New Yorker and CNN), and mid-October, 2016 (New York Times, WaPo, and Yahoo News), per instructions from Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS):
Additionally, in late October, 2016, Christopher Steele briefed Mother Jones via Skype.
According to the HPSCI intelligence memo, the FBI sought a FISA application based on the Steele Dossier on October 21st, 2016. From the evidenced UK court records at least two briefings with reporters, containing five outlets, took place prior to the FBI using the Clinton-Steele dossier in their FISA application.
The “late September” briefings with the New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker and CNN took place prior to Christopher Steele meeting with FBI officials early October.
The implication therein is that the FBI had to know prior to their October 21st, 2016, court application that the information they were presenting to the FISA court was being heavily shopped to media outlets. This would be immediately disqualifying.
However, in the released HPSCI memo, it is noted that Christopher Steele lied to the FBI about those media engagements taking place. See:
The HPSCI memo notes the FBI relationship with Christopher Steele was terminated after the FISA application (Oct. 21st, 2016), as a result of the Mother Jones article from October 30th, 2016. Media contact by an FBI material witness is immediately disqualifying.
The question is: did the FBI submit the FISA application under false pretenses? Did the FBI actually know Christopher Steele was shopping the dossier to the media prior to their FISA court submission?
The HPSCI memo gives the FBI the benefit of doubt by presuming the FBI were unaware or “lied to“.
The FD-302’s (FBI investigative interview notes), which appear to have been turned over to Senate Chairman Chuck Grassley, could contain the evidence to support the FBI being duped; – OR – show the FBI knew, and proceeded in using the dossier despite disqualifying knowledge of media involvement; – OR – the FBI could have manipulated the FD-302’s.
In an effort to get the answer to those questions into sunlight; and with the understanding that Chairman Grassley has the FBI documents; Grassley produced a memo for declassification that facilitates understanding how the FBI claims it used the Clinton-Steele dossier during their investigation.
On January 5th, 2018, The Grassley Memo approach surfaced. Grassley issues a statement on the reason for the criminal referral. He lets us know that he ALSO has a classified memo that he is trying to get released! Unlike Nunes he needs to go through DOJ:
January 24th, 2018, Grassley Speech: “Hiding From Tough Questions” – In his 17 minute speech Grassley reveals important details about his investigation into Steele and the FBI.
Thanks to the brilliant work of DaveNYviii we can walk through this carefully, and watch the outline in a logical sequence.
“If those [FBI] documents are not true, and there are serious discrepancies that are no fault of Mr. Steele, then we have another problem—an arguably more serious one.”
The FBI, via Agent Peter Strzok, was already caught (text messages with his co-hort Lisa Page) admitting to falsifying FD-302 material during this exact time frame.
At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.
On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:
“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.
We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)
The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents. On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview. This investigative release was big news at the time.
The 302’s are the specific FBI forms used to document interviews/interrogations. They detail questions asked and answers given as well as who was present during the interview.
Inside the September 2nd, 2016, FBI release were two files:
•One file was 47 pages (full pdf here) and includes a full summary of the Clinton email investigation.
•The second file is 11 pages (full pdf here) and is the actual FBI investigator notes during the Hillary Clinton interview.
This second file is the “FD-302” (embed at the bottom for reference). This is the 302 file FBI Agent Peter Strzok is referencing in the text message to Lisa Page. Remember, Peter Strzok was one of the FBI people who actually interviewed Hillary Clinton.
What FBI Agent Peter Strzok is admitting in the September 10th text message, is that there are details within the interview of Hillary Clinton that he (and others) intentionally withheld from the September 2nd, 2016, release.
Specifically, evidence withheld in the 302’s would be some of the FBI questions and some of the Hillary Clinton answers to those questions. In essence, the FBI held back actually releasing the full account of the interview.
According to the Strzok text message, the reason for withholding some of the details of the Hillary Clinton interview is because there are “very INFLAMMATORY things” within it; and once congress finds out what was withheld the details will “absolutely inflame” them.
Peter Strzok then goes on to say when/if the full FOIA is released, presumably post-election, Jim, Trisha, Dave and Mike are going to have to figure out how to deal with the discrepancy:
…”I’m sure Jim and Trisha and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that will play out as they talk among themselves.”
•”Jim” is likely James Baker, the disgraced Chief Legal Counsel for FBI Director James Comey. He was busted out of a job right before congressional questioning.
•”Trish” is likely Trisha Beth Anderson, Office of Legal Counsel for the FBI. [Anderson was hired for the DOJ, by AG Eric Holder, from Eric Holder’s law firm.]
•”Dave” was likely David Laufman the Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence. Laufman sat in on the questioning of Hillary Clinton and resigned RIGHT AFTER these Strzok/Page text messages were released. [SEE HERE]
•And “Mike” was almost certainly Mike Kortan, the FBI Communications Director who also resigned right after the Nunes memo was released, when confronted by FBI Director Christopher Wray about an unauthorized FBI statement which attempted to undermine the HPSCI memo content. [See HERE and HERE]
So it would appear, James Baker and Trisha Anderson, the legal advisers at the top of the FBI leadership apparatus, in addition to Lisa Page the DOJ attorney assigned to the staff of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, were all legally aware the September 2nd, 2016, FOIA release was manipulated by the FBI to conceal part of Hillary Clinton’s questions and answers.
Perhaps now we can better understand the importance of this specific text message as it was released by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.
This message by Strzok shows a team of FBI officials intentionally conspiring to withhold “inflammatory” Clinton investigation evidence, from congress. And the decision-making goes directly to the very top leadership within the FBI.
Peter Strzok justifies his knowledge of the intentionally withheld 302 interview material by claiming: “because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation”. However, to evaluate the filter this investigative team are applying we only need to look at the wording of their public release which accompanied the material:
Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. (link)
They felt obligated only to release information about “classified” or “improperly stored or transmitted” information. That’s a rather disingenuous investigation.
There’s no mention of any FBI intent to investigate action or conduct undertaken by Hillary Clinton or her team to hide the use of classified or improperly stored information; or any intent to look at a cover-up, scrubbing, or conduct that happened AFTER it was discovered that she unlawfully used a personal e-mail server during her tenure.
We can see from the wording of the FBI public release, and the overlay of the text message from interviewer Peter Strzok, a deliberate effort to inquire into only the surface issues of classified information transmission and storage. There was no investigative intent to go beyond that, and no information released, intentionally, that might disclose any larger issues.
If the FBI was legitimately conducting an investigation, and providing the subsequent evidence from within that investigation, the FOIA would include all material relevant to the investigation, which would include all 302 (essentially Q&A) pages. However, the set of questions and answers the FBI released on Sept. 2nd 2016 was not the full set of Questions and Answers. They withheld something, likely “inflammatory”, per FBI Agent Strzok.
FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.
Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.
Oh, here we go. Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch has a decades-earned nickname, “Mr. Wall Street”, Chris Wallace is the insufferable media mouthpiece for the financial interests of the guy who signs the front of his paycheck. This is Wall Street -vs- Main Street.
.
When Main Street economic principles are applied Wall Street will initially lose. There’s no way for this not to happen. Most of Wall Street is built on the Multinational platform of economic globalism. Weaken the grip of the multinational corporations and financial interests on the U.S. economy and Wall Street will drop… this is not difficult to predict. This is also necessary.
U.S. stocks, centered around U.S. domestic companies, will go up. U.S. stocks, centered around multinational companies -invested heavily overseas, and dependent on exploitation of the U.S. trade deficit- will go down.
As Secretary Wilbur Ross, U.S.T.R. Robert Lighthizer and U.S. President Trump have previously affirmed, they are going to restore the U.S. manufacturing base or lose office trying.
Additionally, the U.S. GDP is measured by deducting the value of imports from the value of everything produced domestically. Therefore, initially as the economy expands, and as more Americans have more money to buy more stuff, lots of the things they buy will come from overseas. This increase in purchasing of imports drives down the GDP despite the overall economic activity expanding.
I hope everyone has been prepared with prior information on how the economic system works so we can understand this weird and predictable dynamic. Increased consumer spending can actually drive down the GDP if the stuff we are buying is imported.
National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo for a discussion of ongoing trade initiatives.
Keep in mind, while simultaneously confronting China head-on, USTR Lighthizer has current trade deals, centered around reciprocity, being negotiated with: NAFTA [Mexico and Canada (round #7)], the EU, South Korea (almost done), Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Australia and Japan (almost done).
President Trump is no longer planning to utilize the services or representation of the legal husband and wife team of Joseph diGenova and Victoria Toensing, within the ongoing Mueller probe, due to conflicts.
“The President is disappointed that conflicts prevent Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing from joining the President’s Special Counsel legal team,” his lawyer, Jay Sekulow, said in a statement. “However, those conflicts do not prevent them from assisting the President in other legal matters. The President looks forward to working with them.”
[…] DiGenova and Toensing released a statement on the announcement Sunday, saying: “We thank the President for his confidence in us and we look forward to working with him on other matters.” (link)
Just guessing, but it doesn’t seem surprising there would be a conflict considering Toensing is representing an FBI whistle-blower in the Clinton Uranium-One scandal.
Nuance and subtlety is everything in China. Culturally harsh tones are seen as a sign of weakness and considered intensely impolite in public displays between officials; especially within approved and released statements by officials representing the government.
There is no doubt in my mind that President Trump has a very well thought out long-term strategy regarding China. President Trump takes strategic messaging toward the people of china very importantly. President Trump has, very publicly, complimented the friendship he feels toward President Xi Jinping; and praises Chairman Xi for his character, strength and purposeful leadership.
To build upon that projected and strategic message – President Trump seeded the background by appointing Ambassador Terry Branstad, a 30-year personal friend of President Xi Jinping.
To enhance and amplify the message – and broadcast cultural respect – U.S. President Trump used Mar-a-Lago as the venue for their visit, not the White House. And President Trump’s beautiful granddaughter, Arabella, sweetly serenaded the Chinese First Family twice in Mandarin Chinese song showing the utmost respect for the guests and later for the hosts.
Why the constant warm messaging?
What is the purpose?
What does all this have to do with a trade confrontation?
Historic Chinese geopolitical policy, vis-a-vis their totalitarian control over political sentiment (action) and diplomacy through silence, is evident in the strategic use of the space between carefully chosen words, not just the words themselves.
Each time China takes aggressive action (red dragon) China projects a panda face through silence and non-response to opinion of that action;…. and the action continues. The red dragon has a tendency to say one necessary thing publicly, while manipulating another necessary thing privately. The Art of War.
President Trump is the first U.S. President to understand how the red dragon hides behind the panda mask.
It is specifically because he understands that Panda is a mask that President Trump messages warmth toward the Chinese people, and pours vociferous praise upon Xi Jinping, while simultaneously confronting the geopolitical doctrine of the Xi regime.
In essence Trump is mirroring the behavior of China while confronting their economic duplicity.
China has no cultural or political space between peace and war; they are a historic nation based on two points of polarity. They see peace and war as coexisting with each other.
China accepts and believes opposite or contrary forces may actually be complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world, and they may give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another. Flowing between these polar states is a natural dynamic to be used -with serious contemplation- in advancing objectives as needed.
Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome. If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war. In politics or economics the same perspective is true. It is a zero-sum outlook.
Therefore, when you see China publicly use strong language – it indicates a level of internal disposition beyond the defined western angst. Big Panda becomes Red Dragon; there is no mid-status or evolutionary phase. Every American associated with investment, economics and China would be well advised to put their business affairs in order accordingly.
President Trump will not back down from his position; the U.S. holds all of the leverage and the issue must be addressed. President Trump has waiting three decades for this moment. This President and his team are entirely prepared for this.
We are finally confronting the geopolitical Red Dragon, China!
The Olive branch and arrows denote the power of peace and war. The symbol in any figure’s right hand has more significance than one in its left hand. Also important is the direction faced by the symbols central figure. The emphasis on the eagles stare signifies the preferred disposition. An eagle holding an arrow also symbolizes the war for freedom, and its use is commonly referred to the liberation fight of righteous people from abusive influence. The eagle on the original seal created for the Office of the President showed the gaze upon the arrows.
The Eagle and the Arrow – An Aesop’s Fable
An Eagle was soaring through the air. Suddenly it heard the whizz of an Arrow, and felt the dart pierce its breast. Slowly it fluttered down to earth. Its lifeblood pouring out. Looking at the Arrow with which it had been shot, the Eagle realized that the deadly shaft had been feathered with one of its own plumes.
Moral:We often give our enemies the means for our own destruction.
When Jesus and his disciples drew near to Jerusalem,
to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives,
he sent two of his disciples and said to them,
“Go into the village opposite you,
and immediately on entering it,
you will find a colt tethered on which no one has ever sat.
Untie it and bring it here.
If anyone should say to you,
‘Why are you doing this?’ reply,
‘The Master has need of it
and will send it back here at once.’”
So they went off
and found a colt tethered at a gate outside on the street,
and they untied it.
Some of the bystanders said to them,
“What are you doing, untying the colt?”
They answered them just as Jesus had told them to,
and they permitted them to do it.
So they brought the colt to Jesus
and put their cloaks over it.
And he sat on it.
Many people spread their cloaks on the road,
and others spread leafy branches
that they had cut from the fields.
Those preceding him as well as those following kept crying out:
“Hosanna!
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!
Blessed is the kingdom of our father David that is to come!
Hosanna in the highest!”
The Lord GOD has given me
a well-trained tongue,
that I might know how to speak to the weary
a word that will rouse them.
Morning after morning
he opens my ear that I may hear;
and I have not rebelled,
have not turned back.
I gave my back to those who beat me,
my cheeks to those who plucked my beard;
my face I did not shield
from buffets and spitting.
The Lord GOD is my help,
therefore I am not disgraced;
I have set my face like flint,
knowing that I shall not be put to shame.
What was Jesus doing at the Triumphal Entry?
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI explains:
Jesus claims the right of kings, known throughout antiquity, to requisition modes of transport.
The use of an animal on which no one had yet sat is a further pointer to the right of kings. Most striking, though, are the Old Testament allusions that give a deeper meaning to the whole episode. . . .
For now let us note this: Jesus is indeed making a royal claim. He wants his path and his action to be understood in terms of Old Testament promises that are fulfilled in his person. . . .
At the same time, through this anchoring of the text in Zechariah 9:9, a “Zealot” exegesis of the kingdom is excluded: Jesus is not building on violence; he is not instigating a military revolt against Rome. His power is of another kind: it is in God’s poverty, God’s peace, that he identifies the only power that can redeem [Jesus of Nazareth, vol. 2].
Something to think about. I just saw this in a video. On Palm Sunday, Jesus did something radically different. For the first time, he allowed “people to proclaim him and treat him as king” to quote the video by Father John Sims Baker of of Ashland City, Tennessee. Jesus enters the royal City of David as the royal descendent of that King, the one foretold. It is the only time he allowed himself to be treated as royalty. Very quickly things changed, but for that moment, a few people were allowed to see the long awaited King return to Jerusalem.
He has entered the Holy City, making his claim to Kingship clear.
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!
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
Then this idea shows truly their underlying ignorance for if you cut off lending, well guess what! They will be unable to sell their homes and the value will crash because the only buyer will be someone with cash. The town I grew up in, 
Centinel2012 