Monthly Archives: October 2019

Oct 29 2019

UPDATED: Pelosi Calls House Vote to Affirm Speaker Impeachment Inquiry The House Never Authorized…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on October 28, 2019 by 

Very nice trick here by the Lawfare advisory and rules committee that is handling the construct of the “Official House Inquiry” on impeachment.  It is such a good trick it has everyone crossed-up and confused.  Likely, that is by design.

On Thursday of this week Speaker Pelosi is bringing to the floor a resolution to affirm her previous declaration of an “Official House Inquiry”.  Mrs. Pelosi is very purposefully and carefully telling reporters this is not a “House resolution on impeachment”.  Read the wording carefully:

(LINK)

Speaker Pelosi is holding a vote, a resolution, to affirm her previous declaration of a House “inquiry”.  The resolution is currently being written by Lawfare. Pelosi is not delivering a House “Resolution on Impeachment” for a vote, because if she did hold a vote on an impeachment resolution, the minority and the Executive branch would gain rights therein.

This is a House vote to show support for Pelosi’s previous unilateral decree.   Right now the rules committee is adding language to the resolution that will provide additional one-sided support for a completely partisan process: “and for other purposes”.

Note in this video, Pelosi is careful to say “this is not an impeachment resolution”:

Rebecca Kaplan

✔@RebeccaRKaplan

Speaker Pelosi, asked by @AlexNBCNews to comment on the impeachment resolution:

“It’s not an impeachment resolution.”

Embedded video

1,414

Twitter Ads info and privacy
1,857 people are talking about this
It is not an “impeachment resolution”, it is a resolution to support the already existing “impeachment inquiry”.   Pelosi and the Lawfare crew are playing games.

Additionally, notice that like Pelosi, Chairman Schiff is careful not to use the words “impeachment investigation”, but rather says “impeachment inquiry”:

Adam Schiff

✔@RepAdamSchiff

The American people will hear firsthand about the President’s misconduct.

Twitter Ads info and privacy
20K people are talking about this
The rules for an “impeachment investigation” would provide rights for the minority and also rights for the Executive branch.

So instead of having a House vote to authorize an impeachment investigation, with subsequent rights for the minority; they are having a House vote to affirm the “impeachment inquiry” with an entirely different set of House rules that do not include rights for the minority.

Nice trick huh?

On Thursday there will be a House vote to authorize:

…”ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, and for other purposes.”  (link)

And that House vote will include rules to further facilitate the one-sided, official impeachment inquiry, process therein.

Here’s where it gets interesting.

“And for Other Purposes” – The Thursday vote will likely have a rule process to conjoin the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) with the House “official impeachment inquiry”.

Why now?  Because the HJC just won a legal ruling from DC Judge Beryl Howell granting the Judiciary Committee formal impeachment authority.   {Go Deep}

Lawfare is hoping that through this Thursday vote scheme they will be able to twist the legal process into providing their House inquiry judicial enforcement authority, or punishment possible for the executive not complying with a House committee subpoena.

Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler are hoping to achieve this by bringing in the House Judiciary Committee and the judicial enforcement authority they were just granted by Judge Howell.  They are also in a big rush to do this; hence the Thursday vote.  The rush is because the DOJ has filed a motion for stay, as they appeal the Judge Howell ruling.

Remember, the Lawfare intent is to pierce the constitutional firewall that creates a distinct separation of powers; and the Legislative branch is trying to force documents from the Executive branch, overriding executive privilege. This is a constitutional issue. This level of impeachment intent is why judicial enforcement authority (the full house authorization to grant weight to legal subpoena power) becomes much more important.

Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and Lawfare are attempting to create “judicial enforcement authority” without having an actual and constitutional vote to authorize an official “impeachment investigation”.   That’s what this Thursday House resolution is all about.

The Thursday House resolution is intended to authorize and validate the pre-existing Pelosi “impeachment inquiry”, and then expand the authority within the rules to create the impression of a full House impeachment investigation; without actually having a House  “impeachment investigation vote”…. because that would open-up rights to the minority and rights to the executive.

Of course, as previously stated, none of this would be possible if it were not for the complicit support of the entire national media. Pelosi’s impeachment scheme requires a compliant media to support her construct. So far, they have.

UPDATE: In the DC court the DOJ has filed a motion to stay the Judge Howell ruling as they appeal the decision.  The stay motion appears pretty solid on three of the four corner arguments.

The weakest aspect to the motion is the legal framework around “judicial enforcement authority.”  In part because the impeachment precedent is thin; and in part because the Judiciary Committee angle is about gaining evidence underneath the Mueller report – not the House Ukraine investigation.

Here’s the motion for stay:

.

If Judge Howell doesn’t grant the stay pending appeal, the DOJ would have to look for an emergency injunction.  In the interim, Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler are looking to exploit the Howell decision that accepted, some would say ‘created‘, the existence of a formal House impeachment proceeding despite the non-existence of an authorizing vote.

In essence, Lawfare is trying to exploit a decision -quickly- that put the cart (impeachment) before the horse (vote); and leverage that judicial ruling as a back-door to grant full judicial enforcement authority over the House impeachment inquiry.

The optics therein is what the sham vote is intended to present.  As if the full House voted to allow the committee’s go gain judicial enforcement authority and change the committee request letters into actual and enforceable subpoenas.

I hope that helps make sense of it all.  Right now it feels like CTH is up against the entire DC Lawfare process, in explaining what is going on; and what are the motives and intents behind all of these moves….

Senator Roy Blunt

✔@RoyBlunt

House Democrats’ impeachment efforts are marked by two things: lack of fairness, lack of transparency.

Embedded video

583

Twitter Ads info and privacy
725 people are talking about this

Our united job is to STAND UP and explain this complex non-constitutional process to our friends, family and neighbors.

Oct 29 2019

UPDATE: Judge Sullivan Postpones Hearing on Flynn Brady Material…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on October 28, 2019 by 

Following an extensive 160-page filing by Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell; including extensive exhibits to support her motion to compel Brady material; Judge Sullivan has now delayed the previously scheduled November 7th hearing on the motion(s).

Generally this delay is good news as it provides the Judge more time to review the rather extensive list of exhibits presented by the defense.

Hopefully, the pending inspector general report on the DOJ/FBI FISA abuse issues will be released prior to the next hearing.   There is a possibility that IG report will contain background material on FBI and DOJ misconduct that will be supportive of the defense case highlighting how Flynn was set-up.

Sidney Powell 🇺🇸⭐⭐⭐@SidneyPowell1

: Judge Sullivan has cancelled our hearing in early November because of the “comprehensive briefing” of the parties. To see the full brief and exhibits (160 pages) filed on behalf of @GenFlynn, see http://www.SidneyPowell.com  @BarbaraRedgate @JosephJFlynn1 @GoJackFlynn

Home

Home

sidneypowell.com

9,835

Twitter Ads info and privacy
5,676 people are talking about this

Oct 29 2019

“Name Redacted” – President Trump Tweets Picture of Hero From Baghdadi Raid…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on October 28, 2019 by 

Moments ago President Trump honored a very handsome hero from the raid on the ISIS compound of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi with a picture:

The hero’s name is redacted, but he sure is handsome. A key member of the Special Forces operation in Syria that took out the Islamic State leader on Saturday was a Belgian Malinois who chased al-Baghdadi down a tunnel to his death.  Doggo was slightly wounded but is recovering.  Hopefully he gets a Purple Heart and lots of treats.

Oct 29 2019

AG Bill Barr Defends John Durham Investigation, Praises FBI Director Chris Wray “Outstanding Support”…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on October 28, 2019 by 

Earlier today Bill Barr gave an interview to Fox News on the sidelines of a law enforcement event in Chicago.  The U.S. Attorney General discussed the ongoing investigation by U.S. Attorney John Durham, and gave high praise to FBI Director Christopher Wray for his “outstanding support” therein.   [Link to Fox Interview]  Excerpt Video:

.

(Via Fox) […] The attorney general said that while he’s assisting in connecting Durham with countries that could have valuable information, Durham is running the show.

“He is in charge of the investigation, I’m not doing the investigation,” Barr said, while describing Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, as “thorough and fair” and saying he’s making progress.

Further, Barr took an implicit swipe at Comey as he maintained current FBI Director Christopher Wray is cooperating.

“I do want to say that one of the reasons Mr. Durham is able to make the kind of progress he’s making is because Director Wray and his team at the FBI have just been outstanding in support and responsiveness given to Mr. Durham,” Barr said.

“As you know, I’ve said previously that I felt there was a failure of leadership at the bureau in 2016 and part of 2017, but since Director Wray and his team have taken over there’s been a world of change. I think that he is restoring the steady professionalism that’s been a hallmark of the FBI. I really appreciate his leadership there.” (read more)

This interview, and particularly the Barr perspective on FBI Director Wray, is challenging to reconcile against the historic behavior of the FBI under Wray’s tenure.   In order to reconcile Barr’s characterization of Chris Wray, those who follow the issues closely would have to ignore or suspend all disbelief in Director Wray’s conduct.

Here at CTH we accept the behavior, actions and statements by federal officials as they are, and not as we would wish them to be.  There is no action in evidence that would support Barr’s characterization of Wray; so it leaves the audience having to take a leap of faith that suddenly, in the past three months, Wray had some ‘come-to-Jesus’ moment.

Given the documented history of the FBI blocking transparency during Wray’s tenure at the helm of the FBI that’s simply a leap of faith we are unwilling to take.

Either Bill Barr is covering for Wray, just like he has done in the past for Rosenstein, with a goal of institutional preservation as his compass heading (Bondo Barr); or Bill Barr has some -as yet- unknown motive for presenting an alternate reality.

It’s up to you to make up your own mind.

June 2018:

.

May 2019:

.

In 2018 Christopher Wray undermined the Nunes memo and refused to present FBI documents for congressional review. Chairman Nunes, HPSCI; Chairman Goodlatte, House Judiciary; and Chairman Grassley, Senate Judiciary; each had requests for document production blocked by FBI Director Wray.

As a result of those roadblocks a list of declassification requests was presented to President Trump by congress. *AFTER* the 2018 mid-term election the bucket list for those still outstanding classified documents was handed to AG Bill Barr.

Barr was granted unilateral declassification authority in May 2019.

Not a single document has been declassified and released from that original list, by the DOJ or FBI; including the authorizing scope memos that were used in the Mueller investigation which concluded in March 2019 and still remain hidden today.   Those scope memos have no investigative value to the IG report on FISA abuse.

The only documents released to the public have come from a FOIA lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch to attain the Bruce Ohr 302’s, ordered to be released by a DC court, and the Comey memos which were released by the IG as part of the evidence underlying the IG report on James Comey activity.

No documents have been declassified by AG Bill Barr; and to this day the FBI still refuses (Flynn case) to unredact the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages.

It defies credulity for Barr to say Director Wray has been of “outstanding support” while simultaneously the same FBI under Director Wrays’ authority has been the primary blocking mechanism for exculpatory evidence within the Michael Flynn case.

Those who choose to believe in the characterization of AG Bill Barr for Director Wray, have to choose to suspend all prior knowledge of the mountain of evidence that supports an entirely different characterization.

This suspension of disbelief is beyond my personal capability.  However, in the strongest of possible terms – I hope I’m wrong.  By disposition I accept the statements and actions of government officials as they are, not as I wish them to be.

Perhaps FBI Director Christopher Wray has, in the last 4 months, had a come-to-Jesus moment. However, that outlook would require me to possess a trusty-plan disposition.

Unfortunately, I lost that ability in August 2018 when the DOJ and FBI covered-up the demonstrably proven James Wolfe leak of classified information.

Lastly, to underline the Wray issues, and simultaneously provide evidence that is only tangentially connected to the current matters at hand…. it is worth remembering Christopher Wray in the ridiculous framework of the pre-midterm-election Cesar Sayoc case.

You might remember: FBI Director Christopher Wray outlined during his remarks that the Sayoc devices consisted of PVC pipe, clocks, batteries, wiring and “energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction”.

The FBI director went out of his way to state: “these were not hoax devices.”  The DOJ then moved to seal all court filings, and the case against the nut continued behind the curtain of ‘national fucking security’.

I digress.

Oct 29 2019

President Trump Delivers Impromptu Remarks From Joint Base Andrews – Video and Transcript…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on October 28, 2019 by 

President Trump delivers remarks to the traveling press pool from Joint Base Andrews. [Video and Transcript Below]

.

[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: So, we had a great weekend for our country. We captured a man that should’ve been caught a long time ago. Unfortunately, he wasn’t. He’s done tremendous damage. But it was an amazing display of intelligence and military power and coordination, and getting along with people. Lots of great things happened. So that was a big, big day and a big weekend, and we’re very happy about it.

The economy is doing phenomenally well. We have — it looks like another good day will be taking place today. In the stock market, good numbers are being — good numbers are happening all the time. We have good numbers happening all the time.

Very soon — I guess we’re in record territory for stock. That’s great for 401(k)s, that’s great for everything. It’s great for jobs.

So, things are going good. Do you have any questions?

Q Are you considering releasing video footage of the raid?

THE PRESIDENT: We’re thinking about it. We may. The question was: Am I considering releasing video footage of the raid? And we may take certain parts of it and release it, yes.

Q Do you think Rudy Giuliani is in trouble with all of the investigations?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I think Rudy Giuliani is a great crime fighter. He was the greatest mayor in New York City history. But he’s been a great crime fighter. He’s always looking for corruption, which is what more people should be doing. He’s a good man.

Q Mr. President, are you on pace to sign the phase one deal with China when you go to Chile?

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, we are looking probably to be ahead of schedule to sign a very big portion of the China deal. And we’ll call it “phase one,” but it’s a very big portion. That would take of the farmers. It would take care of some of the other things. It’ll also take care of a lot of the banking needs.

So we’re about, I would say, a little bit ahead of schedule, maybe a lot ahead of schedule. Probably, we’ll sign it. I imagine the meeting is scheduled for Chile. I know they have some difficulties, right now, in Chile. But I know the people of Chile and I’m sure they’ll be able to work it out.

Q Mr. President, why did you have such an aggressive response to John Kelly’s comments over the weekend?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I don’t think it’s aggressive at all. I would be surprised if he made those comments in a negative way. But I don’t think the response would be — if he actually said that, if he actually meant that, I said what I’d do, and that, I mean.

Q Mr. President, are you concerned that Nancy Pelosi and others can’t be trusted with this kind of information?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I guess the only thing is they were talking about why didn’t I give the information to Adam Schiff and his committee. And the answer is: Because I think Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington. You know that. I know that. We all know that. I’ve watched Adam Schiff leak. He’s a corrupt politician. He’s a leaker like nobody has ever seen before.

We had a very good conversation with the Ukrainian President. The conversation was perfect. They don’t ever talk about the conversation. It started with the whistleblower, and now they don’t want the whistleblower. Then they had a second whistleblower; now they don’t want the second whistleblower. The reason is that when the whistleblower — when they saw what the whistleblower wrote, and then when I released the conversation, which bore no relationship to what the whistleblower saw, they said their case was out the window. And I think it’s a disgrace.

And, frankly, I told Republicans, who are really being taken advantage of — they’re really being maligned — and I think it’s a horrible thing. They’re really looking to hurt the Republican Party, and it’s turning out to be just the opposite.

So one thing I said: I’d rather go into the details of the case rather than process. Process is wonderful. We already 50 Republican senators — I never called one of them — sign up. Fifty. Out of 53, 50. And perhaps the other ones will do it too. But process is good. But I think you ought to look at the case. And the case is very simple; it’s quick. It’s so quick.

I had a great conversation with the Ukrainian President. I had another conversation with him also, I think before that, which was the same thing. It was nothing. They tried to take that conversation and make it into a big scandal. The problem was we had it transcribed. It was an exact transcription of the conversation.

So, in a nutshell, a whistleblower wrote a false narrative of the conversation. Now they don’t want to talk about the whistleblower because they didn’t think I was going to release the conversation. When I released the conversation, I blew up Schiff’s act. And just to put topping on it, the Russian — as you know, the new Russian President, a good man, made his statement. There was no anything. There was no pressure put on him. No anything.

The Foreign Minister of Ukraine made his statement. There was absolutely no pressure put on. They didn’t even know what we were talking about.

And just to finish it off, Adam Schiff went up before Congress and he made my words. He didn’t copy what I said. He didn’t know them, probably, at the time. Nobody thought I was going to release the conversation. I got the approval from Ukraine. Once I released the conversation, this thing all died. And that’s what they should be looking. And Adam Schiff went before Congress, and Adam Schiff, what he did, will never be forgotten. He made up a conversation that was a phony fabrication. It was a fraud. And people shouldn’t be allowed to get away. They say he has immunity because he’s a member of Congress. People shouldn’t be allowed to do that. That’s a criminal act. What he did is a criminal act.

Thank you.

Q On UMSCA —

THE PRESIDENT: I hope they approve USMCA. It’s in there. It’s a great agreement for the United States, for our farmers, for our manufacturers, for unions, for everything. It’s been approved by Mexico and Canada. They’re waiting.

We don’t seem to be able to have time for Nancy Pelosi. I call them the “Do-Nothing Democrats.” They’re the Do-Nothing Democrats. And, frankly, if they put it up, it’s going to win very easily. It’s going to have bipartisan support. I have no idea what they’re doing with it. I can’t imagine it takes this long. But they’re so busy focusing on a witch hunt and a scam.

Thank you.

END 8:52 A.M. EDT

Oct 29 2019

California Bans the Sale of Furs


Armstrong Economics Blog/Gov’t Incompetence

Re-Posted Oct 29, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

California has become the first state to ban the sale of new fur clothing, starting in 2023. Used second-hand furs will still be legal to sell and no doubt they will play the same game they do with expensive high-end cars. They import them to a low tariff place, pay someone to drive and put 100+ miles on the car, and then resell it as used to avoid tariffs.

The ban will not apply to leather. That would really make the car world go crazy, not to mention the shoe industry. But the attitude in California will most likely inspire a resurrection of the protests of the ’80s where they start throwing red pain on anyone wearing fur. The average person on the street will have no idea if the coat is second-hand or if it was purchased on a trip to New York City on 5th Avenue.

This only illustrates the problem when one state tries to enforce a law that is unenforceable. The ONLY possible way to impose such a law is to ban ownership. But that would then raise Constitutional concerns

Oct 29 2019

Negative Press Always Has to Find an Issue


Armstrong Economics Blog/Press

Re-Posted Oct 28, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

It is really interesting how the press is so biased, that no matter the issue, they MUST simply spin it against Trump. It is really getting so bad these days that the press has surrendered all impartiality and trustworthiness. They were criticizing Trump for pulling out troops from Syria saying ISIS would be given free rein. They failed to understand that all along they were targeting the head of ISIS and intended to take him out. When that takes place, the credit belongs to the military in spite of Trump. It is just interesting how skewed the press has become and they no longer report news, it is all manufacturing news.

When we were opening our first office in Europe back in 1985, I went to lunch with one of the heads of the top Swiss banks and asked him what name should we use since I believed there was an anti-American base in Europe. He asked me to name one European analyst. I was embarrassed because I could not. He said there was none. He explained that if he was British, it was always God save the Queen, French bullish the franc, etc. He said the reason everyone used our services is that “you do not give a shit if the dollar goes up or down.” It was our unbiased analysis that made our operation the largest international FOREX adviser.

Just-the-Facts1

This pervasive hatred of Trump so that they must interpret every piece of news against him is diminishing the very institution of the press. The days of true investigative journalists like Edward Murrow are long gone. Journalism is now all about expressing personal doctrines. It has lost the integrity of just reporting the facts as they exist.

They have to stage everything to pretend it is far worse than what it is or to push their own agenda. This has become criminal in any other field. If a brokerage house puts out fake analysis to just sell a product, they paid tremendous fines – it’s illegal. In the world of finance, if you have a conflict of interest in your analysis, it is subject to a fine. Journalism is so corrupt that they can be paid off by political parties and it is perfectly OK to put out propaganda that in any other field would be prison time. Trump should clean up the fake news using the very same theories that land every other field in prison.

Journalism is NOT abusing your position to indoctrinate others to agree with you. It must be just the facts. In real analysis, we have to call both the ups and downs. You cannot simply say a given market will always go up. That is not an analysis.

Categories: Press
Oct 28 2019

Wild 9-Year Cycles in Climate Change from Cold to Warm


Armstrong Economics Blog/Climate

Re-Posted Oct 28, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

On September 28, 1924, the New York Times reported that there was evidence that the Arctic had actually been tropical in the past. They reported that there was the possibility of a coming Ice Age. The NY Times reported: “NATURE is in a strange mood beyond the Arctic Circle, Glaciers are moving from their age-old beds, pouring greater quantities of ice into the sea than recorded history has known. Broad areas of land are sinking to new levels. A number of islands have disappeared.”

Then on March 27, 1933, the NY Times reported: “America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise.”

 

There have always been overlapping forecasts that swing between global warming to Ice Ages. Journalists love to write alarming stories to capture the attention of readers. This has been going on since 1895. The difference this time has been that this issue has been seized by the socialists and used as the covert method to push their agenda to control the economy, end independent business, and redistribute wealth.

Oct 28 2019

Ebola Rising Again in Africa


Armstrong Economics Blog/Disease

Re-Posted Oct 28, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

While the bad news is Ebola has risen again and spread, the good news is that there has been an experimental vaccine that appears to have been 97.5% effective. The survival rate for children under the age of 5 seems to be only about 25%. As reported by the Telegraph, the previous nine outbreaks ended in just a few months and the death toll was less than 300. This current outbreak has killed approximately 1,800 people so far, which makes this outbreak the worst to date in the region. West Africa’s outbreak of 2014-2016 killed 11,323 and remains the deadliest on record.