Here’s Why the Big Club and People Managing Ron DeSantis Hate Donald Trump


Posted originally on the CTH on January 26, 2023 | Sundance 

President Trump transmitted a message to congress, warning them not to cut Social Security and Medicare {Direct Rumble Link}.  Many politicians and pundits will look at Trump’s position from the perspective of it being good to campaign for older voters, but that’s not the core of his reasoning.

In 2016 CTH was the first place to evaluate the totality of President Trump’s economic policies; specifically, as those policies related to the entitlement programs around Social Security and Medicare.  We outlined the approach Trump was putting forth and the way he was approaching the issue.   In the years that followed, he was right.  He was creating a U.S. economy that could sustain all of the elements the traditional political class were calling “unsustainable.”

Before getting to the details, here’s his video message and policy as delivered yesterday. WATCH:

Fortunately, we do not have to guess if President Trump is correct. We have his actual economic policy results to look at and see how the expansion of the economy was creating the type of growth that would sustain Social Security and Medicare.  This was/is MAGAnomics at work.

♦ On Social Security – Unlike many other 2016 Republican candidates, Donald Trump did NOT call for rapid or wholesale changes to the current Social Security program; and there’s a very good reason why he was the only candidate who did not propose wholesale changes.

With the single caveat of “high income retirees” (over $250k annually), which previously Trump said he was open to negotiating on, President Trump does not consider these programs as “entitlements”. The American people pay into them, and the federal government has an obligation to fulfill the promises made upon collection.

To fully understand how Donald Trump views the solvency of Social Security, you must again understand his economic model and how it outlines growth.

The issue with Social Security, as viewed by Trump, is more of an issue with receipts and expenditures. If the aggregate U.S. economy is growing by a factor larger than the distribution needed to fulfill its entitlement obligations, then no wholesale change on expenditure is needed. The focus needs to be on continued and successful economic growth.

What you will find in all of Donald Trump’s positions, is a paradigm shift he necessarily understood must take place in order to accomplish the long-term goals for the U.S. citizen as it relates to “entitlements” or “structural benefits”.

All other candidates and politicians begin their policy proposals with a fundamentally divergent perception of the U.S. economy.

The customary political economy theory, carried by most politicians, positions them with an outlook of the U.S. economy based on “services”; a service-based economic model.

While this economic path has been created by decades old U.S. policy and is ultimately the only historical economic path now taught in school, President Trump initiated his economy policy with the intention to change the dynamic entirely, and that’s exactly what he did.

Because so many shifts -policy nudges- have taken place in the past several decades, few academics and even fewer MSM observers, were able to understand how to get off this path and chart a better course.

Donald Trump proposed less dependence on foreign companies for cheap goods, (the cornerstone of a service economy) and a return to a more balanced U.S. larger economic model where the manufacturing and production base can be re-established and competitive based on American entrepreneurship and innovation.  This is the essence of MAGAnomics.

The key words in the prior statement are “dependence” and “balanced”. When a nation has an industrial manufacturing balance within the GDP there is far less dependence on the economic activity in global markets. In essence the U.S. can sustain itself, absorb global economic fluctuations and expand itself or contract itself depending on the free market.

When there is no balance, there is no longer a free market. The free market is sacrificed in favor of dependency, whether it’s foreign oil or foreign manufacturing, the dependency outcome is essentially the same. Without balance there is an inherent loss of economic independence, and a consequential increase in economic risk.

No other economy in the world innovates like the U.S.A. President Donald Trump saw/sees this as a key advantage across all industry – including manufacturing and technology.

The benefit of cheap overseas labor, which is considered a global market disadvantage for the U.S., is offset by utilizing innovation and energy independence.  This was the core of the economic program that created so much immediate GDP growth in 2017, 2018 and 2019.

2017: […]  “This policy will be successful in moving the U.S. economy away from low-growth secular stagnation towards significantly more buoyant performance. We would not be taken by surprise by a doubling of the growth rate of real GDP in the U.S. over the next two years, nor by a further significant move up of equity valuations and a material further appreciation of the dollar.”  ~  David Folkerts-Landau, Chief Economist, Deutsche Bank

The third highest variable cost of goods beyond raw materials first, labor second, is energy. If the U.S. energy sector was unleashed -and fully developed- the manufacturing price of any given product would allow for global trade competition even with higher U.S. wage prices.  This is why President Trump traveled to Saudi Arabia as his first foreign trip, followed closely by a trip to Asia.  He was putting the basics of his U.S. economic policy into place.

Additionally, the U.S. has a key strategic advantage with raw manufacturing materials such as: iron ore, coal, steel, precious metals and vast mineral assets which are needed in most new modern era manufacturing. President Trump proposed we stopped selling these valuable national assets to countries we compete against – they belong to the American people; they should be used for the benefit of American citizens. Period.  This was the central point of the Steel and Aluminum tariffs.

EXAMPLE: Prior to President Trump, China was buying and recycling our heavy (steel) and light (aluminum) metal products (for pennies on the original manufacturing dollar) and then using those metals to reproduce manufactured goods for sale back to the U.S.

As President, Donald Trump stopped that practice immediately, triggering a policy expectation that we do the manufacturing ourselves with the utilization of our own resources.  Then he leveraged any sales of these raw materials in our international trade agreements.

When you combine FULL resource development (in a modern era) with the removal of over-burdensome regulatory and compliance systems, necessarily filled with enormous bureaucratic costs, Donald Trump began lowering the cost of production and the U.S. became globally competitive. In essence, Trump changed the economic paradigm, and we no longer were a dependent nation relying on a service driven economic model.

The cornerstone to the success of this economic turnaround was the keen capability of the U.S. worker to innovate on their own platforms. Americans, more than any country in the world, just know how to get things accomplished. Independence and self-sufficiency are part of the DNA of the larger American workforce.

In addition, as we saw in 2018 and 2019, an unquantifiable benefit came from investment, where the smart money play -to get increased return on investment- became putting capital INTO the U.S. economy, instead of purchasing foreign stocks.

With all of the above opportunities in mind, this is how President Trump put us on a pathway to rebuilding our national infrastructure.

The demand for labor increased, and as a consequence so too did the U.S. wage rate which was stagnant (or non-existent) for the past three decades.

As the wage rate increased, and as the economy expanded, the governmental dependency model was reshaped and simultaneously receipts to the U.S. treasury improved.

More money into the U.S Treasury and less dependence on welfare/social service programs have a combined exponential impact. You gain a dollar and have no need to spend a dollar – the saved sum is doubled. That was how the SSI and safety net programs were positioned under President Trump.  Again, this is MAGAnomics.

When you elevate your America First economic thinking you begin to see that all of the “entitlements” or expenditures become more affordable with an economy that is fully functional.

As the GDP of the U.S. expands, so does our ability to meet the growing need of the retiring U.S. worker. We stop thinking about how to best divide a limited economic pie and begin thinking about how many more economic pies we can create.  Simply put, we begin to….

…. Make America Great Again!

We know it works, because we have the results to cite.

It was the Fourth Quarter of 2019…..

Right before the pandemic would hit a few months later…. Despite two years of doomsayer predictions from Wall Street’s professional punditry, all of them saying Trump’s 2017 steel and aluminum tariffs on China, Canada and the EU would create massive inflation, it just wasn’t happening!

Overall year-over-year inflation was hovering around 1.7 percent [Table-A BLS]; yup, that was our inflation rate.  The rate in the latter half of 2019 was firmed up with less month-over-month fluctuation, and the rate basically remained consistent.   [See Below]  The U.S. economy was on a smooth glide path, strong, stable and Main Street was growing with MAGAnomics at work.

A couple of important points.  First, unleashing the energy sector to drive down overall costs to consumers and industry outputs was a key part of President Trump’s America-First MAGAnomic initiative.  Lower energy prices help the worker economy, middle class and average American more than any other sector.

Which brings us to the second important point.  Notice how food prices had very low year-over-year inflation, 0.5 percent.  That is a combination of two key issues: low energy costs, and the fracturing of Big Ag hold on the farm production and the export dynamic:

(BLS) […] The index for food at home declined for the third month in a row, falling 0.2 percent. The index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs decreased 0.7 percent in August as the index for eggs fell 2.6 percent. The index for fruits and vegetables, which rose in July, fell 0.5 percent in August; the index for fresh fruits declined 1.4 percent, but the index for fresh vegetables rose 0.4 percent. The index for cereals and bakery products fell 0.3 percent in August after rising 0.3 percent in July. (link)

For the previous twenty years food prices had been increasingly controlled by Big Ag, and not by normal supply and demand.   The commodity market became a ‘controlled market’. U.S. food outputs (farm production) was controlled and exported to keep the U.S. consumer paying optimal prices.

President Trump’s trade reset was disrupting this process.  As farm products were less exported the cost of the food in our supermarket became reconnected to a ‘more normal’ supply and demand cycle.  Food prices dropped and our pantry costs were lowered.

The Commerce Dept. then announced that retail sales climbed by 0.4 percent in August 2019, twice as high as the 0.2 percent analysts had predicted. The result highlighted retail sales strength of more than 4 percent year-over-year.   These excellent results came on the heels of blowout data in July, when households boosted purchases of cars and clothing.

The better-than-expected number stemmed largely from a 1.8 percent jump in spending vehicles. Online sales, meanwhile, also continued to climb, rising 1.6 percent. That’s similar to July 2019, when Amazon held its two-day, blowout Prime Day sale. (link)

Despite the efforts to remove and impeach President Trump, it did not look like middle-class America was overly concerned about the noise coming from the pundits.   Likely that’s because blue-collar wages were higher, Main Street inflation was lower, and overall consumer confidence was strong.  Yes, MAGAnomics was working.

Additionally, remember all those MSM hours and newspaper column inches where the professional financial pundits were claiming Trump’s tariffs were going to cause massive increases in prices of consumer goods?

Well, exactly the opposite happened [BLS report] Import prices were continuing to drop:

[Table 1 – BLS report link]

This was a really interesting dynamic that no-one in the professional punditry would dare explain.

Donald Trump’s tariffs were targeted to specific sectors of imported products.  [Steel, Aluminum, and a host of smaller sectors etc.]  However, when the EU and China respond by devaluing their currency, that approach hit all products imported, not just the tariff goods.

Because the EU and China were driving up the value of the dollar, everything we were importing became cheaper.   Not just imports from Europe and China, but actually imports from everywhere.   All imports were entering the U.S. at substantially lower prices.

This meant when we imported products, we were also importing deflation.

This price result is exactly the opposite of what the economic experts and Wall Street pundits predicted back in 2017 and 2018 when they were pushing the rapid price increase narrative.

Because all the export dependent economies were reacting with such urgency to retain their access to the U.S. market, aggregate import prices were actually lower than they were when the Trump tariffs began:

[…]  Prices for imports from China edged down 0.1 percent in August following decreases of 0.2 percent in both July and June. Import prices from China have not advanced on a monthly basis since ticking up 0.1 percent in May 2018. The price index for imports from China fell 1.6 percent for the year ended in August.

[…]  Import prices from the European Union fell 0.2 percent in August and 0.3 percent over the past 12 months.

[Page #4 – BLS Report, pdf] – BLS press release.

So yes, we know President Trump can save Social Security and Medicare by expanding the economy with his America First economic policy.  We do not need to guess if it is possible or listen to pundits theorize about his approach being some random ‘catch phrase’ disconnected from reality.  Yes folks, we have the receipts.

This was MAGAnomics at work, and this is entirely what created the middle-class MAGA coalition.  No other Republican candidate has this economic policy in their outlook because all other candidates are purchased by the Wall Street multinationals.

America First MAGAnomics is unique to President Trump because he is the only one independent enough to implement them.

That’s just the reality of the situation.  They hate him for it… 

Author’s note as said in 2016: “If I absolutely did not believe this economic model was doable, I would never expand the concept and place advocacy upon it. I am an absolute believer that we can, as a nation, reignite a solid manufacturing base and generate an expanding middle class.”  Yes, I bet on Trump, and he was right.    

Tucker Carlson Discusses Pfizer Effort to Recreate Modified COVID Viruses Under Term “Directed Evolution”


Posted originally on the CTH on January 26, 2023 | Sundance

Tucker Carlson covered the Project Veritas story about a Pfizer executive talking about the pharmaceutical company engineering new COVID strains via a process of modifying the virus called “directed evolution.”  After the monologue segment, Tucker Carlson interviews Dr. Robert Malone. {Direct Rumble Link}  WATCH:

The full crazy video of the Project Veritas confrontation with Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner, is below.

.

Sunday Talks, Senator Joe Manchin Doing that Purple Thing Again – Admits No Federal Budget in Last 12 Years


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance 

West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin appears with his good friend Chuck Todd for an interview about ongoing political events to include the debt ceiling.

As Manchin and Todd finish each other’s sentences, the discussion hits on the upcoming debt ceiling battle.  Manchin surprisingly pulls out the purple card and states the super-secret thing that no one in DC will admit.  The last federal budget was signed into law September 2008, for fiscal year 2009.  From that moment forward, there has been nothing except continuing resolutions and omnibus spending bills [SIDENOTE: this approach was by design by Obama/Pelosi].

This 12-year timeline includes the entire tenure of House Speaker Paul Ryan, former Budget Committee Chair, who now uses the absence of the budget as a tool to advance his outside impression that DC is fiscally reckless, insert pearl clutching here. I digress.  Manchin is positioning himself as the ‘purple’ option for 2024. WATCH (or read):

[Transcript] – CHUCK TODD: And joining me now is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Senator Manchin, welcome back to Meet the Press.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, it’s always good to be with you.

CHUCK TODD: Look, I want to get into the debt ceiling. I want to get into all this stuff. But I — we got some developments overnight with those classified documents, an FBI search — the White House said it was coordinated with the FBI. But we’ve now had an FBI search of former President Trump. Now we have an FBI search into President Biden’s residence. What’s your assessment of how the president has handled the situation?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, I mean, it’s just hard to believe that in the United States of America, we have a former president and a current president that are basically in the same situation. How does this happen? You know, only thing I can tell you, Chuck, is when I go into the SCIF with the secure documents, they always ask, “Are you clean?” when you walk out. They want to make sure you’re not carrying anything out. You know, and it might be a mistake. You might just put it in your other papers, but you double-check right there. To be held accountable and responsible is what we all are. And to put those in unsecured spaces is irresponsible.

CHUCK TODD: Do you see similarities, or do you see more differences in how President Trump versus how President Biden —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m not going to make —

CHUCK TODD: — has handled this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — that decision, but I think that Merrick Garland did the right thing by putting the special counsel.

CHUCK TODD: You do?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And I think that we should wait until the special counsel, rather than making this a political circus. Let them find out the facts. What — was one more damaging? Are they both about the same, did not cause any problem, or is one more reckless and irresponsible than the other? I can’t answer that question, but I think the special counsel will do a better job than the politicians and the political circus that is going to follow.

CHUCK TODD: President Biden said he had no regrets in how he handled this. Do you have any advice for him on how he should handle this going forward?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, I think he should have a lot of regrets. Yeah. I would —

CHUCK TODD: What are those —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I would think that. I said, “Whoever’s responsible.” I mean, if I hold people accountable, and I use — whether my chief of staff or, you know, my staff, who, that were doing this, that I’m looking at, then I’m going to hold someone accountable. But basically, the buck stops with me.

CHUCK TODD: So you think he should be out there, “Look, I mess — I messed up –”

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: That’s all. Just say —

CHUCK TODD: “Maybe I didn’t do it.” Just say it —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — “I made a mistake.”

CHUCK TODD: Just fall on your sword here?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We’re all human.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We make mistakes. I can tell you I don’t think anyone intended, he sure didn’t intend for it to fall in wrong hands and use it against our country. I know they didn’t intend that to happen. Could it have happened? I don’t know. And yeah, you just might as well say, “Listen, it’s irresponsible. It was something we should’ve had a better check and balance on.”

CHUCK TODD: Now, former President Trump defied a subpoena. So in that sense, the, the way each has handled it is different.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yes.

CHUCK TODD: Do you acknowledge that?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Absolutely. Much different than the other. One’s saying, “Okay, I hope I didn’t make any mistakes.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — I hope no one’s compromised. I hope we didn’t hurt our country.” And the other one says, “Ugh, no. I know it didn’t. Believe me.” Well, you know what? What they said, verify? You have to verify.

CHUCK TODD: Trust but verify?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Trust but verify. Let’s find out. And that’s what the special counsel’s —

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you want here? Both special counsels to sort of resolve this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: First of all, every one of us, in our life, have to be held accountable and responsible for our actions because people want accountability. And they want basically when you’re held accountable, are you responsible or not? If you are, would you — can you fix that? Did you make a mistake? Fine. You’re, you know —

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you think – the president needs to get out there and just get in front of this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Cicero, Cicero said, “To err is human.” You’re a human being. You’re going to make mistakes. Did you intend to make it? Did you intend to harm somebody? Did you intend to basically do an irresponsible thing? I don’t think — hopefully, neither one of them did.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIIN: But it sure turned out to be irresponsible.

CHUCK TODD: Let’s talk about the debt ceiling. You’re — as always, you’re trying to find a compromise, middle ground.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: I know your instinct here. But why should Republicans get the benefit of the doubt on the debt ceiling here, considering that it’s a — that they’re sort of manufacturing a crisis that’s a bit unnecessary right now?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all, if one side thinks that the other one’s more responsible for the debt at $31.4 trillion, that’s, that is totally not accurate and it’s deceptive. We’re all responsible. We’ve got a $31.4 trillion debt. It’s a runaway debt, and no one’s holding themselves accountable. And basically, I think you said it, use the budget process. I’ve been here 12 years. We haven’t had a budget yet.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah. I — that’s what I don’t get here.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We haven’t had a budget yet.

CHUCK TODD: And that’s what I question —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, you should.

CHUCK TODD: — you want to do this special committee here.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m —

CHUCK TODD: And I’m sitting here going, “Why add more “bureaucracy?” We have a budget committee. We have two budget committees. We have a Joint Committee on Taxation. We have all these different committees that have already been created to deal with this process. Why can’t we use the congressional bureaucracy that exists?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We have 12 appropriations committees —

CHUCK TODD: They’re —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They’re supposed to do their job. Why don’t you basically put a time certain on —

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — what you can do and what you can’t and when you do it? I can’t speak for that. I was a former governor of the state of West Virginia.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I was responsible for a balanced budget amendment and basically staying within the realms of my Constitution. So, you know, I met every week. Every week like clockwork they walked in my office on a Tuesday or Wednesday and sit down and go over it. You’re either going to be — have to make some cuts now, make some adjustments now, so we end the year with a balanced budget or a surplus. There’s nothing that holds us accountable. Nothing at all. We can say, “Oh, we’re going to do it.” As I’ve said before, 12 years, haven’t had a budget. That’s ridiculous.

CHUCK TODD: So, let me — you want to do this sort of, that you and Senator Romney, to have committee that deals with the trust fund issues. But right now, neither party wants to touch – I mean, in that sense, Donald Trump came out, and certainly Democrats, nobody wants to touch Social Security or Medicare.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all —

CHUCK TODD: So how do you separate those two out and deal with our fiscal problems?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Why would you scare the bejesus out of people that are basically going to say — in West Virginia, I’ve got 60% of my population that that’s all they have is Medicare and Social Security. You think I’m going to go down that path and put them in jeopardy? No. But there are so much other things, the basically wasteful spending, that can be corralled in without scaring the bejesus, depending on what political side you’re on.

CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you about wasteful spending, because one of the three most hypocritical words I hear are “waste, fraud and abuse.” Right. Everybody says, “Oh, waste, fraud, and abuse.”

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And it’s all there. It’s all there.

CHUCK TODD: Okay, but waste, fraud, and abuse aren’t going to balance the budget, ok? At the end of the day, there are going to have to be choices that have to be made. What is something that ought to be on, on, in the decision of, “You know, maybe we’re spending too much”?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, we know we’re spending too much because we’re not balancing our budget and —

CHUCK TODD: But on what?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — we have more debt. The bottom line is, it’s in the eyes of the beholder. That’s the problem that we have. Five-hundred-and-thirty-five people said, “Well, yeah. What you’re doing is wasteful, Chuck. I think you ought to cut that.” And you’re going to say, “Okay, Joe. How about yours?”

CHUCK TODD: But your, your spending that you think is mandatory, another person thinks is wasteful or abuse.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah. Just think, for every dollar, just get it down, break it down to the dollar. Is there any savings within that dollar you think that is wasteful or abuse that we could at least have a target to set? Is it a penny? Is it five pennies? Is it a nickel? Where is it?

CHUCK TODD: But here’s what gets lost here, is nobody will put anything on the table. Everybody says, “We’ve got to cut spending.” Well, what? And nobody wants to articulate —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the process —

CHUCK TODD:– the what.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, you hit it dead on the head. The process isn’t working. How come we’re not held accountable to have – to have the appropriation bills done at a certain time before the end of the fiscal year?

CHUCK TODD: You tell me.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, that’s what I —

CHUCK TODD: I mean –

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know –

CHUCK TODD: – what does Chuck Schumer say? What does Mitch McConnell

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know what happens? It rolls over into an omnibus bill at the end and everything’s thrown into it. “Okay. Here we got it, guys. That’s it.” It makes no sense.

CHUCK TODD: So what should – it sounds like you actually think the debt ceiling is a moment we should use to focus on —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, if you’re going to use the debt ceiling for anything except for theatrics, okay, which is what probably might happen for a while, we’re going to pass the debt ceiling. You are exactly correct.

CHUCK TODD: Right.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: It has to pass. You know, we have the currency of it, you know – the good faith of the United States dollar and the currency of the world. You just can’t let it default and basically hold us in jeopardy from where we stand in the world, world order. With that being said, is how do you get to it? Do you use this moment? Do you come to a reason – responsibility? What are we paying for interest now? For ten years, it was zero. It was funny money. Were not – you know, it doesn’t put any burden. We’re just raising debt, but we’re not basically harming how we have to meet that debt through our interest payments. Now we’re talking real money on an interest basis. We’re almost, up to what our defense budget is, paying in interest.

CHUCK TODD: I guess I come back to, and I don’t think you have the answer either, which is what is the moment to force this conversation?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: This is a moment if, if Kevin McCarthy coming in – coming in new says, “Okay, this is – it’s serious,” and he takes it from the standpoint. And he knows —

CHUCK TODD: What does he need to do that you would take him seriously in this?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, you know, Chuck —

CHUCK TODD: Do you know what I mean by that? Like, how do you know when he’s being serious, and how do you when he’s paying politics?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the bottom line is he has a hell of a – heck of a political hand that’s not, not very good right now. He’s not holding a lot, if you will. And he has ten or 12 that’s pretty much out there. He has to make a decision how he wants to govern and how he ought to these next two years in this 118th Congress. You know – I just – it was amazing. I just saw that the Ohio legislature, I don’t know if you paid any attention to that —

CHUCK TODD: I did. Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The Ohio legislature, which is Republican-controlled –

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – basically chose their new speaker, a Republican, with as many, if not more votes, from the Democrats because they wanted someone they can work with. That’s a coalition. Why can’t we put coalitions together here?

CHUCK TODD: Well, that’s —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The moderate, centrist Democrats coming over and working, whoever’s the majority, and saying, “You don’t have to bow and cow-tail to the extremes.”

CHUCK TODD: Yeah. You don’t have to worry about primaries. A lot of your colleagues have to worry about primaries. Isn’t that why this —

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Let me tell you —

CHUCK TODD – doesn’t happen?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – one more thing. I’ve got to be honest with you, Chuck. If it’s all about the election, the next election, you know, that’s the worst thing that could happen to us.

CHUCK TODD: You just came from Davos.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: There’s a moment, I don’t know if you realized, that went viral between you and Senator Sinema. I want to show the moment here. I want to ask you about it. You guys are high-fiving. I think we’ll show it again here. It was right after she was talking about the filibuster.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.

CHUCK TODD: Is that what you were high-fiving about?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, that was – I think, you know, after that. I saw her hand go up and I said, “Sure” because here, the two of us are committed to protecting the filibuster, which I think protects checks and balances on the executive branch. So if you have a Democrat, Democrat, Democrat – president, House and Senate – and you have a strong president, basically leader of the party, then you don’t have a check and balance because I can guarantee you the House and Senate will roll wherever the president wants. I – and I’ve said this before. I appreciate the Republican senators and the leadership of the minority leader at that time, McConnell, majority leader at that time – with Donald Trump every day beating on him, “Get rid of the filibuster.” You’ve got 53, 54 Republicans, and he would not. And I appreciate that. And I told Harry Reid we should not have done it when we did it in 2013. But to come back now, the checks and balances aren’t there. It makes and forces them to work together. Think what we’ve accomplished in the 117th, the most divided Congress we’ve ever had, and we did more substantial bills, I think that’s going to be transformational.

CHUCK TODD: You think those first two years of Biden and this Democratic Congress is going to be historic?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I think it’s going to be transformational and historical, yes, because here you had a bipartisan infrastructure bill we haven’t done for years.

CHUCK TODD: Yeah.

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You had then on top of that the CHIPS Act, which will bring manufacturing back so we don’t have supply chains that we’re depending on that aren’t loyal and trustworthy. And then we have the Inflation Reduction Act, which is going to give us – it’s been misaligned because this administration basically said it’s environmental, environmental, environmental. That bill is designed to be energy security, Chuck. And energy security is exactly what we need.

CHUCK TODD: And you’re frustrated that the White House won’t say the phrase “energy security”?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They will not use the word, and they haven’t. I’m begging you all, please. Energy security. We have to have fossil. We do it better and cleaner than anywhere in the world. And we can be energy secured for ten years, and also be able to invest in technology of the future.

CHUCK TODD: Is this an agenda you can run for reelection on in West Virginia?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, most certainly because we’re seeing right now, I’ve got a battery plant coming in. I’ve got basically hydrogen coming in that direction. We’ve got expansion. And we’re raising our coal with carbon capture sequestration. We’ve got basically methane capturing using gas. We have people that are fighting continuously. And you have to have the pipeline to move this product. And it’s going to be needed. If not, you’re going to end up like Europe. And that’s where I didn’t want to rub it into them, but Europe took an approach that they’re going to say, “We’re going to have cap-and-trade.” And we’re going to be basically charging you a carbon tax.” I’ve said, “I’m not going to support that and vote for it because I think it doesn’t work.” So I took the approach, and basically we wrote this bill with incentives. And it was working. And that’s why they were all upset. That’s why the chancellor and that’s why presidents of other countries were very upset on this bill and concerned about it.

CHUCK TODD: If you run for office in 2024, are you going to run as a Democrat?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, I haven’t made a decision what I’m going to do in 2024. I’ve got two years ahead of me now to do the best I can for the state and for my country.

CHUCK TODD: What are – what’s on the table? Is reelection on the table?

SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Everything’s on the table.

[End Transcript]

During Remarks at World Economic Forum FBI Director Chris Wray Talks About Success in Combatting Pre-Criminal Activity


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 19, 2023 | Sundance 

Lots of people are talking about U.S. FBI Director Christopher Wray discussing the agencies “partnership with the private sector” as it relates to modern FBI activity.  However, I’m just that random oddball in the crowd who just wants to point out something, well, kind of a big picture issue.

I notice in all of the discussions surrounding the FBI activity, and there are a lot of discussions – including admissions and outlines from the FBI itself, there appears to be an element of the subject matter being overlooked.  Here’s a segment from Wray at the World Economic Forum {Direct Rumble Link} as a precursor to what few are noticing.  WATCH:

The FBI is a criminal investigative agency. Meaning, a crime is committed, and the FBI mission is to investigate it, solve it, and bring the information to the justice department for pursuit. At least that was the customary role of the FBI as it was/is commonly discussed.

However, please note that in Director Wray’s remarks, every element of the FBI mission is framed around “prevention” of criminal activity, or what we would call pre-crimes.

Stop for a moment and rewatch it if needed, you’ll see what I am talking about.

Um, please excuse my interruption.

While it might seem like an unusual thing to notice, this is not a small issue.

In the era following the 9-11 attacks, there was public outcry around the issue of “how” and “why” did law enforcement, specifically the FBI, not PREVENT the attack.  In just about every conversation following the attack every framework was about how to prevent an attack.

The 9-11 commission itself was focused on learning lessons from the attack; thereby the direct and implicit message was to construct systems to prevent another attack from happening.  Essentially to move the FBI from a reactive footing in the aftermath of a crime, to a proactive footing to prevent crime.

Now, what I am asking readers to do is to realize when the fundamental mission of an investigative agency changes from investigating the aftermath of criminal activity, to the prevention of criminal activity, we as a society open ourselves up to having severe restrictions on our liberty.  After all, just about everything that we now see as an infringement on freedom, is some form of a proactive action by government.

Change the mission from the investigation of crime to the prevention of crime, and the entire apparatus of the mission fundamentally changes.

Criminals are no longer the target when you are preventing crimes.  Criminals are only targets in the aftermath of crime.  When you are preventing crime, everyone that could commit a crime is the new mission target.  Everyone, regardless of their connection to – or association with – criminal activity, is now a potential criminal.   Potential criminals must be monitored.

Potential criminals are now the target.  You are a potential criminal.  As a result of your potential ability, you are a target for pre-crime investigation.  Within the process of pre-crime investigation, your archaic views of freedom and liberty are dispatched.

The office of the Director of National Intelligence was created to turn the terrorist radar internally.  Every American is now a potential “domestic terrorist.”  Thus, you see FBI Director Christopher Wray sitting on a stage and openly admitting the FBI partnerships with the private sector are key to the mission; a mission of pre-crime targeting.

Can you see how this rolls along?…

As soon as the FBI changes from investigating the aftermath of a crime committed to intercepting the potential criminal conduct, things get very opaque, sketchy and weird.  When the FBI is investigating crimes, you have rights.  When the FBI is preventing crimes, those rights are impediments.

Our entire legal system is structured around criminal accountability.  An event takes place, and we hold the criminal accountable.  Judges, lawyers, courts, systems, processes, protections, rights of the accused, fourth amendment, fifth amendment, etc. etc.  Hundreds of years of rules and regulations within a criminal justice system.

We do not have a “pre-crime” justice system.

The current FBI mission is pre-crime enforcement.

Think about the ramifications; it shouldn’t be hard, because we are living them.

I will sit down now….

President Trump Outlines Policy Video Calling for Ban on China Acquisition of American Infrastructure


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 19, 2023 | Sundance

On Wednesday President Trump released a new policy video {Direct Rumble link} highlighting “China’s intrusive actions to own America’s infrastructure and vital industries.”

Within the policy, the Trump campaign pledges to enact aggressive regulations to prevent China from influencing American sovereignty. According to the proposal, “the United States will also pressure the Chinese to sell off any current holdings that threaten the country’s national and economic security.” WATCH:

President Trump was the largest voice amid U.S. politicians to call out the economic threat represented by China back in 2015, an extension of criticism and warnings he carried for more than a decade before entering the world of politics. Transcript Below:

[Transcript] – “China is buying up our country. While corrupt Democrats and RINO-type politicians in Washington have been spending trillions of dollars on the Green New Deal nonsense, foolish foreign wars, and providing lavish benefits to illegal aliens from all over the planet, China has been spending trillions of dollars to take over the crown jewels of the United States economy. And they are doing that.

China is buying up our technology. They’re buying up food supplies. They’re buying up our farmland. They’re buying up our minerals and natural resources. They’re buying up our ports and shipping terminals. And with the help of corrupt influence peddlers like the Biden Crime Family, China is even trying to buy up the pillars of the U.S. energy industry. Because frankly, Biden and the group don’t care about real energy. They only care about nonsense energy, energy that doesn’t work, and it never will.

While some are focused on China’s purchases near power plants and military bases, the fact is we should be very concerned about all Chinese Communist activity in the United States. As I’ve long said, economic security is national security. China does not allow American companies to take over their critical infrastructure. And America should not allow China to take over our critical infrastructure. I didn’t allow it when I was president, and I won’t allow it when we become president again.

To protect our country, we need to enact aggressive new restrictions on Chinese ownership of any vital infrastructure in the United States, including energy, technology, telecommunications, farmland, natural resources, medical supplies, and other strategic national assets. We should stop all future Chinese purchases in these essential industries, and we should begin the process of forcing the Chinese to sell any current holdings that put our national security at risk.

If we don’t do this, the United States will be owned by China which would make them very happy. When I’m president, I will ensure that America’s future remains firmly in American hands just as I did when I was president before. It’ll happen again, and our country will be stronger than ever. Thank you.” (link)

Steven Crowder Goes to the Mattresses Against Big Con


Posted originally on the CTH on January 18, 2023 | Sundance 

Steven Crowder is a smart and witty voice, generally a happy warrior who has been in the battle against the cultural and political progressive movement for over a decade.  He’s been in the fight for quite a while and deserves a great deal of praise for bringing a generation of younger people into the fold.  I respect his long-established time in the trenches of the cultural war, and we are helping him deliver his message.

Crowder’s audience, the “Mug Club”, is likely a mix of Gen-Z and Gen-X rebels throwing sand into the machinery. He does a great job producing content that deconstructs the insanity of the political left in a way that works and expands his audience.  Crowder has almost 6 million YouTube subscribers and while I don’t follow him closely, the message he delivered yesterday is very pertinent.

The problem he outlines is an inside baseball dynamic taking place in the background of the conservative media.  It essentially boils down to a financial issue CTH raised a long time ago when the first signals of this troubling trend started.  Most of the “well known” conservative media outlets have been purchased and co-opted by a financial system that ultimately controls their content.  If you have the time, WATCH:

.

What Crowder is discussing is the reason why Michelle Malkin dropped out of the fight.  The “BigCon” Crowder notes is essentially like the Fox News of alternative media. They offer incentives to monetize the content provider (broadcaster, website, pod caster etc.) then lock the content providers into extremely controlling contracts that control the outcomes.

Ultimately, what the audience ends up seeing is an approved finished product that is acceptable to BigCon and Big Tech.  In essence they are in bed together to stop bold and alternative conversation and filtrate the message to shades of soft pastels.

Charlie Kirk, Turning Point USA (TPUSA), Posobiec, Tim Poole, Conservative Review, CRTV (Glenn Beck, Blaze), Mark Levin, Dave Rubin, Salem Media [Townhall, Hot Air, Twitchy, Red State, PJ Media], The Daily Wire with Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens, the list of names and outlets who participate in this overall system is very long.   Upstream you will find the same financial underwriters, and all of them have a commonality.

Crowder is at an inflection point and obviously he is unwilling to capitulate to the guiding hands in control that no one is allowed to discuss.

Good for him.  I hope he can leverage his influence to break the control mechanism, give startups an alternative, and continue the rebellion.

In the Before Times….


Posted originally on the CTH on January 17, 2023 | sundance

Be rebellious and have fun doing it.

Live your best life.

Manipulated Economic News on Inflation – Prepare for Bad Corporate Earnings Reports as a Result of Poor Holiday Sales


Posted originally on the CTH on January 17, 2023 | sundance 

There has always been a general shaping and interpretation surrounding economic news, specifically as it relates to the impact of pricing on consumers and corporations. However, against the backdrop of supply side inflation, the financial gaslighting from the Wall Street Journal stands out at the top.

Without pretending, and looking directly at the Main Street reality, CTH has outlined inflation as a matter of monetary and energy policy.  From that standpoint the timing and scale of price increases (inflation measured over time) was predictable.  Our current status is an inflationary plateau, where prices remain high but stabilize for likely two quarters.

What the Wall Street Journal outlines as a “shopper rebellion against high prices” is complete hogwash.  Notice in the construct of the narrative, the demand side (consumers) is identified as the cause of diminished revenue & profits for corporations.  They continue pretending that inflation was not driven by energy costs.

(WSJ) – […] Many companies raised their prices substantially last year to offset higher fuel costs and higher prices for ingredients, parts and labor. As fuel prices have dropped and pandemic supply-chain snarls have eased, some of those costs have come down.

That is a good sign for the economy. It suggests that some inflation in the past year resulted from extreme supply-demand imbalances brought on by the pandemic and the war in Ukraine and which are now fading.

Notice the transparent lack of mentioning ‘energy policy’ as the inflation driver.

[…] The study, by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, found that higher markups—the gap between what a firm charges and what it costs to produce an item—were a major driver of inflation in 2021.

They concluded that companies in some cases were raising prices in 2021 in anticipation of future cost pressures, rather than because of market power or outsize demand. Andrew Glover, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City who was involved in the study, doesn’t expect prices to fall this year, he said, but he anticipates that the pace of increase will continue to slow.

Inflation is the rate of increase over time. We have experienced two years of massive price increases. Yes, the rate of those increases will moderate, this is the plateau, but the price will never drop. The current prices are a direct result of fixed energy policy.

[…] Unit sales of food and beverages fell 3% last year, but on a dollar basis they rose 10%. That showed consumers were willing to pay higher prices for groceries but bought fewer items.

[…] “People need to eat,” said Krishnakumar Davey, a president at IRI. Shoppers are nonetheless buying less when possible and, in many cases, buying less expensive versions of necessities such as toilet paper and laundry detergent.  (read more)

Meanwhile the Fed is worried that wages will be forced to increase.  Here is the real worry for the Wall Street Journal, “If consumers believe high prices will persist, they could seek bigger raises, and businesses, seeing higher labor costs, could continue raising prices.”  Yes, workers, forward inflation is your fault.

Government policy drives up prices, but workers needing wage increases to pay for those higher prices… well, that is not acceptable to the government, comrade proles.

Madoff – Hiding the Real Fraud


Armstrong Economics Blog/Conspiracy Re-Posted Jan 17, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: I know you saved Mercedes making back their $1 billion lost all because they listened to the fake news about how the pound and the dollar would crumble in the face of the euro. I read the 2011 Barron’s article on your forecast. It was OK to publish that when they thought you would be wrong. Where is the follow-up when you proved to be the only one who was correct? The same can be said of the New York Times and especially Bloomberg. It is obvious that they will not report on the success of your forecasts because they are leading society at the direction of the Deep State.

Keep up the good work. We need someone independent in this time of darkening clouds.

JWN

REPLY: Let me explain something. All the hype about Bernie Madoff is also FAKE NEWS. On December 10th, 2008, Madoff’s sons Mark and Andrew covered themselves most likely at their father’s direction, and told authorities that their father had confessed to them that the asset management unit of his firm was a massive Ponzi scheme. They even supposedly told them it was “one big lie”. The next day, agents from the FBI arrested Madoff and charged him with one count of securities fraud. There was no possible way the FBI would arrest someone like that without an independent investigation.

The Securities and Exchange Commission had previously conducted numerous investigations into his business practices. Vere did ANY audit uncover such a massive fraud. It was then on March 12th, 2009, when Bernie Madoff simply pleaded guilty to 11 federal felonies and admitted to turning his wealth management business into a massive Ponzi scheme. He was not even indicted. He pled simply to what is known as an “information” so nothing was even presented to a grand jury. That is UNPRECEDENTED!

The banks all claimed that they had “no idea.” Before he died, Madoff did an interview where the headline was that the Banks had to have known. There is ABSOLUTELY no way that the banks were NOT involved or had no idea.  That is legally impossible. As a client of a bank of that size especially, the bank must fill its files with KNOWN YOUR CLIENT rules.

In my case, we had companies set up for each note in Turks & Caicos. The bank actually sent someone down there to audit the legal structure behind every account. There is simply no way a bank can even claim it had no idea. That was a serious RED FLAG that the Madoff case was not what it appeared.

Everyone just skipped over the fact that the SEC conducted multiple audits and found nothing. That included looking at bank accounts and positions on hand. That did NOT add up to a PONZI scheme where you are taking money from one person to pay another which is the actual structure of Social Security. The current generation’s contributions are tasked to pay the previous generation.

Add to that, HSBC, which has been itself indicted for money laundering more than once, stood out as the largest “victim” of Madoff’s scheme – $1.5 billion. HSBC pays countless fines for every scandal they seem to be in the middle of.

In my case, the Bank said they had no idea where the money was after they stole it. How does $1 billion leave a bank without a withdrawal of some sort? Had it not been for my clients standing with me and doing what I told them to do and then sued HSBC, they would have gotten nothing, the government would have claimed I lost it all and the ban was not responsible. The government then put a gag order on me to stop me from helping my clients against the bank! If the bank was not trying to take my client’s money to cover their losses in Russia, then why put a gag order on me if the bank did not do anything wrong?

Then to hide my profits, the receiver handed the notes we issued to HSBC for them to redeem for $606 million pocketing $400 million profit stolen from my company. A former employee bumped into a former HSBC official and he asked what the hell went on. The bankers bluntly told him, the deal offered by the government was too good to pass up. When I asked a NY lawyer why no banker ever is charged or goes to jail, he laughed and said: “You don’t shit where you eat!”

Remember the 1995 collapse of the British Barings Bank because of a “rogue” trader? Nicholas William Leeson was an English former derivatives trader whose claimed fraudulent, “unauthorized and speculative trades” resulted in the 1995 collapse of Barings Bank, the United Kingdom’s oldest merchant bank. Leeson was convicted of financial crime in Singapore court and served over four years in Changi Prison. At the time, I owned a Brokerage House I was asked to bail out by the Japanese government. At our Hong Kong office, Barings wanted to open an account to trade with Leeson in charge.

I knew the corruption of the banks and if the trade went wrong, they would claim he was not authorized. That was the standard operational procedure. Knowing the inside of the industry out, I insisted on a letter from the Board of Directions expressly laying out the credit line for Leeson they requested from my company. I got the letter. So when Leeson supposedly went belly up, guess what. I was quietly paid when everyone else it was said Leeson was a rogue trader.

The New York Post journalist Isabel Vincent who wrote Gilded Lilly, the wife of Edmond Safra, had called me and asked that since I had said that Republic National Bank, Edmond Safra’s, had been illegally trading in my accounts, did I think they were laundering money for the Russian mafia “as they were doing in Madoff’s?” I said I did not know. All I could tell was there were countless errors constantly being put into my accounts and then backed out. At first, I assumed they were “parking trades” in my accounts to use my cash for their margin. Of course, if the “error” was backed out to a different account, they indeed, they were engaging in money laundering.

The court-appointed forensic accountant even wrote to the court about the unprecedented errors in the accounts. The government refused to provide account information to allow them to audit what was going on. The court-appointed counsel, David Cooper, I believe was doing everything he could to help the government cover everything up. The forensic accountant then sent letters to the Judge, and he took no action.

You now have the FTX scandal. You will see that there will NEVER be a trial that would expose all the money laundering where the Democrats had Zelensky, which supposedly needed money to defend his country and fee starving Ukrainians, hand the money to FTX who then happened to be the #2 donor to the Democrats for the midterms. Guess what! Sam Bankman-Fried was charged in the most corrupt court in the nation – the Southern District of New York. The Court of Appeals admitted on page 97 of US v Ziccehtello, that judges are altering transcripts and changing the very words spoken in court.  That is 20 years in prison if you or I alter court documents. They do it all the time. When I confronted Judge Richard Owen about this practice, so many people showed up in court to see what would happen. The lawyers said you can’t accuse a federal judge of committing a crime. I said you all say they do it. They responded. Yes, but you cannot accuse them of doing it. The judge got scared and admitted it in public but claim it wasn’t material.

All the press was there AP, New York Times, Bloomberg, NT Post, you name it. NOT a single member of the press reported what took place that day. OMG! Exposing the federal courts corruption? Impossible!

If a case is a high profile, you will NEVER see the truth in the media.