QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I listened to you perhaps a bit too late. Put my condo on the market here in New York City and nothing for six months. The realtor said they have never seen buyers disappear so fast. Is there still hope for those of us trapped in the Big Apple?
GB
ANSWER: Real estate in New York has collapsed 25% basis the number of sales by the end of the first quarter. Sorry, but you may have to just lower your price until you find a sucker. Keep in mind that as interest rates rise, banks will tend to run away from mortgages very fast. The last crisis was real estate. They will be more reluctant with real estate than any other sector going forward. If funding for mortgages dries up, prices crash.
Today President Donald Trump signed a proclamation directing the National Guard to be deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border. Earlier today DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen explained the process:
In a memorandum to Defense Secretary Mattis, Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, President Trump states the “situation at the border has now reached a point of crisis.” The document orders the Secretary of Defense to support the Department of Homeland Security in securing the southern border to stop the flow of drugs and people.
FROM THE WHITE HOUSE – WHAT: President Donald J. Trump is authorizing the deployment of the National Guard to support the Border Patrol in its mission to protect our country and stop the stream of illegal immigration.
To give our Border Patrol agents the support they deserve, President Trump is authorizing the deployment of National Guard units to the southern border to aid their mission.
America’s Border Patrol agents work incredibly hard to do their jobs of enforcing our Nation’s immigration laws and protecting our national security. These law enforcement personnel are tasked with securing thousands of miles of border, however, and often do not have the manpower or resources necessary to stem the tide of illegal immigration into the United States.
Given the importance of secure borders to our national security, the National Guard, in coordination with governors, will remain in a support role until Congress takes the action necessary to close the loopholes undermining our border security efforts, including ending the practice of Catch and Release.
This is not the first time in recent history that the National Guard has been deployed to the southern border. In 2012, President Barack Obama authorized the deployment of guardsmen to the border. President George W. Bush also authorized deployment of 6,000 guardsmen to the border as a part of Operation Jump Start, assisting in operations which resulted in the arrest of more than 173,000 illegal aliens, the rescue of 100 persons, and the seizure of more than 300,000 pounds of drugs.
WHY: The President is taking action to protect America’s national security because congressional Democrats have obstructed efforts to secure our border.
Throughout his campaign and Administration, President Trump has called for greater resources and legal authorities to end the national security threat posed by our porous borders. The President has repeatedly outlined a series of steps that are crucial to fixing this problem, including funding to build a wall securing our southern border; greater resources for manpower and security technology; and the closure of legal loopholes that allow illegal immigration to flourish.
More than a thousand people a day and more than 300,000 a year violate our sovereignty by illegally crossing the border. With our current laws and resources, we cannot stop illegal aliens from crossing the border or remove all of the illegal aliens we catch. Of the over 75,000 family units apprehended in FY 2017, only 2,605 were removed.
Stonewalling by Members of Congress, however, has prevented our dedicated Border Patrol agents from getting the resources they so desperately need. Inaction has left glaring loopholes open and crucial legal authorities unauthorized, so the President is taking action and using his existing powers to fill these gaps. (WH Link)
Neil Cavuto is the defender of multinational Wall Street interests. Cavuto’s boss, Rupert Murdoch has a well known insider nickname: “Mr. Wall Street”… The Murdoch operations (Fox News and Wall Street Journal among them) are ideological advocates for multinational corporations and historic globalist trade practices; to the detriment of the U.S. middle-class. Cavuto and Murdoch are aligned with U.S. Chamber of Commerce President, Tom Donohue, in all things related to Big Multinational Trade.
In this interview there is a very apropos example of the twisted disconnect evident in the multinational corporate media perspective. Please watch the part that begins around 04:55 and listen closely to Cavuto:
…”and we’re really seeing the effect on the folks who have to pay the bills for this sort of thing … we’re already seeing soybean prices coming down; we’re seeing pork related prices coming down … folks are taking it on the chin, what are you telling them?”… etc.
There it is. Did you catch it?
In discussing futures Cavuto sounds the alarm for “Soybean prices coming down.” “Pork prices coming down”; and “the folks “taking it on the chin.”
Now, think. What Neil Cavuto is saying is that U.S. food futures prices are forecast to come down. In that scenario who exactly is taking it on the chin?
Who is it that Neil Cavuto sees losing out in his position? It’s not the family going to the grocery store… they will see lower prices… so who are these “folks” losing out?
There it is.
Right there.
It’s easy to miss the gaslighting because it is so commonplace. Cavuto doesn’t even see himself doing it.
This is the twisted and controlled market being discussed.
Neil Cavuto is not calling for ‘free markets’, he is advocating for ‘controlled markets’, and his anxiety is because the “folks” he references as “losers” are the Multinational Corporations and Big-AG who control the Pork and Soybean market.
Cavuto’s ‘consumers’, those he is advocating for, are Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Monsanto, Cargill, Unilever, Nestle’ and ConAgra. Those are the names of Cavuto’s folks that he sees as “taking it on the chin.” He is NOT, repeat NOT, talking about people who shop at supermarkets and grocery stores, ie. the middle-class.
I cannot emphasize this enough… once you know how to spot this economic disconnect in the arguments by advocates for multinational corporations you can never go back to a time when you don’t see it.
This is the most important economic lesson that most Americans simply do not comprehend. We are in an abusive relationship, and most U.S. consumers don’t even know about it.
If the U.S. were to exit NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), the price you pay for most foodstuff at the grocery store would drop 10% in the first quarter and likely drop 20% or more by the end of the first year. Here’s why:
Approximately a decade ago the U.S. Dept of Agriculture stopped using U.S. consumer food prices within the reported CORE measures of inflation. The food sector joined the ranks of fuel and energy prices in no longer being measured to track core inflation and backdrop Fed monetary policy. Not coincidentally this was simultaneous to U.S. consumers seeing massive inflation in the same highly consumable sector.
There are massive international corporate and financial interests who are inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.
When you understand how trade works in the modern era you will understand why the agents within the system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.
The biggest lie in modern economics, willingly spread and maintained by corporate media, is that a system of global markets still exists.
It doesn’t.
Every element of global economic trade is controlled and exploited by massive institutions, multinational banks and multinational corporations. Institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Bank control trillions of dollars in economic activity. Underneath that economic activity there are people who hold the reigns of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of America-First national economics.
The modern financial constructs of these entities have been established over the course of the past three decades. When you understand how they manipulate the economic system of individual nations you begin to understand understand why they are so fundamentally opposed to President Trump.
In the Western World, separate from communist control perspectives (ie. China), “Global markets” are a modern myth; nothing more than a talking point meant to keep people satiated with sound bites they might find familiar. Global markets have been destroyed over the past three decades by multinational corporations who control the products formerly contained within global markets.
The same is true for “Commodities Markets”. The multinational trade and economic system, run by corporations and multinational banks, now controls the product outputs of independent nations. The free market economic system has been usurped by entities who create what is best described as ‘controlled markets’.
U.S. President Trump smartly understands what has taken place. Additionally he uses economic leverage as part of a broader national security policy; and to understand who opposes President Trump specifically because of the economic leverage he creates, it becomes important to understand the objectives of the global and financial elite who run and operate the institutions. The Big Club.
Understanding how trillions of trade dollars influence geopolitical policy we begin to understand the three-decade global financial construct they seek to protect.
That is, global financial exploitation of national markets.
FOUR BASIC ELEMENTS:
♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national outputs and industries of developed industrial western nations.
♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.
♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.
Against the backdrop of President Trump confronting China; and against the backdrop of NAFTA being renegotiated, likely to exit; and against the necessary need to support the key U.S. steel industry; revisiting the economic influences within the modern import/export dynamic will help conceptualize the issues at the heart of the matter.
There are a myriad of interests within each trade sector that make specific explanation very challenging; however, here’s the basic outline.
For three decades economic “globalism” has advanced, quickly. Everyone accepts this statement, yet few actually stop to ask who and what are behind this – and why?
Influential people with vested financial interests in the process have sold a narrative that global manufacturing, global sourcing, and global production was the inherent way of the future. The same voices claimed the American economy was consigned to become a “service-driven economy.”
What was always missed in these discussions is that advocates selling this global-economy message have a vested financial and ideological interest in convincing the information consumer it is all just a natural outcome of economic progress.
It’s not.
It’s not natural at all. It is a process that is entirely controlled, promoted and utilized by large conglomerates, lobbyists, purchased politicians and massive financial corporations.
Again, I’ll try to retain the larger altitude perspective without falling into the traps of the esoteric weeds. I freely admit this is tough to explain and I may not be successful.
Bulletpoint #1:♦ Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.
This is perhaps the most challenging to understand. In essence, thanks specifically to the way the World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, national companies expanded their influence into multiple nations, across a myriad of industries and economic sectors (energy, agriculture, raw earth minerals, etc.). This is the basic underpinning of national companies becoming multinational corporations.
Think of these multinational corporations as global entities now powerful enough to reach into multiple nations -simultaneously- and purchase controlling interests in a single economic commodity.
A historic reference point might be the original multinational enterprise, energy via oil production. (Exxon, Mobil, BP, etc.)
However, in the modern global world, it’s not just oil; the resource and product procurement extends to virtually every possible commodity and industry. From the very visible (wheat/corn) to the obscure (small minerals, and even flowers).
Bulletpoint #2 ♦ The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.
During the past several decades national companies merged. The largest lemon producer company in Brazil, merges with the largest lemon company in Mexico, merges with the largest lemon company in Argentina, merges with the largest lemon company in the U.S., etc. etc. National companies, formerly of one nation, become “continental” companies with control over an entire continent of nations.
…. or it could be over several continents or even the entire world market of Lemon/Widget production. These are now multinational corporations. They hold interests in specific segments (this example lemons) across a broad variety of individual nations.
National laws on Monopoly building are not the same in all nations. Most are not as structured as the U.S.A or other more developed nations (with more laws). During the acquisition phase, when encountering a highly developed nation with monopoly laws, the process of an umbrella corporation might be needed to purchase the targeted interests within a specific nation. The example of Monsanto applies here.
Bulletpoint #3 ♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
With control of the majority of actual lemons the multinational corporation now holds a different set of financial values than a local farmer or national market. This is why commodities exchanges are essentially dead. In the aggregate the mercantile exchange is no longer a free or supply-based market; it is now a controlled market exploited by mega-sized multinational corporations.
Instead of the traditional ‘supply/demand’ equation determining prices, the corporations look to see what nations can afford what prices. The supply of the controlled product is then distributed to the country according to their ability to afford the price. This is essentially the bastardized and politicized function of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is also how the corporations controlling WTO policy maximize profits.
Back to the lemons. A corporation might hold the rights to the majority of the lemon production in Brazil, Argentina and California/Florida. The price the U.S. consumer pays for the lemons is directed by the amount of inventory (distribution) the controlling corporation allows in the U.S.
If the U.S. lemon harvest is abundant, the controlling interests will export the product to keep the U.S. consumer spending at peak or optimal price. A U.S. customer might pay $2 for a lemon, a Mexican customer might pay .50¢, and a Canadian $1.25.
The bottom line issue is the national supply (in this example ‘harvest/yield’) is not driving the national price because the supply is now controlled by massive multinational corporations.
The mistake people often make is calling this a “global commodity” process. In the modern era this “global commodity” phrase is particularly nonsense.
A true global commodity is a process of individual nations harvesting/creating a similar product and bringing that product to a global market. Individual nations each independently engaged in creating a similar product.
Under modern globalism this process no longer takes place. It’s a complete fraud. Massive multinational corporations control the majority of production inside each nation and therefore control the global product market and price. It is a controlled system.
EXAMPLE: Part of the lobbying in the food industry is to advocate for the expansion of U.S. taxpayer benefits to underwrite the costs of the domestic food products they control. By lobbying DC these multinational corporations [Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Monsanto, Cargill, Unilever, Nestle’, ConAgra etc] get congress and policy-makers to expand the basis of who can use EBT and SNAP benefits (state reimbursement rates).
Expanding the federal subsidy for food purchases is part of the corporate profit dynamic.
With increased taxpayer subsidies, the food price controllers can charge more domestically and export more of the product internationally. Taxes, via subsidies, go into their profit margins. The corporations then use a portion of those enhanced profits in contributions to the politicians. It’s a circle of money.
In highly developed nations this multinational corporate process requires the corporation to purchase the domestic political process (as above) with individual nations allowing the exploitation in varying degrees. As such, the corporate lobbyists pay hundreds of millions to politicians for changes in policies and regulations; one sector, one product, or one industry at a time. These are specialized lobbyists.
EXAMPLE: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)
CFIUS is an inter-agency committee authorized to review transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person (“covered transactions”), in order to determine the effect of such transactions on the national security of the United States.
CFIUS operates pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) (section 721) and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.
The CFIUS process has been the subject of significant reforms over the past several years. These include numerous improvements in internal CFIUS procedures, enactment of FINSA in July 2007, amendment of Executive Order 11858 in January 2008, revision of the CFIUS regulations in November 2008, and publication of guidance on CFIUS’s national security considerations in December 2008 (more)
Bulletpoint #4 ♦ With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.
The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth. This is the basic premise, the cornerstone, behind the catch-phrase ‘globalism’.
It is never discussed.
To control the market price some contracted product may even be secured and shipped with the intent to allow it to sit idle (or rot). It’s all about controlling the price and maximizing the profit equation. To gain the same $1 profit a widget multinational might have to sell 20 widgets in El-Salvador (.25¢ each), or two widgets in the U.S. ($2.50/each).
Think of the process like the historic reference of OPEC (Oil Producing Economic Countries). Only in the modern era massive corporations are playing the role of OPEC and it’s not oil being controlled, thanks to the WTO it’s almost everything.
Again, this is highlighted in the example of taxpayers subsidizing the food sector (EBT, SNAP etc.), the corporations can charge U.S. consumers more. Ex. more beef is exported, red meat prices remain high at the grocery store, but subsidized U.S. consumers can better afford the high prices.
Of course, if you are not receiving food payment assistance (middle-class) you can’t eat the steaks because you can’t afford them. (Not accidentally, it’s the same scheme in the ObamaCare healthcare system)
Agriculturally, multinational corporate Monsanto, ADM, ConAgra says: ‘all your harvests are belong to us‘. Contract with us, or you lose because we can control the market price of your end product. Downside is that once you sign that contract, you agree to terms that are entirely created by the financial interests of the larger corporation; not your farm.
The multinational agriculture lobby is massive. We willingly feed the world as part of the system; but you as a grocery customer pay more per unit at the grocery store because domestic supply no longer determines domestic price.
Within the agriculture community the (feed-the-world) production export factor also drives the need for labor. Labor is a cost. The multinational corps have a vested interest in low labor costs. Ergo, open border policies. (ie. willingly purchased republicans not supporting border wall etc.).
This corrupt economic manipulation/exploitation applies over multiple sectors, and even in the sub-sector of an industry like steel. China/India purchases the raw material, coking coal, then sells the finished good (rolled steel) back to the global market at a discount. Or it could be rubber, or concrete, or plastic, or frozen chicken parts etc.
The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upsets the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focus exclusively on bilateral trade deals, with specific trade agreements targeted toward individual nations (not national corporations).
‘America-First’ is also specific policy at a granular product level looking out for the national interests of the United States, U.S. workers, U.S. companies and U.S. consumers.
Under President Trump’s Trade positions, balanced and fair trade with strong regulatory control over national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped.
This puts many current multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding contracted interest of an asset they can no longer exploit.
Perhaps now we understand better how massive multi-billion multinational corporations and institutions are aligned against President Trump.
Replacing Gary Cohn, today is day one for Larry Kudlow to hit the airwaves as President Trump’s new Chairman of the National Economic Council. This will be an interesting dynamic to watch. In essence, Kudlow’s job – whether he admits it or not, is to remove the clenched grip of U.S. Chamber of Commerce President, Tom Donohue, from the republican trade and business position.
With multinational trade confrontations now taking center stage, Kudlow is going to have to slowly shift the GOPe political minds into a modern Trump-era where Main Street U.S.A. is the priority. Wall Street needs to shift to domestic investment if they desire to remain beneficiaries.
President Trump is immovable on his trade and economic agenda. Period; end of story. Ask Gary Cohn or any other member of the disassembled manufacturing council advisory board who quit last year because POTUS Trump just wouldn’t heed their duplicitous and high-minded advice. Do you remember candidate Trump mentioning the endless talking to nowhere that he has not time for? Yeah, that.
President Trump has a 30-year-developed plan and strategy for the U.S. to recapture economic power. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, and key trade strategist Peter Navarro are carrying out that plan.
Anyone thinking they would somehow disrupt three decades of trade planning by POTUS Trump is too funny to give typeset space.
POTUS would cut off his own hand before he would change direction on his economic strategy.
Remember: “America First”. Titan-minded Trump is the most committed economic influence agent in the history of American politics.
The National Economic Council (NEC) is an entity demanded by the formal traditions of the Office of the President. The council assembles, meets, discusses, hold conferences, invite guests etc. However, for POTUS Trump it’s an exercise in formality run mostly by professionals who benefit from the indulgences of membership.
The NEC has no more influence on Trump’s economic plan than any chosen Country Club has influence over his skills on the golf course. But it looks good. And that’s it.
Chairman Larry Kudlow will be working overtime amid the financial-class cocktail party circuit to share an entirely different economic when it comes to trade and investment.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross appears on CNBC earlier today to talk specifically about U.S-China trade resets, confrontation and negotiations. Secretary Ross cuts right through the chaff and countermeasures and gets right to the primary issues.
When questioned about the myriad of downstream issues, Secretary Ross stays focused on the big picture. GREAT INTERVIEW (there are multiple segments where it’s almost impossible not to laugh during Wilburine’s gnat-swatting):
When reviewing new information against the backdrop of existing information it is important not to get so caught up in the weeds that you miss the obvious. This is the important aspect to a new information release from Robert Mueller.
Overnight last night Special Counsel Robert Mueller released an attachment as part of a responsive court pleading. The attachment was a previously unknown letter from Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller outlining the specific authority of his investigative appointment. The letter from Rosenstein to Mueller is dated August 2nd, 2017.
There are several elements to break down, and one of the best ways to review the information is to first ask “why”?
Question #1) Why did Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein deliver a non-public outline of investigative authority to Mueller on August 2nd, 2017?
Question #2) Why would Robert Mueller be seeking a signed more specific outline of his investigative authority on August 2nd, 2017; a full three months after he was assigned the role of Special Counsel?
Question #3) Why would Robert Mueller need to redact the content of an official outline of his investigative instructions from the Asst. Attorney General?
First, it is important to put the Rod Rosenstein releases into context.
On Wednesday May 17th, 2017 Rosenstein announced the following:
Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.
The “previously-confirmed FBI investigation … efforts” is apparently code-speak for the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign confirmed by FBI Director James Comey on March 20th, 2017 to congress.
The simultaneous release of investigative intent then includes a more specific and formal outline, which does include Donald Trump:
So there we have the three areas of direct authority: ¹Links or coordination between the Russian Government and the campaign of Donald Trump. ²Matters that may arise from the investigation of the Russian government and the campaign of Donald Trump. And ³other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). [<- ie. ‘Jurisdiction‘]
So there’s the instructions to Robert Mueller and his team on May 17th, 2017.
Now, as we previously discussed: “Robert Mueller didn’t necessarily appoint or select a team of lawyers and investigators…. the previously assembled team of lawyers and investigatorsselected him.” The key player in that assembly was FBI Chief-Legal-Counsel and personal confidant to Robert Mueller, James Baker. (pictured right)
Remember, the “small group”, career officials inside the DOJ and FBI needed to continue their group effort after the election. Therefore they needed to stay assembled as a group; they needed to stay on task, to facilitate the original intent of their association. The Special Counsel was merely a way, an approach, a tool for this specific team to continue their efforts after the 2016 presidential election, nothing more – nothing less.
The team already existed. The objectives already existed. The only thing they needed was a willfully-blind leader and an excuse to continue their ideological efforts. Robert Mueller became their selected willfully-blind leader because the small group already knew him and they knew they could manipulate/use him.
Their ideological association is why the same people behind Phase 1 (Clinton Exoneration ’15, ’16), and Phase 2 (opposition research, counterintelligence and surveillance against Trump ’15, ’16, ’17), became the same people in Phase 3, the post-election vast Russian-Trump Collusion Conspiracy; also known as “The Insurance Policy”. In many ways Phase 3 was/is more of a continued opposition research endeavor, part of the “resistance” per se, with a good dose of self-preservation binding them all together.
Robert Mueller could technically shut down the official Special Counsel tomorrow and for the ‘small group’ nothing would change much. The ‘group’ shifts back out of government work and reconnects with Fusion GPS (or similar). They inform their media allies to change the official name of their tasks from ‘investigation’ back to ‘opposition research’. Sans Mueller all group tasks remain consistent, and three days from now it’s just another Friday.
If it is a paradigm shift to understand that Mueller didn’t select his team, but rather the team selected him…. then a similar paradigm shift will be found in the following motive behind Robert Mueller requesting Rosenstein to outline his investigation on August 2nd, 2017:
Mueller wasn’t asking Rosenstein to expand the focus of the endeavor; team Mueller was asking Rosenstein to NARROW the focus of their investigation.
Why would Team Mueller be asked to narrow the focus?
Because Inspector General Michael Horowitz just informed him/them of his discovery of the conspiracy behind the DOJ and FBI plan against Donald Trump.
On July 20th, 2017 IG Horowitz gets the Page/Strzok text messages. Horowitz informs Mueller there is evidence of a conspiracy evident within his team. That had to be an ‘oh, shit’ moment for the “small group”; and for Robert Mueller.
The investigation was going on for more than two months and the team was already moving on Paul Manafort. Quickly, the investigative team needs Rosenstein to narrow the investigation. The last thing the Special Counsel team needed, was an open door to investigate corrupt officials within their own ideological ranks. Lord knows where that would end-up.
Now, before getting to #3 (why the redacted memo from Mueller last night), and retaining the bigger picture, take a look at a few aspects that need to fall into place within this timeline.
FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was was interviewed about his media leaks in May 2017. He denied. Notice what comes next… “a couple of months later” he was interviewed by IG Horowitz. And he again denied. Now think! That conversation would be around July of 2017. What happened right after/amid this period? Answer: Horowitz gained the Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text messages.
•May 2017 McCabe denies leaking for WSJ story (to FBI).
•July 2017 McCabe denies again (to IG Horowitz).
•July 20th, 2017 Horowitz gets Strzok/Page text messages. Proving McCabe constructed the WSJ story and lied to FBI investigators and Inspector General.
•August 2017: After Horowitz gets the proof McCabe was lying – McCabe follows up on the two denials saying “he may have allowed FBI officials to speak with the newspaper”.
•August 2017: FBI re-interviews McCabe based on new admissions.
•November 29th 2017: One day before SC Mueller indicts Michael Flynn, IG Horowitz interviews McCabe again. Apparently this time McCabe admitted to constructing the leak.
Apply Occam’s razor.
Lisa Page is likely also questioned about the Wall Street Journal article and she told the truth. However, now her story conflicts with Andrew McCabe. So to prove her side of the story, Lisa Page provides the text messages July 20th, 2017 to investigators. That’s where the “Page was already disenfranchised with the SC Mueller assignment” and the “removed earlier” aspect comes from.
Andrew McCabe lied in May and July 2017. Lisa Page likely gave a statement that conflicted with McCabe and used the text messages to back up her side. That’s how IG Horowitz gained the original access to the Page/Strzok messages. The rest is history.
The ‘good guys’ inside the investigative FBI unit have a motive to be angry.
♦Think about it…. McCabe admits to lying to the FBI on November 29th, 2017. On November 30th, Michael Flynn is forced to sign a sketchy guilty plea for *presumably* lying to the FBI. On December 1st the media pushes the Flynn lying guilty plea. On December 2nd *some entity* within the process hits back against the corrupt insiders (around McCabe) and begins blasting out information about Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr… That’s where most people began to take notice.
Additionally, think about the time-frame knowing IG Horowitz informed SC Mueller about Strzok and Page and the potential criminal conduct outlined within their text messages.
In between the time McCabe lied to the FBI (May ’17), and then lied to Horowitz (July ’17), and then attempted to clean up his lie (Aug ’17), and then McCabe’s November 29th re-interview with Horowitz…. Prosecutor John Huber was brought on board.
There’s obviously a history of White Hats and Black Hats inside the DOJ and FBI while the entire operation against Trump was taking place. There’s White Hats -vs- Black Hats playing out inside the intelligence apparatus (Rogers -vs- Clapper/Brennan). In 2017 there’s White Hats and Black Hats inside dueling investigative units (Horowitz -vs- Mueller). And with Huber added there’s now White Hats -vs- Black Hats as prosecutors.
So lets look at a few interpersonal and organizational dynamics for examples. [Forgive my plain-speak]. Taking some cues from inside the text messages already reviewed:
♦DOJ Attorney assigned to the FBI effort, Lisa Page, was willing to go along with the plans in 2015/2016 because she’s ideologically aligned with the political objectives to aid Hillary Clinton. However, after the election she ain’t stupid. By late spring she can see the writing on the wall… the intended outcome ain’t working. Nervous already, with McCabe lying about the media leaks in July, she’s had enough… she shoots down “Andy’s” lies and exits.
♦FBI Asst. Director in charge of counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, was already likely not comfy with the entire scheme, and his #2 Deputy FBI Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok was too far out-of-bounds. Priestap likely never agreed to ‘Phase-3’. He’s also rich with a well-off spouse and too much to lose.
♦FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker did his earnest best to support the operation through Phase #1, Phase #2 and helped set up Phase #3… but after he found out congress was going to subpoena him, the next day something happened and FBI Director Christopher Wray removed him. The ‘something’ was likely Baker realizing Phase-3 wasn’t working, and began working toward self preservation.
♦FBI Agent Peter Strzok is just all around FUBAR. He’s busted all over the place… ‘where do I sign’? Halp.
♦Comey’s former Chief-of-Staff James Rybicki knew his goose was cooked as soon as he saw the Page/Strzok text messages surfacing in December 2017. But his loyalty to his former boss, and the actual physical risk to life and limb precluded his ability to help. He quit.
FBI Communications Director Michael Kortan was caught within the media leaks and also inside the spin machine from the Clinton investigation the ‘small group’ intentionally sunk and he sold as valid. Kortan decides to give the team the last help he can and releases an unauthorized FBI media statement in January, slamming the Nunes memo and undermining the official FBI position. It was his parting shot to attempt cover for the remaining crew. A few days later he was resigned by Director Wray.
On the Main Justice side:
♦DOJ-NSD Deputy Bruce Ohr was in too deep. Demoted twice in between a series of twelve, yes twelve, FBI investigative interviews… Obviously Bruce knew too much, and the collaboration/connection with his wife Nellie and Fusion GPS just put a massive target on his back. Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr connect the activity from the DOJ (national security division) and FBI (counterintelligence division) together with Fusion GPS (Nellie’s 2016 employer, Glenn Simpson) and Christopher Steele (the recipient of the unwashed intelligence product).
Nellie and Bruce didn’t exactly have an option… no doubt that’s why all the FBI investigative interviews from Horowitz and Huber. Tick.Tock on the IG report.
♦DOJ-NSD Deputy AAG David Laufman sat in on the Clinton investigations and was part of the collaborative effort to construct the fraudulent FISA application. In his former position, Laufman would have been involved and hold knowledge of the FISA “Title-1” surveillance program initiated on target Carter Page and the “incidental” Trump campaign officials. Laufman would also have close contact with former Asst. Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr; husband of Fusion GPS employee Nellie Ohr. Laufman quit in February, 2018.
♦DOJ-NSD Principle Deputy Asst. Attorney General Mary McCord replaced John Carlin in October 2016 and assisted Sally Yates in Phase-3 along with the Flynn scheme. Mary McCord accompanied Yates to the White House. Three things happened right before McCord resigned at the DOJ-NSD in April 2017. First, Sally Yates was fired. Second, the #2 re-authorization of the Page surveillance warrant occurred; and Third, IG Michael Horowitz gained oversight over the DOJ-NSD.
Sally Yates had blocked OIG oversight over the DOJ-NSD for the previous years. In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD. In April 2017 all of that changed.
Not coincidentally the first White Hat arrives at the DOJ-NSD leadership ranks when Dana Boenteshows up, also in April 2017, from his prior position as U.S. AG for the Eastern District of Virginia. Boente acted as interim Attorney General after Yates was removed. Boente left Main Justice in October 2017 and in January joined Christopher Wray at the FBI as Chief Legal Counsel to replace the removed James Baker.
OK, so that’s a long and rather exhaustive summary of the key inside-players without going directly into the White House (Obama), CIA (Brennan) and ODNI (Clapper) roles.
Why is this pertinent to Robert Mueller and the August 2nd, 2017 request to Rod Rosenstein for a clarification/narrowing of investigative authority?
Because Mueller’s team, the small group of political officials and lawyers, know all of these people inside the DOJ apparatus. These are their peers, their comrades in ideology… this is their crew and social circle. The last thing their legal endeavors need is to be put in a position of intel or information about their brethren.
And for Team-Leader Robert Mueller, against the back-drop of this information; and with IG Horowitz giving him details about Page/Strzok messages; there’s a strong motive to ask for a signed letter from Rosenstein prior to continuing to investigate the President of the United States knowing President Donald Trump was also a target of this plan – and these details were going to surface at some point.
Lastly, and specifically about Rod Rosenstein, perhaps at a certain point in the spring and early summer 2017 he might have thought there was a substantive way for the assembly to carry out their plan. Perhaps he even believed the popular leftist narrative and thought there might be something to these ‘Trump-Russia-Collusion’ claims. Perhaps that’s why he directed the Muller investigative mandate in May 2017 to the exclusivity of President Donald Trump with no mention of any other campaign (Hillary Clinton) contact with Russian entities.
However, by August 2017 with full information coming from IG Horowitz about the likelihood of criminal conduct by FBI and DOJ officials; at the time Rosenstein wrote the more carefully detailed outline; he had to know the investigation into Trump was heading no-where.
Overnight last night Special Counsel Robert Mueller released an attachment as part of a responsive court pleading. The attachment was a previously unknown letter from Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller outlining the specific authority of his investigative appointment. The letter from Rosenstein to Mueller is dated August 2nd, 2017.
The revelation of the content within the letter, in conjunction with the specific date of transmission to Robert Mueller, substantively changes my review of Rod Rosenstein’s 2017 motives and intents surrounding his authorization of the Special Counsel appointment.
Before getting to the Rosenstein letter to Mueller, it is important to review the origin of a specific fact that will be a key component in the next post. To establish an important and needed time-frame. See Page 18, Item #3, second paragraph of Interim Congressional Report:
“The FBI’s conduct in relation to supplying the text messages between Strzok and Page only heightens concern about actions and intentions at the highest echelons of the FBI. The DOJ OIG obtained the initial batch of text messages on July 20, 2017.“
Inspector General Horowitz gained the Page/Strzok text messages on July 20th, 2017.
Police have identified the shooter who attacked a San Bruno YouTube campus wounding three employees and killing herself as Nasim Aghdam. Apparently Ms. Aghdam was a user of the platform and was considerably upset about YouTube ad revenue policies.
Nasim Aghdam has a website [available here] displaying a weird manifesto of sorts where she admonishes YouTube for censorship and demonetization of her video content. Her self-identification is an “Iranian Vegan”, and apparently she is also an animal rights activist. Prior to the rampage she might not have entirely lost all her marbles, but there was definitely a big hole in her bag.
(Via ABC7) […] Aghdam is said to have no relationship with anyone in the YouTube facility. Sources contacted by ABC7 News say that Aghdam did not have an ID badge, but was carrying a purse, and that nobody in the facility knew who she was.
According to her website, a possible motivation for the shooting could have been tied to her many YouTube accounts, which she says have seen a decline in viewership over the past few months. (read more)
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