Category Important

Nov 21 2018

Italy v EU – November 21, 2018


Armstrong Economics Blog/ECM

Re-Posted Nov 21, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

The event today may be the fact that the EU has now stated it will bring sanctions against Italy for refusing to comply with its demands. So here we have the Pi Target and to the day Brussels has officially rejected Italy’s spending budget on Wednesday, November 21st which opens the door to sanctions. With hindsight, we will perhaps look at this day as the start of a further deterioration of the European Union that has converted a trade union into a centralized dictatorship applying a central theme of austerity to everyone regardless of their economic conditions.

 

Nov 19 2018

The Great Global Warming Swindle – Full Documentary HD


Published on Aug 19, 2018

The Great Global Warming Swindle caused controversy in the UK when it premiered March 8, 2007 on British Channel 4. A documentary, by British television producer Martin Durkin, which argues against the virtually unchallenged consensus that global warming is man-made. A statement from the makers of this film asserts that the scientific theory of anthropogenic global warming could very well be “the biggest scam of modern times.” According to Martin Durkin the chief cause of climate change is not human activity but changes in radiation from the sun. Some have called The Great Global Warming Swindle the definitive retort to Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Using a comprehensive range of evidence it’s claimed that warming over the past 300 years represents a natural recovery from a ‘little ice age’. According to the program humans do have an effect on climate but it’s infinitesimally small compared with the vast natural forces which are constantly pushing global temperatures this way and that. From melting glaciers and rising sea levels, The Great Global Warming Swindle debunks the myths, and exposes what may well prove to be the darkest chapter in the history of mankind. According to a group of leading scientists brought together by documentary maker Martin Durkin everything you’ve ever been told about global warming is probably untrue. Just as we’ve begun to take it for granted that climate change is a man-made phenomenon, Durkin’s documentary slays the whole premise of global warming. “Global warming has become a story of huge political significance; environmental activists using scare tactics to further their cause; scientists adding credence to secure billions of dollars in research money; politicians after headlines and a media happy to play along. No-one dares speak against it for risk of being unpopular, losing funds and jeopardizing careers.
Nov 18 2018

Monckton’s Mathematical Proof – Climate Sensitivity is Low


Published on Mar 28, 2017

1000Frolly channel relies on your generosity and support to keep up the fight against the forces of pseudo-science. Please assist of you can; Patreon https://www.patreon.com/1000Frolly The 12th ICCC (International Conference on Climate Change) March 23rd and 24th, 2017 in Washington D.C. Lord Monckton strikes again! Technical talk on the mathematical problems of the IPCC’s climate sensitivity. Standard YouTube licence.
Nov 17 2018

The Modern Myth of “Global Markets”…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on November 16, 2018 by

Reposted by request – There are massive multinational interests inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.

When we understand how trade works in the modern era we also understand why the multinational control agents within the current system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.  In essence, this is a structural economic battle that is being waged politically.

The biggest lie in modern economics, willingly spread and maintained by corporate media, is that a system of global markets still exists.

It doesn’t.

Every element of global economic trade is controlled and exploited by massive institutions, multinational banks and multinational corporations. Institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Bank control trillions of dollars in economic activity. Underneath that economic activity there are people who hold the reigns of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of America-First national economics; for brevity these are called ‘globalists’.

The modern financial constructs of these entities have been established over the course of the past three decades. When we understand how they manipulate the economic system of individual nations we begin to understand why they are so fundamentally opposed to President Trump and their execution of a business plan to influence U.S. politics.

In the Western World, separate from communist control perspectives (ie. China), “Global markets” are a modern myth; nothing more than a talking point meant to keep people satiated with sound bites they might find familiar.

Global markets have been destroyed over the past three decades by multinational corporations who control the products formerly contained within global markets.

The same is true for “Commodities Markets”. The multinational trade and economic system, run by corporations and multinational banks, now controls the product outputs of independent nations. The free market economic system has been usurped by entities who create what is best described as ‘controlled markets’.

U.S. President Trump smartly understands what has taken place. Additionally he uses economic leverage as part of a broader national security policy; and to understand who opposes President Trump specifically because of the economic leverage he creates, it becomes important to understand the objectives of the global and financial elite who run and operate the institutions. The Big Club.

Understanding how trillions of trade dollars influence geopolitical policy we begin to understand the three-decade global financial construct they seek to protect.

That is, global financial exploitation of national markets.

FOUR BASIC ELEMENTS:

♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national outputs and industries of developed industrial western nations.

♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.

♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).

♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.

Against the backdrop of President Trump confronting China; and against the backdrop of NAFTA renegotiated; and against the necessary need to support the key U.S. steel industry; revisiting the economic influences within the modern import/export dynamic will help conceptualize the issues at the heart of the matter.

There are a myriad of interests within each trade sector that make specific explanation very challenging; however, here’s the basic outline.

For three decades economic “globalism” has advanced, quickly. Everyone accepts this statement, yet few actually stop to ask who and what are behind this – and why?

Influential people with vested financial interests in the process have sold a narrative that global manufacturing, global sourcing, and global production was the inherent way of the future. The same voices claimed the American economy was consigned to become a “service-driven economy.”

What was always missed in these discussions is that advocates selling this global-economy message have a vested financial and ideological interest in convincing the information consumer it is all just a natural outcome of economic progress.

It’s not.

The process is not natural at all.  It is a process that is entirely controlled, promoted and utilized by large conglomerates, lobbyists, purchased politicians and massive financial corporations.

Again, I’ll try to retain the larger altitude perspective without falling into the traps of the esoteric weeds. I freely admit this is tough to explain and I may not be successful.

Bulletpoint #1: ♦ Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.

This is perhaps the most challenging to understand. In essence, thanks specifically to the way the World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, national companies expanded their influence into multiple nations, across a myriad of industries and economic sectors (energy, agriculture, raw earth minerals, etc.). This is the basic underpinning of national companies becoming multinational corporations.

Think of these multinational corporations as global entities now powerful enough to reach into multiple nations -simultaneously- and purchase controlling interests in a single economic commodity.

A historic reference point might be the original multinational enterprise, energy via oil production. (Exxon, Mobil, BP, etc.)

However, in the modern global world, it’s not just oil; the resource and product procurement extends to virtually every possible commodity and industry. From the very visible (wheat/corn) to the obscure (small minerals, and even flowers).

Bulletpoint #2 ♦ The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.

During the past several decades national companies merged. The largest lemon producer company in Brazil, merges with the largest lemon company in Mexico, merges with the largest lemon company in Argentina, merges with the largest lemon company in the U.S., etc. etc. National companies, formerly of one nation, become “continental” companies with control over an entire continent of nations.

…. or it could be over several continents or even the entire world market of Lemon/Widget production. These are now multinational corporations. They hold interests in specific segments (this example lemons) across a broad variety of individual nations.

National laws on Monopoly building are not the same in all nations. Most are not as structured as the U.S.A or other more developed nations (with more laws). During the acquisition phase, when encountering a highly developed nation with monopoly laws, the process of an umbrella corporation might be needed to purchase the targeted interests within a specific nation. The example of Monsanto applies here.

Bulletpoint #3 ♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).

In underdeveloped countries the process of buying political outcome is called bribery. Within the United States we call it lobbying.

With control of the majority of actual lemons the multinational corporation now holds a different set of financial values than a local farmer or national market. This is why commodities exchanges are essentially dead. In the aggregate the mercantile exchange is no longer a free or supply-based market; it is now a controlled market exploited by mega-sized multinational corporations.

Instead of the traditional ‘supply/demand’ equation determining prices, the corporations look to see what nations can afford what prices. The supply of the controlled product is then distributed to the country according to their ability to afford the price. This is essentially the bastardized and politicized function of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is also how the corporations controlling WTO policy maximize profits.

Back to the lemons. A corporation might hold the rights to the majority of the lemon production in Brazil, Argentina and California/Florida. The price the U.S. consumer pays for the lemons is directed by the amount of inventory (distribution) the controlling corporation allows in the U.S.

If the U.S. lemon harvest is abundant, the controlling interests will export the product to keep the U.S. consumer spending at peak or optimal price. A U.S. customer might pay $2 for a lemon, a Mexican customer might pay .50¢, and a Canadian $1.25.

The bottom line issue is the national supply (in this example ‘harvest/yield’) is not driving the national price because the supply is now controlled by massive multinational corporations.

The mistake people often make is calling this a “global commodity” process. In the modern era this “global commodity” phrase is particularly nonsense.

A true global commodity is a process of individual nations harvesting/creating a similar product and bringing that product to a global market. Individual nations each independently engaged in creating a similar product.

The production efficiency, the quality and capability of each nation, to produce the  product is independent and proprietary to the businesses within the nation.  In the natural course of national production, not all products are therefore identical; there are variances.

Under modern globalism this process no longer takes place. It’s a complete fraud. Massive multinational corporations control the majority of production inside each nation and therefore control the global product market and price. It is a controlled system.

The outputs are now almost identical regardless of the producing nation.  The processes used for a specific manufacturing sector output in the U.S. are now the same processes used for production in Mexico, or South Korea, or China etc.  Any technological efficiency gains are quickly purchased by the multinational and distributed internationally.

[Edwards Demming was a U.S. industrial expert who went to Japan following WWII and taught them the best processes for industrial manufacturing.  Japan embraced the teaching and instituted an improvement process called “Kaizen“.]

Back to lemons – EXAMPLE: Part of the lobbying in the food industry is to advocate for the expansion of U.S. taxpayer benefits to underwrite the costs of the domestic food products they control. By lobbying DC these multinational corporations get congress and policy-makers to expand the basis of who can use EBT and SNAP benefits (state reimbursement rates).

Expanding the federal subsidy for food purchases is part of the corporate profit dynamic.

With increased taxpayer subsidies, the food price controllers can charge more domestically and export more of the product internationally. Taxes, via subsidies, go into their profit margins. The corporations then use a portion of those enhanced profits in contributions to the politicians. It’s a circle of money.

In highly developed nations this multinational corporate process requires the corporation to purchase the domestic political process (as above) with individual nations allowing the exploitation in varying degrees. As such, the corporate lobbyists pay hundreds of millions to politicians for changes in policies and regulations; one sector, one product, or one industry at a time. These are specialized lobbyists.

EXAMPLE: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)

CFIUS is an inter-agency committee authorized to review transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person (“covered transactions”), in order to determine the effect of such transactions on the national security of the United States.

CFIUS operates pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) (section 721) and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.

The CFIUS process has been the subject of significant reforms over the past several years. These include numerous improvements in internal CFIUS procedures, enactment of FINSA in July 2007, amendment of Executive Order 11858 in January 2008, revision of the CFIUS regulations in November 2008, and publication of guidance on CFIUS’s national security considerations in December 2008 (more)

Bulletpoint #4 ♦ With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.

The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth. This is the basic premise, the cornerstone, behind the catch-phrase ‘globalism’.

It is never discussed.

To control the market price some contracted product may even be secured and shipped with the intent to allow it to sit idle (or rot). It’s all about controlling the price and maximizing the profit equation. To gain the same $1 profit a widget multinational might have to sell 20 widgets in El-Salvador (.25¢ each), or two widgets in the U.S. ($2.50/each).

Think of the process like the historic reference of OPEC (Oil Producing Economic Countries). Only in the modern era massive corporations are playing the role of OPEC and it’s not oil being controlled, thanks to the WTO it’s almost everything.

Again, this is highlighted in the example of taxpayers subsidizing the food sector (EBT, SNAP etc.), the corporations can charge U.S. consumers more. Ex. more beef is exported, red meat prices remain high at the grocery store, but subsidized U.S. consumers can better afford the high prices.

Of course, if you are not receiving food payment assistance (middle-class) you can’t eat the steaks because you can’t afford them. (Not accidentally, it’s the same scheme in the ObamaCare healthcare system)

Agriculturally, multinational corporate Monsanto says: ‘all your harvests are belong to us‘. Contract with us, or you lose because we can control the market price of your end product. Downside is that once you sign that contract, you agree to terms that are entirely created by the financial interests of the larger corporation; not your farm.

The multinational agriculture lobby is massive. We willingly feed the world as part of the system; but you as a grocery customer pay more per unit at the grocery store because domestic supply no longer determines domestic price.

Within the agriculture community the (feed-the-world) production export factor also drives the need for labor. Labor is a cost. The multinational corps have a vested interest in low labor costs. Ergo, open border policies. (ie. willingly purchased republicans not supporting border wall etc.).

This corrupt economic manipulation/exploitation applies over multiple sectors, and even in the sub-sector of an industry like steel. China/India purchases the raw material, coking coal, then sells the finished good (rolled steel) back to the global market at a discount. Or it could be rubber, or concrete, or plastic, or frozen chicken parts etc.

The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upsets the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focus exclusively on bilateral trade deals, with specific trade agreements targeted toward individual nations (not national corporations).

‘America-First’ is also specific policy at a granular product level looking out for the national interests of the United States, U.S. workers, U.S. companies and U.S. consumers.

Under President Trump’s Trade positions, balanced, fair and reciprocal trade with firm regulatory control over proprietary national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is significantly stalled.

This puts many current multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding contracted interest of an asset they can no longer exploit (exfiltrate).

For durable goods: If the corporation wants the benefit of access to the U.S. market, President Trump applies price pressure (tariffs) which changes the ‘total cost of goods‘ dynamic and leverages the company interest to produce inside the United States.

Perhaps now we understand better how and why massive multi-billion multinational corporations and Wall Street institutions are aligned against President Trump.

 

RELATED:

♦The Modern Third Dimension in American Economics – HERE

♦The “Fed” Can’t Figure out the New Economics – HERE

♦Proof “America-First” has disconnected Main Street from Wall Street – HERE

♦Treasury Secretary Mnuchin begins creating a Parallel Banking System – HERE

♦How Trump Economic Policy is Interacting With The Stock Market – HERE

♦How Multinationals have Exported U.S. Wealth – HERE

Nov 14 2018

You Cannot Understand Global Warming without understanding the Second Law of Thermodynamics


Armstrong Economics Blog/Climate

Re-Posted Nov 14, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong; I came across this guy Richard Lindzen and it struck me he was asking people the same question about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. He concluded that very few people who appear to be scientists or educated can even answer the question but still profound to be experts on Global Warming. It is impossible to argue for Global Warming if you cannot even describe what is the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Thank you for opening our minds.

HW

REPLY: Yes you are absolutely correct. I assume you are referring to a comment I have made at WEC events about a major public corporation directed its Chief Financial Officer to meet with me after he lost probably 10% of the company’s funds on currency. I met with the CFO and of course, it was hostile at first. He had to acknowledge our track record but he rebutted that every single forecast for 20 years could have been coincidence or luck. When I saw it was really going nowhere but I sensed he was not a smart-ass of stupid, I asked him what was his background. He hesitated and lowered his voice to reply he went to school and had a degree in nuclear physics. I said great – “Let’s now look at the markets from the perspective of the Second Law of Thermodynamics!”

It may have taken him all of 15 seconds for his mouth to drop and out came the words – OMG, there has to be a cycle! I said absolutely!

This is the entire problem with the Global Warming crowd. They have bogus data only back to the second half of the 1800s and they have ZERO comprehension of the dynamics of the system. Then you have people like Al Gore preaching on a subject in which he has never even taken a course in school yet knows everything there is to know. Welcome to the new world order where these people have determined the best way to save the planet is to eliminate humans. They are working hard on trying to figure out how to accomplish that without standing trial for genocide. Just in case they do not understand what that word means the definition = the deliberate killing of a large group of people. In their case, anyone in the industrialized world.

Nov 12 2018

The Cleaner…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on November 12, 2018 by

There are ongoing consequential election battles taking place in multiple states that are far more urgent than my meager outlines; and it is not my intent to distract from the more pressing matters of our political surrounding.  However, there is a strong possibility the current election events are symptoms of a larger battle within government.

An enigma:

You see, there’s a bunch of ‘unofficial’ evidence, or data-points, that no-one can explain how or why they came to be visible.  The data did not surface sequentially; but it surely surfaced purposefully from within the apparatus of government. Putting the evidence into a sequence that clarifies the picture is not easy. As a respected person recently shared:

“It’s almost like a separate discipline, sort of like textual forensics or document historiography; I don’t know how to describe it yet.”

In an earlier outline I shared the following questions:

  • How do we find out about the Mark Warner text messages?
  • Who publicly released the Carter Page FISA application?
  • Where did the four day flood of information (Dec 1st – 4th, 2017) about Lisa Page and Peter Strzok come from?
  • Who released that Page/Strzok information to the media?  Why?
  • Who made the decision not to indict James Wolfe for leaking classified information?
  • Why be so specific details within the Wolfe indictment; then dismiss them?
  • Who made the decision NOT TO redact the key FISC clerk stamp?
  • Where is all of this “unofficial” evidence coming from?

Well, here’s my answers.

In the James Wolfe indictment, released June 8th, 2018, we find out the Senate Select Committee on intelligence was sent the FISA application on Carter Page.  We don’t find out from the indictment, we only see a description:  [Source Link]

Now, keep in mind this indictment as written ends without any charges of leaking classified documents.  The indictment [Read Here] ends with three counts of giving “false statements to a government agency”, ie. lying to the FBI [18 USC 1001 violation]

If you read the indictment, and the subsequent charges within the indictment, there is absolutely NO REASON, for the extent of the specificity within page #6, lines 17 through 20. As pictured above.  Wolfe was not charged with leaking “classified information”, yet the specific details describe the “top secret” document that was leaked.

A month later, on a Saturday, July 21st, 2018, the redacted FISA Title-1 application used against U.S. person Carter Page is released.  At the time of its release, no-one was looking for it and no-one was requesting the release.

On page #54, 63, 65, 66, and 83 of the heavily redacted FISA application – the FISC Clerk copy stamp appears, drawing attention to the date of distribution, March 17th, 2017. [Source Link]

All dates within the FISA application are redacted, except for the FISC Clerk stamp dates.  Curiously, this March 17, 2017, clerk stamp date is what connects that document to the description of the “top secret” document outlined in the Wolfe indictment.

Against the refusal of the DOJ and FBI to declassify supporting documents to the Nunes memo, this unanticipated weekend release of the FISA application was that much more interesting.  FISA documents are not foia-able; consider the painstaking effort to get the Nunes memo released; in essence this FISA application would have been the easiest document to keep hidden.  Yet, it appeared.

Additionally, another curious unanticipated and never explained document release from February 9th, 2018, overlays with both the Wolfe indictment and the Carter Page FISA application.

In February, 2018, someone, for some reason, released the text messages between Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, and a lobbyist/lawyer named Adam Waldman. [Source Link]  The resulting sunlight showed Senator Warner seeking Waldman’s assistance in setting up a private meeting/interview with Trump dossier author Christopher Steele.

On page #5 of the Warner text messages, we see the date March 17th, 2017, again.  The same date the Senate received the FISA application.  This time we see that Warner was going into the Senate “skif” (SCIF) shortly after 4:00pm; (presumably to review the document):

Using 2018 hindsight and putting together the three documents, released six months apart [Feb (Warner), June (Wolfe), July (FISA)] the picture emerges that the Senate Intelligence Committee received the Carter Page FISA application on March 17th, 2017, delivered to James Wolfe and reviewed by Vice-Chairman Mark Warner.   From the indictment, we discover the content of this document production was leaked by James Wolfe, to his reporter/girlfriend, Ali Watkins the same day.

The important notations here are: (1) two of the three sets of data were released without any specific purpose (FISA App and Warner texts); (2) no-one knows why two data points were released; (3) no-one knows who released them; (4) the FISC Clerk Stamp appears to have been intentionally left unredacted; (5) the specificity within the page #6 data within the Wolfe indictment was unnecessary for the direct purpose, yet important for the indirect purpose of connecting the data; (6) the Wolfe indictment was unsealed six months after the fact; and (7) NONE of these three sets of data were essential information at the time they were released.

This tells me, someone wanted this information into the bloodstream of public knowledge; yet non of this information was part of an official release; except the Wolfe indictment – yet it too contained unnecessary specificity within the page-6 details when unsealed.

This brings us to the critical question: Who?  Who wanted this out there?

The answer to that question, is uniquely narrow when you think about the documents and the position the person would have to hold in order to influence the release.

Because of the documents in question, the person would need to be inside the DOJ.  Because of the content of the documents, the person would have to be important enough to have access and knowledge of the bigger dynamic at play.  This person would also need to be high enough in the food chain to authorize the FISA release and have some control over the redaction process (leaving the FISC Clerk stamp date visible).  This person would have to be high enough to ‘unofficially’ release the Warner text messages, and yet not be in fear after doing it.

In my opinion, that describes Matt Whitaker – AG Jeff Sessions Chief of Staff.

Additionally, when considering another set of unsourced and very consequential data that followed the plea of Michael Flynn as demanded by the prosecution from Robert Mueller November 30th, 2017.   The public releases on December 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, immediately following the Flynn plea (Strzok FISC buddy Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Contreras), were massive in consequence, and appeared reactionary.

Those early December 2017 releases revealed: the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok removals and suspensions; the text messaging; the connections to Bruce Ohr activity (demotion 1); and the connections to Nellie Ohr and Fusion GPS.   No-one ever asked who was the source of that mountain of evidence against the conspiracy group.

Again, in my opinion, that information could only come from someone with deep knowledge of what was going on; and tends to point toward Matt Whitaker.

In short, I think Matt Whitaker was our behind-the-scenes ‘deep throat’; pushing information into the public consciousness that would paint a picture being hidden by opposing voices within the administrative state.  All of the countermeasures became visible after Whitaker was hired in October 2017.

Again, apply common sense, what interests were served; and whose interests were undermined by this information being released?

Whitaker joined Sessions in October 2017; immediately before the FBI investigators zeroed in on the SSCI leaking [See Indictment].

Whitaker came in after the leak task force was in place and investigating.  I believe it was Matt Whitaker who left the disparate breadcrumb trail for us to follow.

Given the nature of how hard Rosenstein and Mueller are/were working to block sunlight and the release of information, as evidenced within their recent threats against declassification by President Trump, these data/evidence points certainly did not come from their collective DOJ camp or the ‘small group’ within the Special Counsel.  Factually the sunlight from the mysterious media information was adverse to their interests.

So here’s my summary:

  • How do we find out about the Mark Warner text messages? – Matt Whitaker
  • Who publicly released the Carter Page FISA application? – Matt Whitaker
  • Where did the four day flood of information (Dec 1st – 4th, 2017) about Lisa Page and Peter Strzok come from? – Matt Whitaker
  • Who released that Page/Strzok information to the media? – Matt Whitaker
  • Why? – Push back against the sketchy Mueller framework within the Flynn plea.
  • Who made the decision not to indict James Wolfe for leaking classified information? – Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, in an effort to protect the interests of corrupt elements within the SSCI. [ Despite the leak task force identifying the leaker, the content of the Wolfe leak meant Sessions could not be the decision-maker; the recusal firewall was crossed.]
  • Who wrote the initial Wolfe indictment to contain such specific evidence as to outline how he had leaked classified information?  – The task force [Whitaker allies].
  • Who made the decision NOT TO redact the key FISC clerk stamp? – Matt Whitaker as push-back against, and evidence toward, the corrupt elements within the SSCI.
  • Where did all of this “unofficial” evidence come from? – Matt Whitaker, current Acting Attorney General.

Additionally, the Office of the President is not an individual, it is an institution.  There are people, mostly lawyers, responsible for the office of the president who are there specifically to protect the executive office and not necessarily the person within it. By protecting the Office of The President, they protect the president.

Part of that protection involves NOT allowing the President to posses information that could put him in a position of compromise or legal jeopardy.  Therefore, in my opinion, President Trump does not have direct knowledge, nor has he been informed, of any of this.

In my humble opinion, those near the President are telling him to keep publicly expressing his distance from Matt Whitaker specifically because Whitaker is “the cleaner” for the DOJ and FBI.  That’s why we are seeing this:

The President needs factual and honest deniability of knowledge, and or any involvement, in what Matt Whitaker has done (as CoS) and/or will do (as AAG) internally.

That scenario doesn’t make former AG Jeff Sessions out to be good or bad, just recused and unable to deal with the issues over the past 20 months – prior to exit.

The conflict and compromise carried by Rod Rosenstein makes him a risk to the office; that’s why Whitaker was recommended as the ‘cleaner’.

I suspect one of Whitaker’s key tools will be to oversee and then utilize the IG report on FISA abuse to expel those within the DOJ and FBI who participated. [See Here]

The deepest elements of the DC swamp will go bananas to get rid of Whitaker specifically because he is positioned to be the cleaner.

Who has given Whitaker counsel?  Likely Senate Judicary Chairman Chuck Grassley.

Will this effort work? I have no idea.

There you have it.  That’s my take.

“Matthew Whitaker”

.

.

Nov 4 2018

Senate Judiciary Committee Releases 414-Page Kavanaugh Report – Investigators Continue Review of Former FBI Agent Monica Lee McLean Involvement…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on November 4, 2018 by

The Senate Judiciary Committee has released a lengthy report (full pdf below) containing the investigative material from the senate investigation of the Kavanaugh accusations.

On page #27 of the report the senate committee notes their intent to continue investigating the role of retired FBI Agent Monica Lee McLean, who appears to have been ‘handling‘ accuser and best friend, Christine Blasey-Ford:

It always seemed curious how the Senate committee never redacted the name Monica McLean when first releasing the investigative material containing her involvement.

Always curious…

Here’s the full report:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/392300733/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-tv0B1Z0rBX7P7XEjmjcX

.

Here’s the backstory on Monica McLean:

In a letter from a former boyfriend of Christine Blasey-Ford, there was a name curiously not redacted. The name of Monica L McLean; revealed as a life-long friend who Ms. Ford helped with polygraph preparation.

The media focused on the letter from the perspective of it outlining a lie told by Ms. Ford during her congressional testimony… But the backstory to Ms. Monica Lee McLean appeared an even bigger story.

First the letter from the boyfriend:

In addition to boyfriend noting Ms. Monica L McLean in the current letter, Ms. Monica Lee McLean was also one of the signatories of another letter from the Holton-Arms class of 1984 bolstering the credibility of her friend, Ms. Blasey-Ford.

(Source)

Some research into Ms. Fords life-long friend from school, Ms. Monica Lee McLean (DOB 03-15-66), reveals an almost guaranteed likelihood the polygraph assistance had something to do with the career path Ms. McLean would take.

Monica Lee McLean was admitted to the California Bar in 1992, the same year Ms Ford’s boyfriend stated he began a six-year relationship with her best friend. The address for the current inactive California Law License is now listed as *”Rehoboth Beach, DE”. [*Note* remember this, it becomes more relevant later.]

According to her LinkedIn background, Ms. Monica Lee McLean, was a 24-year employee of the Department of Justice and FBI from 1992 to 2016. According to public records Ms. McLean worked in both Los Angeles, CA and New York, NY.

In a 2000 Los Angeles FBI declaration Ms. McLean describes herself as a Special Agent of the FBI, Associate Division Counsel, in the Los Angeles Division Legal Unit:

(Source)

Sometime between 2000 and 2003, Ms. Monica L McLean transferred to the Southern District of New York (SDNY), FBI New York Field Office; where she shows up on various reports, including media reports, as a spokesperson for the FBI.

There was a family death in 2003, and Monica McLean then shows up with an address listed in Washington DC in 2003; so it would appear Ms. McLean spent about 10 years in California, and then returned to the east-coast.

…”according to Monica McLean, spokeswoman for the FBI’s New York office.” [2009 citation]

After 2003, Ms. Monica L McLean is working with the SDNY as a Public Information Officer for the FBI New York Field Office, side-by-side with SDNY Attorney General Preet Bharara:

(Document Source – pdf)

According to her LinkedIn profile, Ms. McLean retired from the FBI in 2016, after 24 years of work. [*It should be noted that Ms. McLean’s PIO partner in New York, Jim Margolin, is still currently employed there; and coincidentally attached to the case against President Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen.]

It does not appear that Ms. Monica L McLean ever married. On the east coast her historic addresses are Current: Rehoboth Beach, Delaware; and Former: Bethesda, MD; Potomac, MD; Washington, DC; Malibu, CA; Los Angeles, CA; Laguna Beach, CA; Marina Del Rey, CA and Laguna Hills, CA respectively. All addresses coinciding with her employment and transferred assignments therein.

In an April, 2016, article in the Delaware Cape Gazette, Mrs. McLean shows up at a wine tasting event; and is pictured within the publication:

Enjoying the tastes are In back (l-r) Kelly Devine and Nuh Tekmen. In front, Monica McLean, Karen Sposato, Catherine Hester, Sen. Ernie Lopez, R-Lewes, and Jennifer Burton. BY DENY HOWETH

Ms. McLean is pictured above with the large pink handbag. This article confirms the location of Monica McLean in relationship to the numerous public record citations of her Delaware residence.

Here’s where things get really interesting.

Ms. Monica Lee McLean and Ms. Christine Blasey-Ford are life-long friends; obviously they have known each other since their High School days at Holton-Arms; and both lived together as “roommates” in California after college. Their close friendship is cited by Ms. Fords former boyfriend of six years.

Ms. Monica McLean retired from the FBI in 2016; apparently right after the presidential election. Her current residence is listed at Rehoboth Beach, Delaware; which aligns with public records and the serendipitous printed article.

Now, where did Ms. Blasey-Ford testify she was located at the time she wrote the letter to Dianne Feinstein, accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh?

[Transcript]

MITCHELL: The second is the letter that you wrote to Senator Feinstein, dated the — July 30th of this year.

MITCHELL: Did you write the letter yourself?

FORD: I did.

MITCHELL: And I — since it’s dated July 30th, did you write it on that date?

FORD: I believe so. I — it sounds right. I was in Rehoboth, Delaware, at the time. I could look into my calendar and try to figure that out. It seemed…

MITCHELL: Was it written on or about that date?

FORD: Yes, yes. I traveled, I think, the 26th of July to Rehoboth, Delaware. So that makes sense, because I wrote it from there.

MITCHELL: Is the letter accurate? FORD: I’ll take a minute to read it.

So we have Dr. Blasey-Ford in Rehoboth Beach, DE, on 26th July 2018. We’ve got her life-long BFF, Monica L McLean, who worked as attorney and POI in the DOJ/FBI in Rehoboth Beach, DE…. Apparently at same time she wrote letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Ms. Blasey-Ford and Ms. McLean, the BFF she coached on lie detector testing, together for the four days leading up to the actual writing of the letter. July 26th to July 30th.

It would appear that Ms. Blasey-Ford was with Ms. Monica L McLean, the retired FBI agent and former New York field office spokesperson, at the time she wrote the letter to Senator Feinstein.

That would certainly begin to explain quite a bit about who exactly was handling Ms. Ford; and how there would be an intentional effort, from a subject matter expert, on how to best position the attack against Brett Kavanaugh.

Who better to help scrub the internet history, and know what processes and people to enlist in such preparatory work, than a retired lawyer who worked deeply inside the FBI?

Not only did Ms. McLean possesses a particular set of skills to assist Ms. Ford, but Ms. McLean would also have a network of DOJ and FBI resources to assist in the endeavor. A former friendly FBI agent to do the polygraph; a network of politically motivated allies?

Does the appearance of FBI insider and Deputy FBI Director to Andrew McCabe, Michael Bromwich, begin to make more sense?

Do the loud and overwhelming requests by political allies for FBI intervention, take on a different meaning or make more sense, now?

Standing back and taking a look at the bigger, BIG PICTURE….. could it be that Mrs. McLean and her team of ideological compatriots within the DOJ and FBI, who have massive axes to grind against the current Trump administration, are behind this entire endeavor?

Considering all of the embattled, angry, institutional officials (former and current); and considering the recently fired DOJ and FBI officials; and considering the officials currently under investigation; and considering the declassification requests which will likely lead to the exposure of even more corruption…. Could it be that these elements wanted to do something, anything to get back at the executive branch; and possibly change the tide?

If so, and I think the likelihood is pretty good, doesn’t everything known just easily reconcile if you think of Ms. Blasey-Ford as a tool for those ideologues?

If Ms Monica Lee McLean and her allies wanted to strike, she couldn’t be the visible face of the confrontation because she was retired FBI. It would be too obvious. She would need a patsy; a friend who could deploy the hit on her/their behalf. It would need to be someone she could shape, easily manage and guide etc. Someone who could be trusted, and at the same time would be trusting of them.

It is quite likely Ms. McLean selected/recruited her life-long best friend, Ms. Blasey-Ford.

Oh, and Ms. Monica Lee McLean’s attorney is…. wait for it,….. David Laufman.

Ms. McLean’s lawyer, David Laufman, said in a statement: “Any notion or claim that Ms. McLean pressured Leland Keyser to alter Ms. Keyser’s account of what she recalled concerning the alleged incident between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh is absolutely false.”  (continue reading)

If there was any doubt the “small group” of connected DOJ and FBI officials were behind the use of Ms. Ford, you can put that doubt away now that Ms. Ford’s handler, Monica McLean, has enlisted David Laufman as her legal defense.

They’re not even trying to hide it any more.

Michael Bromwich is representing Ms. Ford, and David Laufman is representing Ms. McLean.   The concentric Lawfare gang is working overtime, likely pro-bono.

It is beyond obvious now that Ms. Christine Blasey-Ford was not just some random ancillary high school acquaintance of Brett Kavanaugh; Ms. Ford appears to have been selected by a group of politically connected FBI and DOJ officials for the purpose of targeting Judge Kavanaugh.

All of these DOJ and FBI people are part of a tight network.

“Beach Friends”?  Rohoboth Beach friends?

David Laufman was the Department of Justice – National Security Division, Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence, cyber security, counterespionage and export controls.  He was inside the DOJ-NSD when the FISA application against Carter Page, and by extension the Trump campaign, was constructed, submitted and approved.

As most people are now aware the epicenter of the DOJ/FBI Clinton-Steele operation against candidate Trump stemmed from a collaborate “small group” effort of Main Justice officials within the National Security Division (John P Carlin – head); and officials within the FBI Counterintelligence Division (Bill Priestap – head).

David Laufman abruptly resigned from his DOJ position on Wednesday February 7th, 2018, without notice – citing “personal reasons.” {Go Deep} Mr. Laufman was one of the “small group” who interviewed Hillary Clinton, July 2nd, 2016, during the FBI email investigation.

Additionally, In his former DOJ-NSD position, Laufman would have held knowledge of the FISA “Title-1” surveillance program initiated on Carter Page and the “incidental” Trump campaign officials. Laufman would also have close contact with former Asst. Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr; husband of Fusion GPS employee Nellie Ohr.

To see Ms. Fords life-long best friend, FBI agent and influencer, Monica McLean, now represented by Mr. Laufman would indicate even more evidence of the “small group” motive.  Again, as previously presented, each of these DOJ/FBI officials are defending their interests -and controlling their risk exposure- from current congressional probes into the activity of a corrupt DOJ and FBI in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

These internecine relationships is likely why Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley sent a follow-up demand letter to the lawyers for Ms. Blasey-Ford, requesting additional information to include the communications between the legal team and the witnesses surrounding Ms. Ford’s claims:

[…] I urge you once again, now for the third time in writing, to turn over the therapy notes, polygraph materials, and communications with The Washington Post that Dr. Ford has relied upon as evidence.

In addition to the evidence I requested in my October 2 letter, in light of recently uncovered information, please turn over records and descriptions of direct or indirect communications between Dr. Ford or her representatives and any of the following: (1) U.S. Senators or their staffs, particularly the offices of Senators Feinstein and Hirono, other than your communications with me and my staff in preparation for the September 27 hearing; (2) the alleged witnesses identified by Dr. Ford (Leland Keyser, Mark Judge, and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth); and (3) Debbie Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, or their representatives.

(Read Full Grassley Letter)

It would appear that Senator Grassley can see the outline of the group who orchestrated the smear campaign against Judge Brett Kavanaugh; and he’s began going directly to those who framed the campaign for answers….

Perhaps, just perhaps, that’s why Ms. McLean’s name was never originally redacted.

Nov 4 2018

US Political 2018 Midterm Elections


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics

Re-Posted Nov 4, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

 

On the one hand, the Midterm Elections really mean nothing. The Democrats cannot reverse their declining trend since they peaked with FDR, and the Republicans cannot deliver the final death blow to the Democrats to put them out of their Marxist misery.  While we have provided the target ranges for the vote, we also have to consider the fact that vote manipulation and rigging will be starting with this election without Russians

It is truly ironic that the Democratic Party was founded by Andrew Jackson to support slavery and then they adopted the Philosophy of Karl Marx to promise Socialism for all.  At the end of the day, we end up where we began – endless toxic politics that has turned into bitter hatred which divides the country more so than at any time since the Civil War. All they are doing is creating an equal and opposite reaction from their opponents. The trench between both sides has opened at it is becoming the Political Grand Canyon.

The political climate from here on out looks very dark and grim with no hope of actually returning to any possible form of civility. All we are doing now is waiting for the first shot to be fired that will literally be heard around the world. There will be no return to civility. It will only get worse from here on out. There is no going back. We have actually crossed the point of no return. It is all over. We just have to wait for the fat lady to finish the last song and then the Opera will come to its violent and bitter end.

The Midterms are upon us and the most interesting aspect has been the fact that the Democrats have waged the most hateful campaign I have ever witnessed in my entire life. Instead of looking to tone down their rhetoric, they have chosen to move even more extreme left. The 28-year old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won 57.5% of the vote, while her opponent, Joe Crowley, had 42.5%. Crowley has represented New York’s 14th District since 1999 and had been touted as a potential future House speaker. Instead of the Democrats realizing that is is really the Trump Revolution where whoever is in power is just being thrown out, they instead assumed that the people wanted more Socialism, taxing the rich, and exploiting anyone who has whatever they arbitrarily assume is not rich – meaning household income of $250,000. They have misread the tea leaves and become even more left-wing. This will end up destroying their party and they are unable to offer anything but free gifts paid for by taking it from those who work. Just looking at the stats demonstrates that sales pit worked for FDR, but for just one campaign cycle. They have been losing ground ever since yet they keep preaching the same old party line.

 

The Republicans keep preaching lower taxes but they too have been hallowed words. An important but very strange poll is one that Fox News did. This poll they put up because the results were so baffling to them. They asked the question: Who did you identify with, Trump or the Republican Party? The stunning result was that 46% said they associated with Trump compared to 25% with Republicans. After all the Hate Trump campaign launched by the Media and the Democrats and Michael Avenatti using porn stars to try to take Trump down, they seem to actually be making him a stronger leader figure in the process polarizing the nation. Perhaps their hateful tactics are just not working the way they expected. Yet there is something else lurking behind this poll. That is the blunt fact that Trump is really a 3rd Party candidate still and the Republicans are just the same old people occupying Washington for self-interests as the Democrats. There is something hiding in the bushes – the frustration with both political parties.

 

When we run our presidential models they are still showing a rising trend in 3rd party activity. This looks to be continuing into 2023/2024 Presidential election. It all appears to be starting to take off following this Midterm Election. This is why I warn that the computer really does not care who wins the House – neither side will accept a loss. They can trash Trump all they want and even start a #MeToHateTrump movement. The real story here is that we are witnessing the disintegration of party politics as we move ahead into the conclusion of the Economic Confidence Model come 2032.

 

 

The Democrats have been losing power steadily as I have pointed out just from a technical perspective. Just plotting the numbers without any political bias demonstrates clearly that the Socialist agenda has been declining after FDR managed to get into office. What many do not know is how did FDR get into office? The Private Wave which peaked in 1929.75 was not really about the evil corporations and the economic decline. FDR gained the national nomination because he was Governor of New York State and jumped on a campaign to clean the city of the worst political corruption period perhaps in history up to that point which bribes and murders. He personal sat as a judge to remove the mayor of New York City which everyone assumed was in the pocket of the Mafia which was made rich and powerful thanks to Prohibition.

The polls have been so wrong in most countries because those who are taking them are also deeply divided. In an analysis, this means they have already determined what the poll should say so they look only for those results to prove their predetermined conclusion. That was not merely self-evident in the US 2016 election, but also BREXIT in Britain. Additionally, people in this field of politics make it their life. They all talk to each other and thus there is no counterbalance. This is why our WEC events are so popular. The audiences are international, not merely local Americans. The room gives off the vibe of international capital flows and people get to meet others from around the world. We then get to listen to all the various concerns and points of view rather than just talking to friends who all just agree. That external viewpoint is necessary to prevent biased analysis.

Our own polls among institutional clients I speak with shows a deep-seated fear that a Democratic victory will destroy the world economy. They will do everything in their power to undo everything Trump has done just for spite rather than economic sanity. Outside the USA, Trump fairs even better. From Asia, they think he is the best President since World War II because he is the first to get North Korea to blink. From Europe, many saw Trump as exposing the stupidity of trade negotiations for they had no idea that 28 members each had a right to veto trade deals preferred by other members.

While so many rely on GDP and unemployment numbers to gauge the economic conditions for a swing in the election, if that were the real factor by itself them the Republicans should win 100%. The average person could care less what the official statistics say. If the economy was bad, things would look even worse for Republicans. What is clearly taking place is we are indeed setting the stage for a civil war for the hatred is manifesting in deeply resented Partisanship which has been increasing since the Democrats lost in 2016. Traditionally, fewer people vote during the midterms than at presidential elections.

 

 

When we dive into the numbers for the Democrats in the House of Representatives we are currently at 45% or 193 Democrats to 235 Republicans with 7 vacancies*, which are split 2 Democrats and 5 Republicans. Many are forecasting that the Republicans will lose 38 seats. That would result in the Democrats having 231 seats out of 435 or 53.1% of the House. We do have a Minor Bullish Reversal at 52.6% and technical resistance at 54-56%. The technical support comes in at the 48-49%. The Major Bullish Reversal stands at 61.5% which is unattainable. If the Democrats really exceeded that number of 52.6%, hiding under the covers is just not going to work. Keep in mind they came in at 45% for the last election so they are starting from below technical support. The Minor Bearish Reversal rests at 40.9% and electing that would signal the end of the Democratic Party which would then split between the extreme left and the moderate Democrats forming so sort of new party lines. The Major Bearish Reversals rest at 24% and 23.5%.

Now when we turn to the Republicans in the House, we can see a clear uptrend since the Great Depression compared to a steady downtrend for the Democrats without involving personal bias or opinion. The Democrats have been making lower highs and the Republicans have been making higher lows – plain and simple. At the last election, the Republicans came in with 54.9% – still not an overwhelming mandate. The technical resistance for this midterm stands at 56.8% to 58.7% and the support is in the 45% zone. If the Republicans lost 38 seats, as is predicted, that ironically would still not break the technical support for that would be 45.2% managing a retest of the Uptrend Line.

The Minor Bullish Reversal stands at 59%  Major Bullish Reversal stands at 69.9% followed by 76% for the Republicans in the House. Don’t forget, we had elected three or the four Bullish Reversals on this aspect. The Minor Bearish Reversal rests at 47.1% followed by 46.2%. If the Republican come in under 47.1%, then you might want to look at buying a nice warm thick blanket for they will be following the Global Warming trend to raise taxes on anything that gives off heat. With the latest being that pets are now responsible for 25% of global warming because it takes energy to wag their tail when you come home, we could end up with federal license fee to have a pet in the first place.

Vacancies*          

  • Conyers (D), MI resignation effective 12/05/2017
  • Slaughter (D), NY died 03/16/2018
  • Bridenstine (R), OK resignation effective 04/23/2018
  • Meehan (R), PA resignation effective 04/27/2018
  • Dent (R). PA resignation effective 05/12/2018
  • DeSantis (R), FL resignation effective 09/01/2018
  • Jenkins, Evan (R), WV resignation effective 09/30/2018

 

What is interesting is trying to sort things out from the polls. They have been biased and completely inaccurate in both the USA and UK for that matter. When we look at President Trump’s approval rating, it is at or above 50% in all the political battleground states for this election concerning the Senate.  Yet in only two states, North Dakota and Tennessee, does a GOP Senate candidate hit 50% support. Many states are just a toss-up as in Arizona and Missouri Senate races. Even the Republican Senator Ted Cruz is only up 3 points ahead of O’Rourke the Democratic candidate. Many of these polls show it is a narrow race overall with no one side running away.

The Major Double Bullish Reversal stands at 61% followed by 64% for the Democrats in the Senate, which are well above the current levels. Minor Double Bullish Reversal for the Democrats in the Senate stands at 51% followed by 53% and 57%. This tends to warn that there is significant overhead resistance. The Democrats are currently at 47%. The Major Bearish Reversal rests at 45.6% followed by 44.7%, just below current levels. The Minor Bearish Reversals rest 47% followed by 46%. The last election closed right on the Minor Bearish Reversal so any loss in the Senate will be quite serious for the Democrats going forward.

The technical perspective should resistance at 54.8% followed by 56.6%. The major support lies at 39.5%. We have 48.7% and 48.9% which are pivot points. Since the current position is 47%, they are ideally resistance points. This means that the Minor Bearish Reversals at 47% and 46% become incredibly important. If the Democrats lose just one seat, it will be a bearish signal for that party looking into 2020.

 

 

Now, turning to the Republicans who finished in 2016 with 51%, the Major Bullish Reversals stands at 62.2% and 64.1%. The Minor Bullish Reversals stands at 53% followed by 54% for the Republicans in the Senate. The Minor Bearish Reversals rest at 48% followed by 47%, 45%, and 43%. We can see that technical resistance stands at 54.9% with support at 49.3%, 48.8%, and 44.3%.

When we put the system numbers (Reversals) alongside the technical numbers, we have this series of projection ranges for the Midterms.

 

Voter turnout in the United States fluctuates in national elections rather dramatically. During the early 1800s, people were more responsible for voting. It appears that the majority of Americans have become complacent about the Midterm Elections. The Democrats have used all sorts of hate speech to turnout a vote and we have an amazing number calling for riots and civil unrest even from the mouth of Hillary Clinton. Then we have Hollywood figures doing the same and some such as actor James Cromwell warns publicly that there will be “blood in the streets” if Democrats don’t win the election, which is obviously highly treasonous for it says there should be no democracy but they have a right to dictate to everyone else what they should do.

In recent elections, about 60% of the voting eligible population votes during presidential election years, and about 40% votes during midterm elections. Turnout is lower for the odd year, primary and local elections. However, upon close examination, the trend was significantly different in the past. For example, Andrew Jackson who instigated the Panic of 1837 by shutting down the Bank of the United States which was acting as a quasi-central bank, set in motion the worst economic depress with not just the Broken Banknote Crisis, but also the Sovereign Debt Crisis of states permanently defaulting on their debt. The most fascinating element that jumps out at you from the data is the voter turnout jumps sharply during this period and during the midterm election of 1838, one year into the Panic of 1837, the turnout was higher than that of the Presidential Election in 1834. That is the ONLY Time that took place. We can also see from the above chart that the voter turnout reaches consistently higher levels entering/during/after the Civil War period.

Therefore, it will be the post-election numbers that reveal perhaps an even more important trend – is voter turnout rising as it did go into the Civil War?

 

 

 

The spin out there is that the Democrats are likely to win back a number of House seats in next week’s midterm elections that “Republicans were lucky to have” because they won seats in districts where Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton defeated President Trump. They argue that this stands to reason that the GOP will lose a number of those seats in the midterms. We can see that we have Directional Changes in 2019 with the big turning points are interesting. The Democrats show 2020 are the big one and the Republicans show 2023 with another Directional Change leading into the 2024 Presidential elections.

 

When we look at the Senate, we see the big target for the Democrats will be 2020 and the Republicans will be 2023/2024. We have Panic Cycles lined up the same 2020 and 2022. The Directional; Changes provide a picture of really chaotic choppiness.

Our models on taxes do show that those in power will raise taxes sharply rather than reform.

 

Now when we actually step back and look at the voter turnout since 1828, first we can see that even when Roosevelt was elected, there was a surprisingly low turnout compared to 100 years before. Looking just at the Presidential elections, we did elect a Yearly Bullish Reversal that was at 53.6% in 2004 which was the incumbent Republican President George W. Bush who defeated Democratic nominee John Kerry. The Yearly Bullish Reversals now stand at 56.1%, 62.5%, 65.2%, and 74.7%. The Yearly Bearish Reversal lies at 49%. The voter turnout was really 55.5% in 2016. Therefore, the neutral range is 49% to 56.1%. Breaking out of that range would indicate things are getting more heated and we can witness a significant rally as we did following the Panic of 1837.

Now lets us turn to this Midterm Election. The last Midterm in 2012 was the lowest turnout that came close to matching the 33% in 1942 with Roosevelt. The numbers came in as 34.1% – the lowest post-World War II. We have two Yearly Bullish Reversal at 36.9% and 39% on the Midterm elections. The technical resistance stands at 37.4% with significant breakout type resistance standing at 49.8%. It looks like it would take a real crisis to reach that level. Our cyclical models point to huge turnout coming in 2020.

CONCLUSION

It does not appear that the Democrats can make a sweeping victory. Despite all the support of the media and the Hate Trump campaign, what it really appears is that whoever wins the House, we are looking at a rise in civil unrest. NEITHER side appears willing to accept the result. The Democrats are indeed historically the most violent so we should expect this trend to continue. With Panic Cycles showing up even on the combined House/Senate perspective in 2019 and 2021, this clearly reflects an unwillingness to accept the end result. This is part of the Crisis in Democracy we have been warning would become the hallmark of this 51.6-year Wave on the Economic Confidence Model.

The Democratic Party is in serious trouble. The hostility is off the charts and really the computer is showing that it really does not matter who wins the House, the trend is toward more obstruction and inaction. The Senate is more important for if the Democrats lose just one seat, the will elect a Bearish Reversal. We DO NOT show any chance that the Democrats would reverse the downtrend in motion. This is why the computer is rather ambivalent on this election. The volatility will rise next year so regardless who wins the House, neither side appears willing to accept the result.

The polls are not really reliable as has been the track record. The press is so hateful and is out to destroy the Republican Party that many people really do remain in the closet about who they really support. This is a sad state of affairs that people are actually afraid to even display a TRUMP sticker because of threats and violence. When a police officer rams a car intentionally simply because they had a TRUMP sticker, this is a warning sign of what is really coming from here into 2021.

Ironically, a Democratic win in the House will be taken as EXTREMELY bearish for the economic future of not just the United States, but the entire world. Nevertheless, that may actually end up being just another reason capital flees the bonds and moves with greater intensity into private assets. The worse it may appear, the more bullish it may be for the capital shift.

Nov 2 2018

UN’s Global Compact for Safety, Orderly and Regular Migration


Armstrong Economics Blog/Refugees

Re-Posted Nov 2, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

Austria and Hungary have now joined Trump in backing out the United Nations migration deal. The UN’s Global Compact for Safety, Orderly and Regular Migration, which is not actually legally binding on any country lacking jurisdiction or power in the UN over the entire world. This deal was finalized and it is widely seen as pro-migration and unrealistic. The greatest problem with this proposal is that the industrialized nations of Europe and America are in fact SOCIALIST states so migrants get benefits for coming that they would not get at home. The problem is that when mass-migration took place from Europe to America in the 19th century and the first near 50% of the 20th century, that migration was to freedom economically and the opportunity to work. The migration into Europe is by no means of the same quality. They go there with no prospect of employment, understanding or speaking the language, and live far better on state welfare that would possibly have at home. The incentives are completely reversed.

Trump pulled out of that deal and no both Austria and Hungary have joined as they are inundated with migrants who just have their hand out and drain the economy rather than adding to it. The UN’s Global Compact for Safety, Orderly and Regular Migration, is simply unrealistic and fails completely to understand that there is a huge difference between subsidized migration and migration for an opportunity. In the USA, Trump carried Florida with the legal Mexicans voting for Trump because they had to prove they could speak the language and had skills. The same took place in Britain where the Indians voted for BREXIT for most who migrated to Britain also had to have a skill set which was most commonly in the field of medicine. Those in power do not understand that those who learned skills to migrate are now upset at this idea of just opening up the doors under the welfare model. It undermines what they had to go through to make it to a new homeland.

Oct 30 2018

Merkel Has been the Face of Europe – So Get Ready!!!!


Armstrong Economics Blog/ECM

Re-Posted Oct 30, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

 

Merkel has been the face of Europe – good, bad, or indifferent. Germany has been the major economy in Europe with France a distant second. We must understand that the fate of the Euro hinges on this position of Merkel. She has been a staunch supporter of austerity and the Green and AfD are rising BECAUSE of Merkel’s immigration policy. Instead of recognizing she may a major mistake and address it instantly, she has done the typical politician maneuver – blame everyone else and deny it was her policy at fault.

 

 

I cannot stress enough that the political instability within Europe, is a critical factor behind the capital flows that can push the dollar to unbelievable highs. Our unique capital flows analysis which we invented is backed by raw data which is contributed from proprietary sources worldwide which allow us to really see the trends without opinions or myopic domestic analysis. All of these people who keep talking about how the dollar has to crash are so caught up in old world theories that have NEVER been correct and have not just failed their analysis of things such as gold, but they have failed the central bankers on an even grander scale. This is why even central bankers attend the WEC. There is a much higher plane of financial analysis that we must respect and come to grips with BECAUSE we are all in this together. NO politician can even pretend to be in charge of the economy and make promises that are far beyond their control because NOBODY can go against the global trend. PLAIN & SIMPLE!!!!!!!

A special report is going out this week for the attendees of the WEC. This is on the Economic Confidence Model and the major November 2018 Convergence that is on our doorstep. The consolidation is about to end. So buckle up – we will be on our way to something really extraordinary that no domestic analysis will ever see coming.

In that respect, it will be like the 1987 Crash that was caused by external factors that never appeared in domestic numbers or analysis. It was so significant, that is when the Presidential Commission was compelled to request all our international research to understand how external factors overpower domestic.

So welcome of 2018. This is going to be a lot of fun to watch. Better than any movie, TV show that’s for sure!