Douglas Murray is a British author, journalist, and political commentator. He is the founder of the Centre for Social Cohesion and is currently the associate director of the Henry Jackson Society and associate editor of The Spectator. This snipet is taken form One-day conference organized jointly by the Batthyány Society of Professors, the Research Centre for the Humanities of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and the Danube Institute, at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, on 15th December 2015. Quoted under fair use: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYJ7J… ——–
Jordan B Peterson (born June 12, 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. This is part of his Biblical Series VIII: The Phenomenology of the Divine and he is talking about globalism and why large systems fail. Full video quoted under fair use: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoQdp…
They should go on a tour together. Finally someone goes back and connects the dots from the hundreds of illegal FBI FISA-702(16)(17) searches where they were allowing ‘contractors’ to do opposition research in NSA and FBI databases. Part of the dirtying up of their opposition required the digging of dirt for use therein. Thank You Sidney Powell.
That righteous notation triggered Joe diGenova’s memory… and Laura Ingraham was left nodding her head (she was lost) as details began surfacing that only a few have yet grasped. Quite a good segment. WATCH:
.
Heads up.Big News Coming Tomorrow!
Thousands of pages of documents about to be released.
The NAFTA phone call between Justin from Canada and U.S. President Trump took place yesterday.
Due to the importance of the timing; and against the backdrop of Trump’s meeting with auto executives; and considering that Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland spent five days in Washington DC last week without an agreement; and understanding no NAFTA talks are taking place this week; it was important to see who called whom in order to understand the import of the phone contact:
President Donald J. Trump spoke today with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada to address the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. President Trump underscored the importance of quickly concluding an agreement. (WH – link)
According to Canadian officials, Justin from Canada was the initiator of the call yesterday.
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan previously set a deadline date of May 17th, due to the statutory requirements for any agreement, based on this year’s legislative calendar. That’s the day after tomorrow. There is general consensus no agreement prior to that date is possible. Additionally Mexico’s national election is July 1st, 2018.
CANADA – […] A senior source with direct knowledge of the situation said senior Trudeau government officials have had multiple recent phone conversations with figures in the Trump administration to gauge their willingness to send decision makers back to the negotiating table.
The source told CBC News federal officials expect to learn in the next 24 hours whether the ministers overseeing the talks will return to Washington at the end of this week to resume negotiations.
[…] Officials decided to make the push now because they don’t want to look back at this junction in the talks weeks from now and realize more could have been done, the source added. (read more)
In California, the DNA of every baby born is being stored by the state. The real question is WHY? Then comes the next question: Who has access? Once that data is stored, any law enforcement agency can get its hands on it. What people do not know is that taking DNA of ANYONE in your family exposes the entire family to be a suspect in any crime. There are cases where the DNA of one person came up with a close match for another crime so they knew a family member was involved. Interesting how the MOST liberal state that claims to cherish the rights of individuals has become the most oppressive.
QUESTION: Hi there Mr. Armstrong
In attempting to synthesize some of your past comments, I wonder if it is accurate to conclude that rate hikes are the lesser of two evils between collapsing pension funds and higher debt servicing costs? If so, the implication is that budgets don’t matter, since it appears you can add another 200B to 400B dollars to your running costs each year, not including higher military spending, new infrastructure investment, trade protection costs etc… without any consequence to the demand for dollars. This is a hard concept for the average person to grasp since, in his/her world, budgets DO matter.
But why do pension managers not buy equity if they want higher returns? Surely this would resolve the problem since western central banks, who appear to deem it their responsibility to protect pensions, could embolden primary brokers, hedge funds, and UHNW investors to produce the concentration needed to raise stock markets into the future, thus securing pension returns.
It also seems that from what you have said, whilst markets are overvalued compared to previous years, they appear not to be overvalued in the present, relative to other asset classes. Investors who have been reading banking commentaries over the last 20 years must feel that valuation guidelines should now be taken with a pinch of salt.
Thanks for your efforts and for keeping the conversation going.
Best regards
CA, Switzerland
ANSWER: We have a number of major pension funds who follow our computer and have outperformed everyone else on the block. However, the problem is not pension funds lacking the desire to move to equities, but many have their hands tied and are restricted to government bonds. Then we have state pension funds like CalPERS in California, who was a big investor in US equities, and was directed by politicians to be politically correct by investing in environmentally pro-active companies. That has been a huge bust.
Some pension funds have followed the 60% equity and 40% bonds rule, but others, most state pensions, made it 80% bonds and 20% equity. Then they ran off into emerging market debt to get the high yield. The Swiss Federal Office for Social Insurance posted 57% of pension funds were underfunded at the start of 2009. Take Belgium where the maximum limit for investment by pension funds into equity is 10%. The bias for government debt in pensions is illustrated by Germany where the maximum investment into any single issuer is set at 5%, but they can invest 30% of the fund in a single government issuer.
We have been creating some clever packages to help some pension get around those limitations. I am not at liberty to discuss the matter.
It really is stunning how politicians in Europe are so disconnected with the people. The press bashes those in Britain who are against “refugee” immigration from the Middle East as RACISTS, despite the fact that they are of all races and Islam is not a race, it is a religion. It is amazing how they throw that word around to belittle and demonize anyone who disagrees with them. Despite all the hatred they hurl at those in Britain who voted for BRXIT, the polls show that the top two issues facing the voters in Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Sweden, Finland, Poland, and Lithuania just so happen to be, let’s guess, Immigration & Terrorism.
When Europeans migrated to America, there were no social programs. They did not come to get handouts, free housing, and a monthly allowance. They came to work. To get a job, they had to learn the language and merge into society. Nobody showed up demanding that everyone in America change to conform to their culture. That is what has taken place, especially in Sweden. Friends from there have remarked how they cannot freely travel in their own country. Of course, there are the horror stories such as one of a refugee raping a 10-year-old boy in a swimming pool. The rapist claimed he was justified because it was a “sexual emergency” and the conviction was overturned because he may have consented?
In Norway, 25% of all rape cases have involved the refugees. The Afghan refugee who raped a 15-year-old fled when released on bail. There was the famous incident where 2,000 girls in Germany were raped or molested on New Year’s Eve. Then the German police were ordered to remove the word “rape” from all official records of the incident. This was to protect politicians who let these people in and not the girls in Germany.
In Sweden, they gang-raped a Swedish girl and broadcast it on Facebook. If you go through the countless number of reports involving rapes throughout Europe, is it any wonder why the polls are against immigration on equal footing with terrorism? In Europe, a girl has more than 1000:1 chance of being raped by a refugee than being killed by a terrorist.
About 70% of the “refugees” are single men under 30 — not families with women and children. Here is a photo of a boat of refugees off the coast of Sicily. They are all young men — not families. That’s the “sexual emergency” because they came with no women, do not speak the language, have no skills, and are use to just taking what they want.
Some major reporting today from Paul Sperry includes very interesting details about how President Obama’s intelligence community structured their Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) about Russian interference in the 2016 election – SEE HERE –
In essence by following-up with various people involved in the construct of the ICA, journalist Paul Sperry outlines how CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, subverted their own intelligence guidelines in assembling the intelligence report.
While much of the background parallels our prior research, there are two very interesting aspects outlined by those with direct knowledge of the construct. First, that Brennan positioned FBI Agent Peter Strzok as the contact between the CIA analysis and the information flow to FBI Director James Comey:
[…] A source close to the House investigation said Brennan himself selected the CIA and FBI analysts who worked on the ICA, and that they included former FBI counterespionage chief Peter Strzok.
“Strzok was the intermediary between Brennan and [former FBI Director James] Comey, and he was one of the authors of the ICA,” according to the source. (link)
This structure is interesting because it highlights an increasingly obvious intention of the participating group to control the content of intelligence, and the information flow therein. There are several instances which highlight the level of a strategic effort undertaken to keep James Comey out of the loop on details within the 2016 operation(s).
Their approach creates the “I don’t know” and “that was not my understanding” defense as deployed heavily by James Comey during his book tour and media interviews.
This approach also creates an unusual set of contradictions.
Former FBI Director James Comey repeatedly says the work on the Clinton and Trump investigations was kept inside a very “tight group” of DOJ and FBI people; yet Comey repeatedly claims to have no knowledge of their activity when questioned about specific events.
Deputy Director Andrew McCabe keeping Director Comey in the dark on the Huma Abedin laptop issues for four weeks (Sept. 28th through October 26th) is a clear example of Comey’s ‘willful blindness’.
There are also numerous examples in the Page/Strzok text messaging or working around Comey within the FBI small group (Andrew McCabe, James Baker, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and Michael Kortan), as Andrew McCarthy finally realized when he sat down to read the content last weekend: “I am bleary-eyed from a weekend of reading about half of them. Even in their heavily redacted form, they are a goldmine of insight.” I digress.
A second interesting aspect revealed in Paul Sperry’s reporting is something we discussed at great length surrounding the President Obama daily briefing material (PDB):
[…] “Brennan put some of the dossier material into the PDB [presidential daily briefing] for Obama and described it as coming from a ‘credible source,’ which is how they viewed Steele,” said the source familiar with the House investigation. “But they never corroborated his sources.” (read more)
So with another confirmation that Brennan was putting FBI Counterintelligence Investigation findings into President Obama’s PDB, let’s revisit the statements in April 2017 from President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice. As relayed in an interview with MSNBC’s Andrew Mitchell:
Susan Rice @00:51 – …”Let me explain how this works. I was a National Security Adviser, my job is to protect the American people and the security of our country. That’s the same as the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and CIA Director.; and every morning, to enable us to do that, we receive – from the intelligence community – a compilation of intelligence reports that the IC, the intelligence community, has selected for us –on a daily basis– to give us the best information as to what’s going on around the world.”
[Note, Susan Rice is describing the PDB]
“I received those reports, as did other officials, and there were occasions when I would receive a report in which, uh, a ‘U.S Person’ was referred to. Name, uh, not provided, just ‘U.S. Person’.
And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance in the report – and assess it’s significance, it was necessary to find out or request, who that U.S. official was.”
The interview goes much further. There was a lot of news in that interview. There is also a tremendous amount of double-speak and self-contradiction; in some cases between sentences that follow each other.
Notice how Susan Rice contradicts herself about what the intelligence community puts into the PDB. Remember, Rice considers the PDB intel community to be very specific: James Clapper (DNI), John Brennan (CIA) and Defense Department (which would be the Pentagon and NSA Mike Rogers). And she states they would never send the President innocuous things unworthy of review.
However, right there Susan Rice is confirming the “unmasking” request(s) which can be pinned upon her, are directly related to her need to understand -on behalf of President Obama- intelligence for the President’s Daily Briefing (the PDB). This was a previous question now answered.
This is EXPLOSIVE, and here’s why.
Remember, the President’s Daily Brief under President Obama went to almost everyone at top levels in his administration. Regarding the Obama PDB:
[…] But while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.
In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers.
By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments. (link)
Pay attention to that last part. According to the Washington Post outline Obama’s PDB’s were going to: “Deputy Secretaries of national security departments”, and his speechwriter, Ben Rhodes.
Susan Rice defined the Obama national security departments to include: “State” – “Defense” (Pentagon includes NSA) and “CIA”….
So under Obama’s watch Deputy Asst. Secretaries of Defense, via their connection to their immediate supervisor, had likely daily access to the content within the PDB. And who was an Obama Deputy Secretary of Defense?
“I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.”
Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.
So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to the Hill. … That’s why you had the leaking”.
CNN political pundit and journalist Chris Cillizza posts a graphic (gif) to his twitter account moments ago attacking President Trump through his remarks during the National Peace Officers’ Memorial Service earlier today.
What makes Cillizza’s tweet particularly disturbing is it depicts President Trump as viewed through a gun sight, and shows the President as an assassination target against the backdrop of being “killed in the line of duty”:
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
Centinel2012 