President Trump Extended Remarks and Mini Presser During Ceremony for Space Policy Directive 4…


Earlier today President Trump signed Space Force Policy Directive #4 and held a brief presser in the Oval Office.  [Video and Transcript Below]  During questions, President Trump answered a variety of questions on: McCabe, China, N-Korea and Bernie Sanders.

.

[Transcript] 2:11 P.M. EST – THE PRESIDENT: Okay, thank you very much. I had a great conversation this morning with President Moon of South Korea. And we obviously discussed the upcoming trip next week, where we’re going Hanoi, in Vietnam. And I look forward to be with Chairman Kim, and I think a lot of things will come out of it.

We had a tremendous first summit. That was really breaking the ice, but a lot of things came from that, including good relationships. And we’re looking forward to having a very good meeting. And President Moon and I discussed, I think, probably every aspect of the meeting; it was a good conversation. I’ll be speaking tomorrow with Prime Minister Abe of Japan, and we’ll be having a similar conversation. So I think next week is going to be very exciting.

It’s going to be the second summit. I think a lot can come from it — at least, I hope so — the denuclearization, ultimately. I’m in no particular rush. The sanctions are on, the relationships are very strong, and a lot of good things have happened.

We’ve gotten our hostages back. The remains are coming back. Vice President Pence was in Hawaii when the first large number, actually, had come. And now, certain have been identified. Their families members have found out exactly what’s going on, and they’ve had ceremonies that are absolutely beautiful. That was an incredible event.

In fact, when we were campaigning, so many people would say — even though it was many years ago, they would say, “Is it possible to get the remains back from North Korea?” So we’ve done that. And as you know, there’s been no testing of rockets, missiles, or nuclear.

So we’re in no rush. A lot of the media would like to say, “Oh, what’s going on? Speed, speed, speed.” No rush whatsoever. We are going to have our meeting; we’ll see what happens. And I think, ultimately, we’re going to be very, very successful.

When I became President, the relationship with North Korea was a very dangerous one for the world, and I think now it’s far less dangerous. And there’s a lot of sanity, a lot of really sane thinking.

So he looks forward to it; I look forward to it. And the talk with President Moon, and tomorrow with Prime Minister Abe, I think will be very helpful.

Today, I’m thrilled to sign a new order taking the next step to create the United States Space Force. So important, when you look at defense, when you look at all of the other aspects of where the world will be someday. I mean, this is the beginning. This is a very important process.

First, I want to recognize our wonderful Vice President, Mike Pence, who serves as the Chairman of the National Space Council. Thank you, Mike. Great job. I know you feel the same way I do.

I also want to thank Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan, who is with us; Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson; Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Paul Selva; and the Executive Secretary of the Space Council, Dr. Scott Pace for being here today.

They’ve all worked very hard on the Space Force. They all believe in it very strongly, as I do. It’s the future. It’s where we’re going. I suspect, whether we like it or not, that’s where we’re going. It’s space. That’s the next step, and we have to be prepared.

Our adversaries and — whether we get along with them or not, they’re up in space. And they’re doing it, and we’re doing it. And that’s going to be a very big part of where the defense of our nation — and you could say “offense” — but let’s just be nice about it and let’s say the defense of our nation is going to be.

America must be fully equipped to defend our vital interests. Our adversaries are training forces and developing technology to undermine our security in space, and they’re working very hard at that.

That’s why my administration has recognized space as a warfighting domain and made the creation of the Space Force a national security priority. I think we’ll have great support from Congress, because they do support something when we’re talking about such importance. And a lot of the generals, a lot of the people involved have been speaking to Congress. And we have some very interesting dialogue going on.

We’re investing in new space capabilities to project military power and safeguard our nation’s interests, especially when it comes to safety and defense.

This directive calls on the Secretary of Defense to develop a legislative proposal that will establish the structure and authority of the Space Force as the sixth branch of the United States Armed Forces. That would mean a high-ranking — the highest-ranking person there would go on to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. So it’s a very, very important deal.

The Space Force will organize, equip, and train the next generation of warriors to deter aggression and defend the nation, our allies, and American interests against hostile actions in the form of space and taking place in space.

So we have a lot of things on the books. We have a lot of new defensive weapons and offensive weapons designed specifically for this, and now we’re going to start taking advantage of. This is something they could have done sooner but they decided to wait. And here I am, and we’re going to do it. And I’m very proud that, during my administration, we’re doing so much in space. We need it.

We’ve already taken historic action to create the United States Space Command, as you know, within the Department of Defense to oversee the nation’s military space operations.

Now, in the face of these threats all around the world, American leadership in space is more important than it ever has been. Before, it used to be something that we’d aspire to, we’d talk about, but we wouldn’t do anything. Now we have to do something because that’s where it’s at.

With today’s action, we will ensure that our people are secure, our interests are protected, and our power continues to be unmatched. There will be nobody that can come close to matching us. It won’t be close.

What we have on the books are things that you wouldn’t even believe. You wouldn’t even believe. It’s going to mean the safety of our nation for many, many decades and many, many generations, and that’s what I’m here for. I guess when you get right down to it, more importantly than anything else, that’s why I’m here.

So I just want to thank everybody. The Space Force is a very important part of my administration and it’s a very important part of this nation. And it’s an honor to be with you all. And I’ll sign and we will then maybe take a few questions and ask a few. You may want to say something. In fact, Mike, why don’t you start off? You’ve been — you and I have been working on this very hard. Why don’t you say a few words? Please.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: We have. Thank you, Mr. President. From the first days of this administration, President Trump has made national security a priority. We’ve secured historic investments in our national defense.

But from very early on, the President also said that America needed to be as dominant in space as we are on the Earth. And now, with this fourth Space Policy Directive, America is leading in space once again.

But in this respect, the President is calling on the Department of Defense to fashion what we have literally been working on for months, consulting with members of Congress and military experts. It will be a legislative proposal that will establish the United States Space Force as the sixth branch of our armed forces.

It will build on the President’s leadership of a United States Space Command, a joint combatant command that we’ve already organized at the President’s direction. But this is now the foundation of ensuring that even as we are dominant in space today, now we’ll begin to bring all of our resources together under U.S. Space Command, which will operate under the Department of the Air Force. And in so doing, we’ll ensure that we bring the best resources and the best minds together to protect the American people and advance our interests.

And, Mr. President, all the members of the National Space Council and the agencies that are a part of it are gathered behind you today —

THE PRESIDENT: That’s right.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: — and we thank you for your leadership and your support in this effort.

THE PRESIDENT: Some great talent, I will say that. Would you like to say something? You’ve helped us so much. Please, Paul.

GENERAL SELVA: Sir, you’ve been incredibly supportive in bringing space to the fore as not only a domain of potential warfare, but also recognizing it as a place where a large amount of our economic power comes from. And so our job to protect our national security includes protecting our economy as well. And so, as your Vice Chairman, the Joint Chiefs endorse all this effort to make sure that we get the right emphasis on defending our interests and our assets in space.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much, Paul. Patrick? How about you?

ACTING SECRETARY SHANAHAN: Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Secretary.

ACTING SECRETARY SHANAHAN: This is a historic moment. The dawn of a new service. I’d like to thank you for your leadership and, most importantly, the resources so that we can do our job.

Mr. Vice President, thank you for pushing us. We’ve come quite a distance in a very short period of time.

And then to my counterparts here, thank you for all the remarkable teamwork. We will deliver the capability better, sooner, faster so we can sustain our margin of dominance.

Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much.

Maybe John Bolton — you’ve been very much involved and I know how you feel about it.

AMBASSADOR BOLTON: Well, this is a visionary project, Mr. President — your leadership, the Vice President, and really everybody on the Space Council. This is not something for the next year or two, or even the next six years. This is on into the century. A place where, as President Kennedy once said, “I believe space is a new ocean and the United States must sail upon it.” And you’re taking the steps to make sure that, from the national security perspective, the United States will be dominant on that new ocean.

THE PRESIDENT: And we will be. Okay, thank you.

Anybody have anything to say? Huh? Would anybody like to say? Fine? No? Good. We’re all (inaudible). (Laughter.) Right? We’ve said enough. Let’s sign. Let’s sign. It’s very exciting.

(The directive is signed.)

So how about we give this one to Paul? Mike, do you want to do that? Okay. Come on, Paul. That’s a big deal. (Applause.)

It’s very important. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you.

Q Mr. President, there’s another round of trade talks starting this week here in Washington.

THE PRESIDENT: That’s right.

Q How confident are you that it will be finished by March 1? Or are you considering extending that deadline?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, they are very complex talks. They’re going very well. We’re asking for everything that anybody has ever even suggested. These are not just, you know, “let’s sell corn or let’s do this.” It’s going to be selling corn but a lot of it — a lot more than anyone thought possible. And I think the talks are going very well — with China, you’re referring to?

Q Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: And the talks are going very well.

Our group just came back and now they’re coming here. I can’t tell you exactly about timing, but the date is not a magical date. A lot of things can happen.

The real question will be: Will we raise the tariffs? Because they automatically kick in to 25 percent as of — on $200 billion worth of goods that they send. So I know that China would like not for that to happen. So I think they’re trying to move fast so that doesn’t happen. But it’s — we’ll see what happens.

I can only say that the talks with China on trade have gone very, very well. In the meantime, our economy is very strong. We’re doing well.

I don’t know if you noticed, but deficits seem to be coming down. And last month it was reported, and everybody was surprised, but I wasn’t surprised. We’re taking in a lot of money coming into our Treasury from tariffs and various things, including the steel dumping. And our steel companies are doing really well. Aluminum companies also. So we’re very happy about that.

I think that it’s — they’ll be coming very shortly. They’re going to have very detailed discussions on subjects that have never really been even discussed by people that sat in this chair and they should have been. Very important subjects. And I think we’re doing very well. Okay?

Q (Inaudible) terrorists from Pakistan have been — struck, inside India, 40 security persons last week. How do you see this issue? What’s the message to Pakistan?

THE PRESIDENT: I’ve seen it. I’ve watched. I’ve gotten a lot of reports on it. We’ll have a comment at the appropriate time. It would be wonderful if they got along. It seems like that was a horrible situation. But we’re getting reports. We’ll have a statement to put out. Okay? Thank you very much.

Q Mr. President, did you ask Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker to change the leadership of the investigation into your former personal attorney, Michael Cohen?

THE PRESIDENT: No. Not at all. I don’t know who gave you that. Just more fake news. A lot of — there’s a lot of fake —

Q (Inaudible) story in the New York Times.

THE PRESIDENT: — there’s a lot of fake news out there. No, I didn’t.

Q What is the current status of your relationship with Mr. Whitaker?

THE PRESIDENT: Very good. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Whitaker. I think he’s done a great job. He’s a very, very straight shooter. I watched him during the hearing — some of it. I thought he was exceptional. He’s a very fine man and he should be given a lot of thanks by our nation.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Q Mr. President, what’s your reaction to the lawsuits yesterday filed by the states against your executive order?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think I called it exactly, right? Including the fact that they would put them in through the Ninth Circuit. That’s where they put them in. And I think we’ll do very well.

We have absolute right to do that. I have an absolute right to call a national security. We need strong borders. We have to stop drugs and crime and criminals and human trafficking. And we have to stop all of those things that a strong wall will stop. I could call it a barrier, but I think I don’t have to do that so much anymore. We’ll call it whatever we want.

But the point is that we have to have a stoppage. Billions and billions of dollars of illicit things are pouring through our border. And, you know, we talk about points of entry, and one of the things that we do have is a lot of money now from points of entry, because everything was given. The money was given — so much that you almost don’t know what to do with it — by Congress. But when it came to the wall, they wanted to hold back because it was politics. That’s all it is.

In fact, I hear the Democrats want to take down all walls along the southern border. And if they do that, you’re going to have a very different country. But they’re not going to do that. They wouldn’t. First of all, they won’t do it because they know it’s wrong. They know walls are necessary, maybe more than we do. But they’re playing a political game. And their new game is, “Let’s take down all walls.” I saw where Beto wanted to take down walls. I said — they asked me, “What do you think?” I said, “Well, I think that’s probably the end of his political career.”

We’re doing very well on the wall. We’re building a lot of wall right now. You know that. In the valley, we’re doing tremendous work in a very important area. We have a lot more under negotiation right now. We’re working with the Army Corps of Engineers. They’re fantastic. And a lot of great things are happening.

I think, in the end, we’re going to be very successful with the lawsuit. So it was filed — it was filed in the Ninth Circuit. And I actually think we might do very well, even in the Ninth Circuit, because it’s an open and closed case.

I was put here for security — whether it’s Space Force, which we’re doing today, or whether it’s borders. Because if our nation doesn’t have borders, we don’t have too much of a nation, especially when drugs and all of the things that — you know better than anybody what’s happening at the border. It’s a bad situation. So I think we’re going to do very well with the lawsuit.

Okay?

Q Just one more on Vietnam. You said — you referred earlier to your meetings in Vietnam. What do you want to achieve during that summit?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’d just like to see, ultimately, denuclearization of North Korea. I think we will see that ultimately. I have no pressing time schedule. And I think a lot of people would like to see it go very quickly from the other side.

I really believe that North Korea can be a tremendous economic power when this is solved. Their location between Russia, China, and South Korea is unbelievable. I think that North Korea and Chairman Kim have some very positive things in mind, and we’ll soon find out. But I’m in no rush. There’s no testing. As long as there’s not testing, I’m in no rush. If there’s testing, that’s another deal. But there has been no testing.

If you look at the end of the Obama administration, it was a disaster what was going on. You don’t have that right now; it’s a much different feeling. I think people have — there’s always danger, but I think people have a much different feeling.

So I hope that very positive things are going to happen. I think that it will be a very exciting couple of days.
Thank you all very much.

Q Your reaction to Bernie Sanders running for President?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, Bernie Sanders is running. Yeah, that’s right. Personally, I think he missed his time. But I like Bernie because he’s — he is one person that, you know, on trade, he sort of would agree on trade. I’m being very tough on trade. He was tough on trade. The problem is he doesn’t know what to do about it. We’re doing something very spectacular on trade.

But I wish Bernie well. It will be interesting to see how he does. I think what happened to Bernie maybe was not so nice. I think he was taken advantage of. He ran great four years ago, and he was not treated with respect by Clinton. And that was too bad. I thought what happened to Bernie Sanders four years ago was quite sad as it pertains to our country. So we’ll see how he does.

You’ve got a lot of people running, but only one person is going to win. I hope you know who that person is.

Goodbye, everybody.

END 2:31 P.M. EST

Another Very Sketchy McCabe Interview – McCabe Obfuscates Details, Clouds Timeline and Embraces Gang-of-Eight…


The best thing for an examination of the 2016/2017 seditious effort is for former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe to keep talking.

In this NBC interview McCabe attempts to cleverly obfuscate the original July 31, 2016, FBI counterintelligence investigation (Crossfire Hurricane/”Spygate”) with the second investigation he launched on May 10th, 2017.

.

Worth noting is McCabe talks about briefing the IC congressional oversight group known as the ‘Gang of Eight’ in May 2017. [Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Richard Burr and Mark Warner]

Here is where the actions of Paul Ryan and Adam Schiff to remove Devin Nunes from active engagement with the Russia probe in March 2017 comes into play.

Remember during the 2016 election Harry Reid was Senate Minority Leader and Gang of eight member. Also, Dianne Feinstein was vice-chair of the Senate Intel Committee and was part of the gang-of-eight; however after the 2016 election Feinstein abdicated her position and Harry Reid retired. In 2017 Harry Reid was replaced by Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein was replaced by Mark Warner.

2016 Gang of Eight  (During “Spygate”)

After the Trump inauguration Devin Nunes found out about the unmasking of Trump campaign officials (via Spygate operations) in/around March 2016. The unmasking requests were part of the Obama PDB (presidential daily briefing). After discovering the activity, and viewing the PDB material at the White House SCIF, Nunes made public statements highlighting his alarm over the unmasking issues and what was contained in the material he reviewed.

In response, and with the media/democrats having fits about Nunes statements, Speaker Paul Ryan subsequently removed Nunes from his responsibilities as Chair of the HPSCI as it pertained to specific matters involving the Russia Probe.

Therefore it is probable Nunes was carved out of the May 2017 McCabe briefing by intentional design of the overall political effort.  Someone needs to ask Nunes about this for clarity.

UPDATE: Shortly after posting this article, we get an answer.  McCabe and Rosenstein wanted Devin Nunes removed from briefings – they failed, and Nunes remained:

[…] “Nunes was suspected of having surreptitiously been given intelligence by presidential aides during a nighttime rendezvous at the House, information that was then publicized,” McCabe writes. “Look who’s here, I said to Rod. Rosenstein understood. He went to talk to Nunes, pulled him aside. Came back, told me, Nunes is staying, he says he’s not recused from this, he refuses to leave.”

And it worked.

“I look at Rod,” McCabe writes. “Rod said, At the end of the day it’s his recusal, it’s his choice, I can’t enforce it. We can’t kick him out of the room.”  (read more)

2017 Gang of Eight: (McCabe Briefing)

The synergy of anti-Trump politicians in positions of power (both parties) and the corrupt efforts of the intelligence community to usurp the 2016 election has always been visible. The only question has been: to what extent?

To what extent did Republicans, specifically Senate Republicans, coordinate with John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey and later Andrew McCabe?  This has been a pondered sideline question without any substantive investigative review.

Throughout 2016 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) was transparently the epicenter of the Decepticon effort to support any effort to stop candidate Trump.  After the election it was the SSCI who was attempting covert contact with Christopher Steele and many of the players behind “Spygate”.  It was from this corrupt committee where Security Director James Wolfe was identified as leaking information to the media.

As Andrew McCabe keeps talking perhaps people will start to turn their inquires toward those Senate co-conspirators….. though, given how far the DOJ and FBI went to cover-up the activity of Mr. Wolfe, I wouldn’t count on much reaching sunlight.

FUBAR.

Former FBI Officials React to Andrew McCabe’s Soft Coup Admissions…


Kevin Brock, former FBI assistant director for intelligence, and Terry Turchie, former deputy assistant director of the counterterrorism division, discuss former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s admissions of intent to usurp the presidency.

The Small Coup Group…

Wilbur Ross Completes Section 232 Report – Auto Industry Executives Going Bananas….


Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has completed the section 232 investigation on the auto industry, reviewing the sector as a vital economic interest for continued national security.

The content of the investigative finding is unknown. The Commerce Department has privately delivered the 232 report directly to the White House. However, with the possibility of the report empowering President Trump to implement 20 to 25% import auto tariffs industry executives are proactively going bananas.

An important aspect here is that the USMCA (U.S., Mexico and Canada) agreement exempts the trilateral North American pact from any auto tariff fear. If the vehicle consists of 75% North American (USMCA) content, there’s no tariff.

At the 30,000 ft level, the USMCA deal positioned the U.S. and Mexico to retain their current multinational investments; and through a series of sector-by-sector standards on origination the deal simultaneously closed the fatal NAFTA loophole.

The USMCA agreement makes an economic manufacturing partnership between the U.S, Mexico and Canada; and for assembly products third parties will have to produce parts and origination material within the U.S. and Mexico.

U.S.T.R. Lighthizer put some details forward:  ♦The NAFTA Loophole closure is explained in Summary Form HERE; with emphasis on the Auto-Sector.  The key is a 75% part origination level for auto-assembly; and a 40-45% level for parts with a minimum $16/hr wage rate.  The source-origination rate (75%) is even higher than all previously forecast USMCA negotiation predictions.

Example of downstream consequences/benefits:  German auto-maker BMW recently built a $2 billion assembly plant in Mexico (almost complete).  Most of their core parts were coming from the EU (steel/aluminum casting components) and/or Asia (electronics).  Now the assembly plant will have to source 75% of the auto-parts from the U.S. and Mexico, with 45% of those parts from facilities paying $16/hr.

As a direct result of the USMCA agreement BMW made an announcement in November they were exploring additional parts manufacturing facilities within the U.S. for their engines and transmissions.  BMW needs to modify their supply chain and build auto parts in the U.S. and Mexico:

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – BMW (BMWG.DE) is considering a second U.S. manufacturing plant that could produce engines and transmissions, Chief Executive Harald Krueger said on Tuesday, shortly after a report that U.S. President Donald Trump would impose tariffs on imported cars from next week

Additionally, with the KORUS (Korean-U.S.) bilateral trade deal now cemented there would be no impact to South Korean auto imports (Kia etc) from a 232 decision.  However, any EU, China or Japanese automaker who is not currently inside U.S.M.C.A operations could be subject to an application of a countervailing duty.

Specifically because of the scale of the industry, German Chancellor Angela Merkel is the most at risk from a lack of an overall U.S-EU trade deal.  This potential 232 auto tariff is a big stick to get the EU to the bargaining table.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Commerce Department sent a report on Sunday to U.S. President Donald Trump that could unleash steep tariffs on imported cars and auto parts, provoking a sharp backlash from the industry even before it is unveiled, the agency confirmed.

Late on Sunday, a department spokeswoman said it would not disclose any details of the “Section 232” national security report submitted to Trump by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. The disclosure of the submission came less than two hours before the end of a 270-day deadline.

Trump has 90 days to decide whether to act upon the recommendations, which auto industry officials expect to include at least some tariffs on fully assembled vehicles or on technologies and components related to electric, automated, connected and shared vehicles.  (read more)

Don’t forget there’s already an existing 25% tariff on imported trucks and SUV’s, that’s why most foreign automakers opened truck and SUV auto-plants in the U.S. over the past two decades.   BMW builds their SUV’s in South Carolina.  Volkswagen builds SUV’s in Tennessee.  Mercedes now builds their SUV’s in Alabama, and Toyota builds in Princeton Indiana as well as Canada.   Volvo has also moved all their SUV building to South Carolina.

It is doubtful President Trump will actually pull-the-trigger on tariffs for cars; however, as said, his ability to do it is a massive stick to get both the EU and Japan to commit to a renegotiated bilateral trade agreement.

President Trump Speech on Venezuela from Miami


Today President Trump is delivering a speech in Florida to Miami’s Venezuelan community.  The speech is being delivered at Florida International University in Miami and the anticipated start time is approximately 4:25pm EST.

UPDATE: Video Added

WH Livestream Link – Fox News Livestream (active) – Alternate Livestream (active)

.

Joe diGenova Discusses McCabe 60 Minutes Interview….


Joe diGenova calls in to WMAL radio to discuss Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein and the Sixty Minutes interview.

FAKE NEWS is not limited to the USA


IMG_1700

 

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; When I raised your name to an investor who was indeed biased toward gold, he said you were a front for bankers trying to keep gold suppressed and sent me an article where they quote you stating bankers are worth every penny they get. Do you tell the press that bankers are worth every penny they get? Is this true?

HT

ANSWER: That article I believe was deliberate FAKE NEWS. It was published in the actual newspaper the night of the debut of the Forecaster in London. I had received numerous people sending in emails telling me that the London Evening Standard was printing an article that contradicted the movie. When I looked online, yes I saw it said, Martin Armstrong. However, the picture was a different person. I responded that no, it was just someone with the same name – not me.

To my shock, clients began sending in photos of the print edition. It was the same story, but in the actual print edition, they used my photograph. Online, they had the other Martin Armstrong. Sure, the London Evening Standard could claim it was just a mistake. Not sure how you have two different pictures and the main print edition carried my photo.

DOC-House-London

I believe it was FAKE NEWS because it was done the very night that the film was making a huge debut in London. Publishing this article and switching photos was curious given the timing that it was the grand opening for the film the Forecaster.

They seem to have created a huge controversy instead for the film was not only sold-out, but they also had to extend the showing another week because tickets were not even available and lot people were getting angry.

So perhaps the London Evening Standard I believe tried to prevent people from seeing the film and it backfired. That was probably why the film was banned in the United States and Switzerland.

Hillary’s Connections to Russia-Gate & Schumer’s Resolution to Prevent Any Investigation in the Magnitsky Act?


One of the gaping questions that have gone unanswered is why has Mueller not taken Putin up on his offer to go question the Russian intelligence officer he has indicted in Russia? Putin said he would allow Mueller and his team to travel to Russia and be present at the questioning of 12 Russian military intelligence officers the special counsel previously indicted for hacking into the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and the emails of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman. Putin wanted to question the former American diplomat, Michael McFaul who was appointed by Obama. Interestingly, it was Senator Chuck Schumer who introduced on 07/19/2018 the resolution to deny Putin to question any Americans including Bill Browder. John McCain, the sponsor of the Magnitsky Act, led the charge among Republicans to support Schumer’s resolution to deny any investigation into the Magnitsky affair. The Senate vote was a resounding 98-0 to deny the questioning of ANY Americans by Russia. This is one of the most curious cover-ups in modern history even after the questionable report that was released on the Trump Tower Meeting that was all about the Magnitsky Act.

The tail gets even more interesting when we look closer at the infamous Trump Tower meeting Mueller has been investigating. Russian-born lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin worked closely with the research firm Fusion GPS which commissioned the infamous Steele Dossier on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC to smear Trump and begin the entire Russia-Gate affair. Interestingly, Akhmetshin also attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting.

Natalia Veselnitskaya was the Russian lawyer who also attended the Trump Tower meeting and in turned US prosecutors later retaliated and charged her with a single count of money laundering.  To add further to all of these coincidences, one of the lawyers involved in the Trump Tower meeting was Scott Balber, who also worked on my case and was familiar with the Russian connection involving Edmond Safra and Republic National Bank and his assassination (Death in Monaco). Yet Akhmetshin and Veselnitskaya worked with Fusion GPS in an effort to expose the truth behind the Magnitsky Act. Fusion’s main task was investigating Bill Browder, the London-based financier whose lobbying efforts led to the Magnitsky Act passage. (see also the film Behind the Scenes Magnitsky Act)

I have stated many times that I was asked to invest $10 billion into Hermitage Capital by Republic National Bank. Edmond was the major shareholder. This is the fund that Browder claimed he was Putin’s number one enemy and Magnitsky was not a lawyer but an accountant. There would have been no incentive for Putin to have killed Magnitsky for he would have been a witness against the entire cabal of bankers seeking to take over the Russian government by blackmailing Yeltsin to step down and stuff in their puppet Boris Berezovsky, who flees to London when Putin comes in an amazingly interesting incident hangs himself in Britain (see the movie the Forecaster).

The ultimate client for Fusion GPS, Akhmetshin, and Veselnitskaya was Katsyv, whose firm, Prevezon Holdings, which was sued by the Justice Department for allegedly laundering money stolen during the tax fraud scheme uncovered by Magnitsky. Interestingly, Prevezon’s payments to Akhmetshin and Fusion GPS were routed through its U.S. law firm, BakerHostetler. That arrangement was the mirror-image of its work for the Clinton campaign and DNC. On that project, Perkins Coie, the law firm for the Democrats, paid Fusion GPS $1 million to investigate Donald Trump’s ties to Russia. BakerHostetler paid Fusion GPS $523,651 in 2016. Entangled in this entire affair is not just Hillary’s paying Fusion GPS to create the dossier on Trump and the strang banning of Ambassador McFaul appointed by Obama and any possible connections with Fusion GPS. Most interesting is the fact that Bill Browder also donated money to Hillary. He donated $17,700 to Clinton and another $297,000 to the Democratic National Committee.

Also entangled deeply is the Bank of New York Money Laundering case for $7 billion and of course the involvement of Republic National Bank working with people in the US Treasury sending skids of $100 bills to Russia in the affair known as the Money Plane.

Here is what CNN Money wrote on September 1st, 1999 12 days before my case began:

The saga that’s brought money laundering issues to the fore this summer allegedly began back in 1994, when Russia’s International Monetary Fund representative, Konstantin Kagalovsky, left the organization to join Menatep Bank in Moscow. 
Over the next three years, it’s alleged, Kagalovsky arranged to funnel billions of IMF money meant to help transfer Russia’s communist economy into a capitalist one through a private company called Benex Worldwide Ltd. Eventually, the money went into and back out of Bank of New York (BK) and Republic National Bank, a unit of Republic Bancorp (RBNC), as well as several institutions in Europe, including the Union Bank of Switzerland AG and Deutsche Bank AG and its Bankers Trust Unit.

Now the burning question the US press will not address is why does Putin want to question a former American Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, who was denied a Russian visa in June 2014 and subsequently banned from entering the country for his supposed “active participation in the destruction of the bilateral relationship and relentless lobbying in favor of a campaign to pressure Russia,” Foreign Ministry officials told Reuters at the time. Essentially, Putin was after U.S. State Department internal memos from 2009 and 2010 drafted in Moscow about the investigation into the Magnitsky case. The Russian agency’s official spokesman, Alexander Kurennoi, told the news agency Interfax that McFaul is one of the Americans suspected of involvement in Browder’s illegal activities alleged by Russia.

Chuck Schumer wants Muller to indict Trump, but he will not allow any investigation into the DNC and Hillary’s involvement in this entire tangled web of intrigue.

Andrew McCabe 60 Minutes Interview – Moments and Excerpts – Also: Did McCabe Leak The Michael Flynn Phone Call?…


McCabe “Duping Delight”

Tonight CBS broadcast a painstakingly edited interview between host Scott Pelley and former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

The transparently political CBS media corporation has skin-in-the-game when it comes to broadcast politics.

Former CBS Vice-President David Rhodes is the brother of President Obama’s senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes.  You might also remember when CBS 60 Minutes intentionally hid a quote from President Obama when Obama denied the Benghazi attack was carried out by “terrorists” [STORY HERE].

60 Minutes has a history of unethical journalistic conduct in covering for the Obama administration.  So it didn’t surprise anyone who follows politics to see Andrew McCabe’s first interview being carried out within this very specific propaganda machine.  Here’s a few “non broadcast” portions of the interview.

NOTE at 03:33 of this video snippet a characteristic called “duping delight“:  The pleasure of being able to manipulate someone, often made visible to others by flashing a smile at an inappropriate moment. [Watch the moment at precisely 03:33]

In this video segment Andrew McCabe says Rod Rosenstein asked him to contact James Comey for advice about appointing a special counsel — after Comey’s firing:

.

Expanded segment where McCabe describes Rod Rosenstein discussing how to use the 25th Amendment to remove President Donald J Trump:

.

Andrew McCabe: Duping Delight

Note from the Office of Inspector General invesgitation, Andrew McCabe has a history of lying to cover his tracks:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/376296306/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-IkIgjc3szdKINfgMHWaC

.

And don’t forget, Andrew McCabe was also likely the person who leaked the content of the Mike Flynn phone call between Flynn and Russian Abassador Kislyak.  A massive leak of classified information:

Within the case against Michael Flynn…. Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then again on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appears to be obfuscating to the court is there was factually a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview.

Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations. It seemed he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

We know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017. The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

Obviously the interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe, on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading.  The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it.

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/395906943/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-djoN4ekdK25ysiMBEvgu

.

Supreme Court will Take Up the Census Argument for 2020


The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Trump administration’s plan to determine who is and who is not a U.S. citizen during the 2020 Census. The justices agreed Friday to squeeze the controversial case on to their April calendar, because the decennial Census questionnaire is scheduled for printing this summer. A federal district judge in New York struck down the plan last month, ruling that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross exceeded his authority when he announced the inclusion of the citizenship question. The district judge’s order is very strange and it appears to be really off the charts. He wrote:

“The evidence at trial, including from the government’s own witness, exposed how adding a citizenship question would wreck the once-in-a-decade count of the nation’s population.”

“The inevitable result would have been – and the administration’s clear intent was – to strip federal resources and political representation from those needing it most.”

What is very strange here is that the Constitution does not state that non-citizens have any rights whatsoever to vote. The press has really clouded this issue and made it seem that Trump is some sort of racist because of this issue. However, as it currently stands, even a legal immigrant with a Green Card has the right to vote if over 18, but they can only vote in local and state elections that don’t require you to be a U.S. citizen. Unfortunately, green card holders are already prohibited from voting in federal elections – but they do pay taxes to work here in the USA. I lived in London and even had a British drivers license. I paid taxes there but never had the right to vote.

The right to vote is RESTRICTED to citizens. Even someone legally present in the USA cannot vote in federal elections. The seats in Congress are allocated according to the census which is to be taken in 2020. Let us say that California has 50% composed of  immigrants both legal with green cards as well as illegal. They are fighting this matter because they get resources from the Federal Government and they have seats in Congress based upon the census. So if 50% were non-citizens, then California should have 50% less seats in Congress.

If I were on the Supreme Court I would have to vote in favor of the Trump Administration for it is inconsistent to allow seats in Congress to be allocated for people who are not citizens and cannot legally vote. The entire argument seems to be about simply not deporting people. I have no problem with a someone who came here as a child and was raised in the USA staying in the USA. They should be instructed to (1) become a citizens or (2) then leave. Citizens pay taxes federally BECAUSEthey have a Social Security number. They also vote. Why should people who cannot vote somehow be represented in Congress? It just does not seem to be consistent with the Constitution.