Senate Finance Committee Passes USMCA Trade Agreement – Submits For Full Senate Vote…


Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley held a mark-up hearing today to review the USMCA and vote the agreement out of committee.  After debate the agreement passed with a 25-3 vote.  Pat Toomey (R-PA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) voted against the agreement (full hearing video below)

The USMCA is now sent to the full Senate for a vote this month; however, it is interesting to hear the reasons why Toomey, Cassidy and Whitehouse oppose it.

Senator Whitehouse (D) opposes USMCA because it doesn’t address climate change and have the provisions within it to support the Paris Climate Treaty.  Senators Toomey (R) and Cassidy oppose USMCA because it is not friendly to the Wall Street multinationals.

Senator Toomey doesn’t like that the Senate cannot change the USMCA to make it more favorable to the Wall Street multinationals who are invested heavily in China.  Toomey, speaking on behalf of several, noted the Trans-Pacific-Partnership (TPP) is a better trade construct.  Quite a remarkable mask-dropping was visible during the hearing.

Obviously, the Senate is the epicenter of the Decepticon coalition.  The Decepticons are U.S. Senators who focus exclusively toward the construction of legislation, policy and economic issues that benefit large U.S. Wall Street multinational corporations.   The USMCA is adverse to those interests as it focuses maximum value to those business entities who are invested in a North American manufacturing and production economy.

(VIA CNBC) […] The agreement has also split up the 2020 Democratic presidential field. Former Vice President Joe Biden backs it. While Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., has indicated she will support the deal revised to include Democratic changes, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has opposed the pact.

Mexico has ratified the trade agreement. Canada may not approve it until later this month. The agreement does not take effect until all three nations ratify it.

The U.S. exports more goods to Canada and Mexico than any other countries.

Trump’s impeachment could complicate the Senate’s efforts to pass the deal. After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sends House-passed articles of impeachment to the Senate, the chamber will start a trial on whether to remove him from office.

The speaker has not pushed impeachment to the other side of the Capitol as Democrats pressure Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to call witnesses. Without a trial, the Senate has more flexibility to quickly pass USMCA.

“If it can be brought up before the impeachment vote, it’d be very important to get this — the sooner it gets done, for the good of the economy, the better,” Grassley told reporters after the committee voted for USMCA. He noted that impeachment would have to take priority over other matters if it comes before the Senate.  (read more)

Advertisements

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Holds a Press Briefing….


Earlier today Secretary of State Mike Pompeo held a press briefing to discuss the ongoing issues with Iran and Iraq.

The Decline & Fall of Religion?


In truth, everything has its cycle. There is no escaping this reality upon which the entire universe was created. There has been a steady decline in church membership which has been consistent with perhaps the politically correct movement with the broader societal trends that also manifest in the declining church attendance. There appears to be a rising trend of an increasing proportion of Americans with no religious preference which is strikingly similar to the decline in religion which took place within the Roman Empire.

Indeed, Constantine’s (309-337AD) decision to decriminalize Christianity within the Roman Empire was a turning point for religious change cyclically. It was the year 313AD, when Constantine and Licinius issued the Edict of Milan decriminalizing Christian worship. Constantine thus became a great patron of Christianity but keep in mind his mother, Helena, was a devout Christian.  She searched all the holy places and constructed churches over them from where Christ was born to where he was crucified.

Note that the medallion pictured here showed Constantine with Sol, the sun god. The cult of Sol was becoming the supreme god even among the pagans – Sol Invictus (invincible sun because it roise every day no matter what). Constantine had set a precedent for the position of the Christian emperor within the Church and raised the notions of orthodoxy, Christendom, ecumenical councils, and the state church of the Roman Empire was officially declared by edict in 380AD. However, Constantine was not really such a devout believer. He adopted Christianity because the movement was rising substantially when people prayed to the pagan golds and nothing happened. The Christians exploited that and argued that the reason their pagan protectors failed was because they did not exist. The pagans, on the other hand, persecuted Christians because the barbarian invasions and the fall of the Roman Empire was taking place because the gods were angry at the Christians.

Constantine sought to be the sole emperor. He really wages civil war. He took a risk to move against Maxentius’ forces which greatly outnumbered his own. Constantine descended through the Genevre Pass and entered Italy. Several battles were fought as Constantine neared Rome itself. The final battle came on October 28th, 312 AD at Milvian Bridge. It was this battle where Constantine I claimed to have had a vision of Christ and marched against Maxentius under the Christian symbol of the cross. Despite the biased historical accounts, the Battle of Milvian Bridge was less of a battle between Christianity and paganism as it was a battle for power and control. While Maxentius may have been a pagan, he did not persecute the Christians and in fact built the first Christian church in Rome. Many of his own troops were Christians. No doubt, Constantine realized that placing the cross on the shield of his army would disrupt his opposing force. Many were Christian and were reluctant to kill a fellow Christian. It was a brilliant move.

Maxentius-Basilica

Historians have written much of the Battle of Milvian Bridge. It has been characterized as the battle between Christianity and Paganism. As Maxentius’ troops began to retreat across a temporary bridge constructed upon boats, Maxentius fell into the water when the bridge collapsed along with thousands of his troops. His armor proved too heavy and thus he drowned in the waters of the Tiber. That ended the battle.

It is not certain when Jesus Christ was actually born. The census that is the story of having to travel to Bethlehem was actually the Census of Quirinius which took place in 6AD after Herod I the Great had died and the Romans were dividing Judaea into thirds among Herod’s sons. There is no actual evidence of Herod issuing an order to kill the firstborn males when in fact he clearly died about 10 years before. Such an order would have to have been issued by one of his sons, yet there is no surviving evidence to support that as fact.

Nevertheless, our model does place a turning point about late 3AD when most scholars agree that Jesus was born based primarily upon the Census of Quirinius. We then have in 312AD the victory of Milvian Bridge by Constantine the Great who then decrees that Christianity will be the state religion primarily so he got to plunder all the wealth of pagan temples. It is rather stunning how we come to major religious events every 309.6 years. This appears to be a change in beliefs that do not necessarily suggest complete changes in religions. Often these are shifts that become more fundamentalist in their beliefs or a turn toward liberalism.

There are two primary cycles. First we can look at the cycle of change in religion which seems to follow the 309.6 year cycle which is, of course, the 8.6-year frequency. The second is to look at the derivative of the 8.6-year which produces a target for a major collapse in religion, which is underway at this time, by 2033.

From the Battle of the Milvian Bridge which took place between the Roman Emperors Constantine I and Maxentius on the 28th day of October 312AD (312.824), it was 309.6 years until the rise of Islam. At the age of 40 in 610AD, Muhammad is said to have received his first verbal revelation in the cave called Hira.

This was the beginning of the writing of the Quran that continued up to the end of his life. There was also the persecution of the newly converted Muslims like there had been among the Christians. Muhammad and his followers migrated to Medina in 622AD, an event known as the Hegira and the birth of the Islam calendar (622.298).

The next cycle produced the target where we see the beginning of pilgrimages to the Middle East during the 10th century. The belief that the world would end come the year 1,000 was very prominent, so much so that the English King Aethelred II (978-1016AD) replaced his image on the coinage with the symbol of Christianity – the lamb. We seem to fear whole even numbers like the 2000 Y2K bug which was going to destroy all computers.

The next target was 1241 which was the year of the Great Mongol Invasion. Poland fell to the Mongols that year who are eventually beaten back. We also see in this cycle was a new trend of Antipopes when France seized the Catholic Church and installed French popes as puppets of the French king that became known as the Avignon Papacy. This was the period from 1309 to 1376 during which seven successive popes resided in Avignon. The Seventh Crusade was a crusade led by Louis IX of France from 1248 to 1254. This was the cycle that we see Constantinople fall to the Turks in 1453.

The next cycle turning point began in 1551 when the Council of Trent reconvened to deal with the Protestant Reformation. This cycle also marks the attempt of Islam to conquer Europe and impose Islam as the state religion. The invading army was the new Ottoman Empire, which was defeated at the Battle of Vienna which took place on the 12th of September 1683 after the imperial city had been besieged by the Ottoman Empire for two months. The peak of that cycle arrives 212 years from the beginning. That was 1763 and the start of George II restrictions placed upon Americans which led to the American Revolution, which was also about the freedom of religion.

This brings us to 1860 and this is the beginning of the American Civil War, which was rooted in a religious question concerning slavery. This current cycle will reach its peak in 2072 and the next will begin in 2170. We are clearly moving toward a clash of philosophies both within Christianity as well as among different religious foundations. As we move into that major turning point, we will see rising discontent and religious confrontation engulf the world. In the USA, we have the liberal v conservative confrontation which is also incorporating the religious right and anti-abortion movements v women’s liberation factions. They see this as plain and simple – thous shalt not kill. Yet this is inconsistent with the idea of war itself. Perhaps it is ok to kill someone if the government tells you to do it?

This is part of the religious cycle as well. We will also see the conflict between Christianity and Islam build in Europe. This will be no different from the anti-immigration movement that surged into gun battles on the streets of Philadelphia during the economic depression that followed the Sovereign Debt Defaults by states during the 1840s. As the economic decline picks up speed from 2018 into 2020, the tensions against immigration will only rise. This is also behind the separatist movements in Europe.

 

 

While we are currently in the Seventh Wave 309.6-year cycle following the birth of Christ, from a pure cyclical perspective, the next turning point in 2072 may be a significant religious change. What comes, can only be subject to speculation. We have completed six waves of 309.6 years. The Seventh is where major change and conflict will be unleashed. However, if we just look at Christianity, from the Edit of 313AD decriminalizing this religion, then 2 x 8.6 = 17.2. Therefore, 1720 years from 313AD brings us to 2033 which aligns with the Sixth Wave of the ECM – 2032.

Further confirmation that we are in a major Private Wave is that the belief systems also shifts not merely away from government (Public v Private) but also from formalized religion and even sports. The evidence is very clear that church memberships have been declining. The various church membership data reflected the steady decline from the 76% level to the 50% level. There has been rising discontent even within the Catholic Church over the left-wing statement of Pope Francis. He has been alienating many Catholics. He has adopted the climate change agenda and supported the United Nations in this anti-industrialization movement. He has also adopted the Piketty argument against capitalism supporting the Marxist view of economic inequality. Many feel he has abandoned the faith since one of the Ten Commandments is thou shall not covert what other people have. This has led many to question if he is not just expressing his personal beliefs disguised as religion.

What is clear is that under Pope Francis, the finances of the Church has been declining significantly. Some argue it is due to his political statements that are not grounded in religion. There is a rather famous Italian investigative journalist, Gianluigi Nuzzi, whose new book, Universal Judgmentis the latest in a string of reveling dispatches on financial crises which he has helped to uncover within the church. In his latest book, he warns that the Vatican will run out of funds by 2023. Certainly, the attendance is declining sharply. His previous book, Merchants in the Temple, focused on the internal corruption in the Vatican bank.

 

CNNi Becky Anderson -vs- State Dept. Spox Morgan Ortagus


CNNi  (CNN international) via Becky Anderson, based out of Abu Dhabi, attempts to push a false propaganda narrative against State Dept Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus.   Things didn’t work out as planned.  The pontificating Anderson was left speechless.  Funny.

Ms. Anderson intentionally ignored the E-3 Statement of support from earlier today and attempted to push a narrative of the U.S. being isolated within the international community.  Mrs. Morgan Ortagus shredded the CNNi narrative engineer.  WATCH:

Jim Jordan Contrasts President Trump Foreign Policy Accomplishments Against Impeachment Fraud…


Representative Jim Jordan discusses the ongoing impeachment fiasco and Pelosi still withholding the articles from the Senate; and contrasts the DC nonsense against the foreign policy accomplishments of President Trump.

Senator Mitch McConnell Delivers Remarks About Soleimani Strike During Chamber Speech…


Earlier today Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered remarks about the U.S. strike in Iraq that killed terrorist Qassem Soleimani:

.

[Transcript] “As the Senate convenes this afternoon, we find our nation facing two grave and serious choices. One concerns our unity at home and the future of our Constitution; the other involves our strength abroad and the security of our homeland.

‘Both situations demand serious, sober treatment from Congress. Both require that we put enduring national interests ahead of the factionalism and short-termism the founding fathers warned us about.

‘But unfortunately, seriousness is in short supply lately from the determined critics of President Trump. And our nation is worse for it.

‘Last Thursday, the United States took decisive action to end the murderous scheming of Iran’s chief terrorist.

‘Qassem Soleimani had spent years masterminding attacks on American servicemembers and our partners throughout the Middle East and expanding Iran’s influence. Despite sanctions, despite prohibitions by the UN Security Council, he roamed throughout the region with impunity.

‘His hands bore the blood of more American servicemembers than anyone else alive. Hundreds of American families have buried loved ones because of him. Veterans have learned to live with permanent injuries inflicted by his terrorists. And in Iraq, in Syria, and beyond, the entire region felt the effects of his evil tactics.

‘We should welcome his death and its complication of Tehran’s terrorism-industrial complex. But we must remain vigilant and soberly prepare for even further aggression.

‘Now, it is completely appropriate this decision would generate interest and questions from this body. We can and should learn more about the intelligence and thinking that led to this operation and the plan to defend American personnel and interests in the wake of it.

‘I’m glad that the administration will hold an all-senators briefing on Wednesday. It will be led by Secretary of Defense Esper, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Milley, Secretary of State Pompeo, and CIA Director Haspel.

‘Unfortunately, in this toxic political environment, some of our colleagues rushed to blame our own government before even knowing the facts… rushed to split hairs about intelligence before being briefed on it… and rushed to downplay Soleimani’s evil while presenting our own president as the villain.

‘Soon after the news broke, one of our distinguished colleagues made a public statement that rightly called Soleimani a “murderer”… but then, amazingly, walked that message back when the far left objected to that factual statement. Since then I believe all her criticism has been directed at our own president.

‘Another of our Democratic colleagues has been thinking out loud about Middle East policy on social media. Mere days before President Trump’s decision, this senator tore into the White House for what he described as weakness and inaction. “No one fears us,” he complained, “Trump has rendered America impotent in the Middle East.”

‘But since the strike — a total 180. The same senator has harshly criticized our own president for getting tough. Ludicrously, he and others on the left have accused the administration of committing an illegal act, and equated the removal of this terrorist leader with a foreign power assassinating our own Secretary of Defense.

‘Here’s what one expert had to say about that. Jeh Johnson, President Obama’s own former Pentagon general counsel and Secretary of Homeland Security, said, quote:

If you believe everything that our government is saying about General Soleimani, he was a lawful military objective, and the president, under his constitutional authority as commander in chief, had ample domestic legal authority to take him out without an additional congressional authorization. Whether he was a terrorist or a general in a military force that was engaged in armed attacks against our people, he was a lawful military objective.

‘That was President Obama’s DHS secretary.

‘And our former colleague Senator Joe Lieberman, the former Democrat Vice-Presidential nominee, wrote this morning that “In their uniformly skeptical or negative reactions to Soleimani’s death, Democrats are… creating the risk that the U.S. will be seen as acting and speaking with less authority abroad at this important time.”

‘That’s how a former Democrat Senator sees this.

‘Look — the Senate is supposed to be the chamber where overheated partisan passions give way to sober judgment.

‘Can we not wait until we know the facts? Can we not maintain a shred, just a shred, of national unity for five minutes before deepening the partisan trenches?

‘Must Democrats’ distaste for this president dominate every thought they express and every decision they make? Is that really the seriousness that this situation deserves?

‘The full Senate will be briefed on Wednesday. I expect the committees of oversight will also conduct hearings and that senators will have plenty of opportunities to discuss our interests and policies in the region.

‘I urge my colleagues to bring a full awareness of the facts, mindfulness of the long history of Iran’s aggression toward the United States and its allies, and a sober understanding of the threat Iran continues to pose.

‘We are all Americans first and we are all in this together.’”

[End Transcript]

Oh Noes – France Warns U.S. Reciprocal Tariffs Will Lead To “Durably Damaged Relations”…


Any headline that uses the phrase “France Warns” immediately requires a background review to understand the big picture driving French fears.

Just like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau thinking he could outwit President Trump’s policies on NAFTA trade (he failed), Trudeau’s bestie, French President Emmanuel Macron, has stupidly exhibited similar shortsightedness.  In the case of both leaders their weasel moves have put their nations’ into a precarious economic position.

To consider the future for France, it would be wise to remember last year when President Trump arrived to attend the G-7 in Biarritz, France, President Macron was waiting at the Hotel du Palais to ambush Trump for an unscheduled luncheon (pictured below):

This was just one example in a series of scripted weasel-moves played by Macron in an attempt to pontificate his importance for the international audience.  Another example from the same event was Macron inviting the Iranian foreign Minister to the G7 for sideline meetings unrelated to the topics being discussed in Biarritz.

In an effort to create leverage against the U.S. position, President Macron never discussed his Iranian invitation -in advance- with the U.S. delegation.  It did not go over well.

The EU, and specifically France, have a dependence on foreign energy sources as a result of their ridiculous climate policies and narrow thinking.  In essence the EU wants to do business and receive oil from Iran; however, U.S. sanctions against Iran forbid those business deals.  Ergo Macron attempted to inject influence and position his interests.

As stated, the ambush approach did not go well, but POTUS played it cool.

There have been several other efforts by Macron to undermine U.S. policy out of self-interest.  In each attempt President Trump has noted the issue but never actually directly responded to the moves.  President Trump continues to speak warmly about Macron but is obviously clear-eyed on the small-man lack of character aspect.

Inside this game of snark and weasel-moves President Trump has refrained from disparaging the weasel yet continually reminded Macron, and other EU leaders, about their continued lack of honoring their obligations: (1) not funding 2% GDP for NATO defense; (2) not taking back ISIS fighters; (3) becoming more energy dependent on Russia for natural gas [Nordstream 2]; (4) one-way tariffs; and (5) not having a trade perspective toward the U.S. based on reciprocity.

As a result of the EU’s intransigent selfishness; in combination with an ongoing attitude of pontificating elitism; President Trump has no disposition to grant any favorable terms on anything.   This is the background for United States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer calculating a $2.4 billion pending tariff against French products as a result of France’s desperation for income and deciding to tax U.S. digital services:

PARIS (Reuters) – French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire warned the United States on Monday that any retaliation to France’s new digital services tax could “deeply and durably” damage relations.

Washington has threatened to impose duties of up to 100% on imports of champagne, handbags and other French products worth $2.4 billion (1.8 billion pounds) after a U.S. government investigation found the French tax would harm U.S. technology companies.

“If the Americans decide to go ahead and impose sanctions against the digital tax … in this case we would retaliate,” Le Maire told France Inter radio.

“If there were to be sanctions, and it is a possibility that we will take sanctions, we would immediately contact the WTO (World Trade Organisation)”, he added.

Le Maire said he had sent a letter on the issue to U.S. trade negotiator Robert Lightizer and was also going to discuss it with U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin by phone.

“If the U.S were to decide to impose trade sanctions against the EU over the French Digital Services Tax, it would deeply and durably affect the transatlantic relationship at a time when we need to stand united”, the minister wrote in the letter seen by Reuters.

Le Maire also said in the letter that France was “in touch with the European Commission and other EU Member States on the subject” and that they were “contemplating the various options to defend our trade rights in a proportionate and determined manner, as we have in the past,” .  (read more)

With the USMCA completed, and with most of the key Asian trade deals finished – sans the watching to see approach with China phase one, the next logical move for President Trump to address the trade imbalance will be to turn attention toward Europe.

The EU is still benefiting from the same trade deals constructed during the Marshal plan. President Trump will use tariffs to fundamentally change this relationship.  The WTO already handed the U.S. legal authority against the EU for a $2.5 billion tariff as a result of the Boeing case.  Combine that with Lighthizer’s calculated $2.4 billion against France and you can easily see how severe these economic weapons will be.

With Britain leaving the EU; and with Germany, France and Italy already suffering from a lack of investment and shrinking sales of industrial products – the EU economy is a sitting duck for President Trump to target.  There is no-way France can lead the charge for a tariff battle against the United States….

As a result watch for them to make geopolitical moves and attempt to threaten Trump over their relationship with Iran in an effort to find leverage.  Predictably U.S. media will attempt to position the EU as victims of President Trump just like they did with China in 2018.

However, unlike China, the EU is precariously positioned as a feather vulnerable to the economic hurricane President Trump can unleash.   This should be fun.

Rush Limbaugh Interviews President Donald Trump – Transcript and Audio/Video


Earlier today President Trump called in to the Rush Limbaugh show for an interview about current political events.  [Transcript Below]

RUSH: Welcome back the EIB Network, and Rush Limbaugh back at it after a couple of weeks off for Christmas. Not much happening. We are happy to have here with us the president of the United States, Donald Trump. It’s so great to have you back here, sir. Thank you for joining us.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you, Rush, very much.

RUSH: Okay. I have had a lot of people say to me — they’re reacting to the media reaction of the action we took, that you took against the Quds Force commander in Iran. Mr. President, people are being scared to death, their kids are being scared to death out of their minds that somehow this is gonna start World War III, that we are now more unsafe than we have ever been. Could you explain to people why what you’ve done here makes us safer, why it was necessary, and why what we did was right.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, this should have been done for the last 15 to 20 years, him in particular. He was their real military leader. He’s a terrorist. He was designated a terrorist by President Obama, and then Obama did nothing about it except give them $150 billion and — even more incredibly — $1.8 billion in cash. You hear me talking about that all the time, and you talk about it all the time. He gave them all this money. He never wanted to do anything about it. President Bush should have taken him out. He’s responsible for the IEDs.

Those are the roadside bombs and the bombs that blow up all over the place — and then the sister, which is the big one, the big version, that actually knocks out tanks and kills everybody within earshot. A really horrible weapon. He’s responsible for all those incredible young people over at Walter Reed — where they do such a great job, by the way — where they lose their arms and their legs and all. He gave so much of that technology. Much of that stuff was made in Iran. And he should have been taken out a long time ago. And we had a shot at it, and we took him out. And we’re a lot safer now because of it. We’ll see what happens. We’ll see what the response is, if any. But you’ve seen what I said our response will be.

RUSH: Well, yeah.

THE PRESIDENT: Our country is a lot safer, Rush.

RUSH: They said they’ve got 21 targets they’re looking at, and you came back and said, “Fine. I’ve got 52 of yours.” I don’t think that they are accustomed to a president like you, sir. I mean, you just mentioned it. Obama basically appeased them. Obama worked with this guy on the Iranian nuclear deal. What…? A lot of things had to surprise you when you assumed office and found out some things that had been done previously in policy. What was the purpose of American policy with Iran prior to your presidency?

THE PRESIDENT: I don’t think they had a purpose. I don’t think they knew what was happening. Why did he give them $150 billion, much of it going back into terror? If you look at what’s happening…

When I first came into office, I went to the Pentagon, and they showed me 18 “sites of confliction,” meaning conflict, over there. And every one of them was started by Iran, either their soldiers or they paid for soldiers, soldiers for hire. I have no idea what they tried to do with appeasement.

And I can tell you, the Logan Act… If there was ever an act that should have been used, they should look at the Obama administration and John Kerry, the Logan Act, because what he was doing with Iran and the relationship that they built up and the things that he said, I would certainly love to see that be looked at because I think John Kerry was… Personally, I think he was advising them. I think that the Obama administration was just letting them get away with murder — in the true sense murder.

And, you know, right after they made the deal, it wasn’t like they were respected. They treated the United States worse than ever before. In fact, I said, “At least give him a little respect,” because they treated… They got worse. They actually got more hostile. They took the $150 billion and they took the $1.8 billion in cash, and they got worse. And if you remember, right before the payment was made, they took 10 sailors.

And they humiliated those sailors, and they humiliated our country with the sailors down on their knees. And the only reason they released them was they wanted their first payment. It was just before the payment. If they had taken them after they got the money, they would have never released them. They’d be there now. Well, they would be there now with me. But they would be there for a long period of time. But you remember the 10 sailors that were —

RUSH: Yeah.

THE PRESIDENT: — 15 feet across the line, probably they weren’t. They don’t even know if they were in Iranian waters. But they said they were slightly in Iranian waters. So they humiliated them. But they released them because the money was due the following day, and they said, “Oh, we don’t want to…” Hey, why should they turn down $150 billion over the 10 sailors? But they humiliated those sailors and our country.

RUSH: Well, he also lifted sanctions on Soleimani as part of the Iran deal. And it looks like, to me, anyway, that Obama looked and that administration looked at building Iran up as some way stabilizing the region. As though Israel’s not the good guys, as though we’re not the good guys, that Iran needs to be made stronger — this is what they believed — otherwise that whole region is kind of a tinderbox. But the thing that really is true about this is the Middle East has changed in priority. Because of the massive improvements made in domestic energy in the United States, we’re no longer dependent on that region.

THE PRESIDENT: Right. Right. Well, it’s right, and one of the things that changed… I know you talk about it. If you go back 10 years or eight years or maybe even five years, Israel was the king of the Congress, right? Our Congress protected Israel and fought for Israel. Now you look at the way the Democrats in Congress are treating them, where you have AOC and you have Tlaib and you have Omar, and they are actually, you know, anti-Semitic. They are totally against Israel. The things that they’ve said…

You go back to the past and you look at the things that they’ve said about Israel and Jewish people, it’s incredible. Ten years ago, that would have been unacceptable. It would have been… It would have been… Nobody could have even believed it. I still can’t believe it! You know, I’m a little bit old-fashioned, right, in that sense, ’cause I’ve grown up and there was always great protection and reverence for Israel, and now it’s the opposite. In the Democrats, it’s almost… It’s almost a negative. They’re going out and what they do for Tlaib and what they do for Omar — Representative Omar, Minnesota — and AOC, I think it’s incredible the way they talk about Israel. It just was unthinkable to do that 10 years ago and sooner.

RUSH: I actually think that you’ve had a role in driving them even more insane than they were. Let me give you some evidence. Let’s go back to the day you came down the escalator and announced your candidacy. You announced the slogan Make America Great Again, and all of a sudden, Make America Great Again becomes some wildly controversial prospect. And I’m asking myself, “What in the world is controversial at all? How can anybody disagree with America being great, becoming great, remaining great?” and yet it was. How do you explain that?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, you know, politics has changed a lot over the last couple of years. For instance, I want low taxes. They want to raise your taxes. How do you think that works? I couldn’t win as a politician. I don’t think Abe Lincoln could win as a politician. Borders. They want open borders. When you see the people that we’re sending back and we’re capturing now at record levels, in many cases they’re murderers and they’re people, they’re drug dealers, and it’s incredible. They want open borders. That means all of these people are gonna be pouring in.

And, of course, good ones will come in too. But you have tremendous numbers of really bad people, including murderers and rapists and others. They want open borders. They want sanctuary cities. They don’t want a strong military based on everything — I mean, we have to fight like crazy to get the strong military, and we have to give up things that we wouldn’t give up if we had the House, as an example, if we were able to have enough. You know, we’ve always needed their vote because it was always very close.

In fact, the first two years we had a very, you know, tiny majority, so we always needed their votes. But when you see they want higher taxes, right? They want much more regulation. You know, I cut regulations more than any president in history by far, even though they were there for four and eight years and in one case more than that, we’ve got the all-time record, that was probably as important or more important as the tax cuts, the biggest — including Ronald Reagan, the biggest tax cut we’ve ever had.

And we’re actually taking in more revenue now than we did when we had the higher taxes because the economy’s doing so well. But, you know, when you see them with open borders, Rush, you say — and sanctuary cities and all of these other things, you say, “Where are they coming from?” Well, Israel is sort of the same. I put that in that same category. As far as I’m concerned, they’re anti-Israel, totally anti-Israel.

RUSH: Well, it’s always perplexed me that you have drawn them out. They have now — with Twitter in the past two or three days since the attack on Soleimani, you literally have the Democrat Party and elements of that party openly supporting Iran, an enemy of the United States, openly supporting the terrorist actions of that country, and this is a country that beheads homosexuals and transgenders –

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah.

RUSH: — and has no human rights for the very constituency the Democrat Party claims to represent. Yet here they are tweeting their support for these people –

THE PRESIDENT: Right.

RUSH: — simply in opposition to you.

THE PRESIDENT: That’s amazing. Like, as an example, take the wall. They were always for the wall. And then I wanted it, and they went against it. In fact, I said if I had it to do again, I would have come out totally against the wall and I would have gotten their votes. Okay? All I had to do was come out against the wall. “I am opposed to building the wall.” And we would have gotten all the votes we needed.

No, it’s almost like they’ll try and do whatever is the opposite. I think they’ve lost their minds, you want to know the truth. I really do. It’s a terrible thing to say. Nobody’s ever seen anything like it. Like even impeachment hoax, you take a look at that, and they have nothing, they have nothing. With one of the biggest investigations in history, they found nothing, the Mueller report, they found absolutely — think of it — they spent $45 million, two years, it’s a hoax.

They spent all of that time, all of that money, had brilliant people that happened to be, you know, very, very — they were crazed — they were crazed. I mean, these people were dying to find something on Trump. They found nothing. I think there’s very few people that you’ve ever met who could have had that. They had so many investigators, they were calling people that I haven’t seen in years, and they got nothing.

Think of that, nothing. Very few people — and, by the way, I’m sure they looked at my taxes, they looked at everything you had to look at, they looked at everything. And $45 million, and much more than that in the true sense, you know, the real sense, it was much more than that. And they had 18 — I used to call them 13 angry Democrats, but they increased it to 18 angry Democrats –

RUSH: Full party.

THE PRESIDENT: — and very smart. Many were tied up with Clinton. They were involved with Clinton. But these people couldn’t find anything on Trump. They would have loved — if I had a parking ticket, it would have been a major story. They found nothing. Even I was very impressed with how clean I am, Rush.

RUSH: You ought to be. You may be cleaner than any previous president that we could think of. Anyway, I gotta take a quick time-out. We have President Trump with us for the remaining part of the program, the last of the half hour, and we’ll continue with him right after this.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: And we are back with President Trump. You mentioned the impeachment hoax. Nancy Pelosi has not delivered these two articles of impeachment that are, frankly, both of them are jokes. What do you suspect is happening here with this? What is the politics of this? What are they trying to achieve here? I mean, I know throw you out of office and all, but what’s the point here, not sending these articles over?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think what they’re trying to do is affect the election illegally. That’s what they’re trying to do. But the reason that they’re not sending it because they’re — they are a joke. They are not crimes. There is nothing there. They found nothing. We went through two years of a Mueller report, you know that better than anybody, nobody covered it better. And we went through two years —

RUSH: I think I’m more frustrated by it than you are. You’ve had to deal with it. But it makes a lot of us livid —

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah.

RUSH: — because there’s nothing, everything to this has been made up. It’s worse than a hoax, the first part of it was a coup, and this is just the continuation of it.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, it’s so sad for our country. I mean, think of it. We’re fighting with Iran, we’re fighting with all of these different places, and in many cases doing great, making trade deals, doing so good, our country is doing so good, but I have to spend and my team has to spend time on this stuff. They found nothing. Just think of that. For two years an unlimited budget, unlimited talent and they found nothing, and they came up with two articles that aren’t even a crime.

RUSH: Well, there was nothing to find. It was all made up. I mean, that’s the frustrating thing here. It was all made up. There was nothing to find. There was nothing to investigate.

THE PRESIDENT: They created a situation that was false, that was fraudulent, and then they investigated the false, fraudulent situation, and they found nothing. It’s hard to believe. The whole thing’s hard to believe. And now on top of it, they come up with two articles and they put it before — now, what happened is she doesn’t want to get a vote because how can anybody possibly — it’s totally partisan. You know, this is not what they had in mind as they call them the founders, right, they keep saying the founders, founders, but the founders didn’t have this in mind. You understand, it’s like I’ve never heard the word “founders” so much in my life.

RUSH: They don’t have anything in common with the founders anyway.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah. We got I guess 196 or 197 to nothing with the Republican Party, plus we had three Democrat votes, and one person actually left the Democratic — the Democrat Party over it and joined the Republican Party, as you know.

RUSH: Speaking of which, the Republican Party hasn’t been this unified in I don’t know how long.

THE PRESIDENT: Never. It’s never — they say maybe never. And one thing I gave the Democrats credit for, they’ve always been very vicious, and they — and that’s not necessarily a good thing, but what is a good thing is they always stuck together. And here the Republicans stuck together even better than the Democrats. So we had, like, 196 or 197 to nothing. It’s unheard of. You know that because they’re always breaking off and — I don’t know — and this is really for 70 years, 80 years, you know, for some reason it’s in the DNA, they just don’t seem — and in this case they have been so good. And I think the Senate will be the same way ’cause the Senate knows it’s a hoax. Everybody knows it’s a hoax.

RUSH: The Republican Party’s now the party of Trump, I mean, there’s no question about it.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I just think it’s the party of common sense. You know, I view it — somebody said, “Are you conservative?” Well, I’m conservative, but I think it’s common sense. It was — like what we did two days ago with this horrible terrorist. He was a terrorist, you know, they don’t want to call him a terrorist. Now the Democrats are trying to make him sound like he was this wonderful human being.

RUSH: He was a poet. Yeah, he was a poet.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, he’s a poet.

RUSH: He’s reading poetry out there.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, when you read the New York Times and you read the Washington Post, that are totally fake newspapers, by the way, that would have both been out of business except I won, I wonder what happens in — hopefully in five years, right? Hopefully in five years. But I wonder what happens to those newspapers. Who knows. But they do well now, although if you look at the unfunded liability probably they don’t do so well.

But you look at what they write, it’s so fake, it’s so phony, and now they’re trying to build him just like they did al-Baghdadi. Al-Baghdadi was the number one terrorist in the world. We got him. They wrote very little about it, relatively speaking. That story disappeared very quickly, as you know. But they tried to build him up into a relatively wonderful man. He was a total bad guy –

RUSH: Yeah.

THE PRESIDENT: He founded ISIS. He was doing it again. He was trying to do it again. You know, I wiped out ISIS. During our administration, we wiped out the entire caliphate — a hundred percent of the caliphate — and we wiped him out and, you know, got little credit. But our people know that we did it, Rush, because of people like you and Sean Hannity and Mark Levin and so many others. Your friends at Fox & Friends in the morning are so good. You know, people are getting it. They really get it. And because of social media and my Twitter. Without Twitter, I think we’d be lost. We wouldn’t be able to get the truth out.

RUSH: Yeah, that’s a good point. People still say to me, “You need to ask him to stop tweeting so much.” I tell ’em, “Look, it’s the only way he can get his message out, and it’s not a negative at all.” People say, “He needs to dial back the drama, needs to dial back the chaos.” I disagree with that talk.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah.

RUSH: I think you’re doing exactly what you have to do, given the circumstances presented to you.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I wish I didn’t have to do it. I wish we had legitimate newspapers and legitimate media. We don’t. I mean, it’s… Much of it is really… I call it corrupt. It’s the corrupt media. It’s — and, you know, it’s very interesting. You understand this better than anybody. If they do a story on me, I immediately know if it’s false or not false — and I don’t mind a bad story if it’s right. But I know. A person reading the story doesn’t know that it’s false, so I’m able to tell ’em through social media.

RUSH: Right.

THE PRESIDENT: I don’t even call it Twitter. I call it social media, ’cause it goes to everything. You know, it goes to Facebook, it goes to Instagram, and we have hundreds of millions of people. You know, we have a tremendous amount of people. Just on one site I’m up to, I guess, close to 70 million people.

RUSH: Yeah, they’re jealous as they can be of that too.

THE PRESIDENT: Now, for Facebook, I had dinner —

RUSH: Of course they want you to stop.

THE PRESIDENT: I had dinner with Mark Zuckerberg the other day, and he said, “I’d like to congratulate you,” in front of a large group of people. So I’m not… (chuckles) But he said, “I’d like to congratulate you, you’re number one on Facebook,” and, you know, it’s incredible, and that’s —

RUSH: Wait a minute! Wait a minute. You had dinner with Zuckerberg?

THE PRESIDENT: I did. I did. I had dinner with him.

RUSH: Oh-ho! Wait ’til the world finds out about that.

THE PRESDIENT: Oh, I know.

RUSH: I guess they just did.

THE PRESIDENT: You have semi-breaking news. I guess a couple of people might have reported it but they’re not like you. So I just got a list, the TSL Power 50. The number one show on radio has a guy named Rush Limbaugh. Did you ever hear of him, Rush Limbaugh?

RUSH: (laughing)

THE PRESIDENT: Number 1. Have you? This is the 50 “most influential and listened to streaming talk show[s] in the country,” Rush Limbaugh number 1. So I hope you saw that. But now we’ve just made your interview.

RUSH: (laughing)

THE PRESIDENT: But your viewers have to know that. Your listeners have to know that. Number 1. Great job.

RUSH: Thank you, sir. You know, your timing is impeccable. You’re a broadcast specialist from The Apprentice and so forth, and you’ve gotten right up to the break here. I can’t thank you enough for this. I wish we had even more time. People love you, sir —

THE PRESIDENT: Well —

RUSH: — and they are grateful, and they know that you still are focused on them —

THE PRESIDENT: I love ’em.

RUSH: — that you’re still implementing the agenda that you ran on.

THE PRESIDENT: I love ’em. I love ’em, Rush.

RUSH: They know that too. Thank you so much for your time and have a great, great rest of this day and year.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you. Thank you.

RUSH: I hope it’s the greatest year of your life, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you very much, Rush, and thank you for everything, and congratulations on your incredible success. I really… It’s so important for this country what you do. Thank you very much, Rush.

RUSH: Thank you, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks. Bye.

U.S. Led Coalition Announces Troop Withdrawal and Reposition From Iraq…


Several days ago CTH pondered the possibility part of President Trump’s decision-making would be intended to provoke a request by Iraq for the U.S. to leave the region….

The United States-led military coalition against Islamic State said on Monday that it was pulling out of Iraq and would be repositioning forces over the next few days and weeks. The authenticity of this letter has been confirmed:

Perhaps this is why Senator Lindsey Graham was so ‘out-of-sorts’ yesterday.  A request for the U.S. to leave Iraq was not against the interests of President Trump; however, it was against the interests of Lindsey Graham’s war-council.

Speaker Pelosi can modify and change all of the War Power resolutions she wants to; it matters not.  President Trump’s preferred weapons are not kinetic, they are economic.

January 3rd:

TheLastRefuge@TheLastRefuge2

By President Trump going full Red Wedding on the Iranian crews in Iraq he could be forcing the Iraqi government to ask us to leave….

🤔 wait a min.. POTUS wants to leave.. So maybe he’s creating a self-fulfilling prophecy and also maximizing the exit value?

View image on Twitter
615 people are talking about this

Trump is not Obama!


TRUMP IS NOT OBAMA

“Perhaps it would have been a better idea to send him (Soleimani) $1.7 billion in unmarked bills, in pallets on planes in the dead of night, so he could kill more Americans?”  Ted Cruz rips the Obama Administration

Let’s not forget how Iran was enriched after billions in sanctions were removed, thanks to Obama’s Iran nuclear deal. Let’s not forget Obama’s outrageous ransom payment to that theocratic nation.

Four American hostages were released after Obama delivered $1.7 billion in untraceable cash on pallets. Let’s not forget that he allowed Iran to make currency exchanges for dollars, thus allowing them access to west’s financial system and billions of dollars more. Was any of this money funneled into Iran’s proxy wars of terror? Of course it was.

Obama’s weakness, stupidity, and fawning generosity only encouraged and emboldened Iran to advance their interests in the Middle East by means funding forces such as Hezbollah and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. They also assigned their own Quds Force, which is part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, to engage in nefarious activities outside their own border. According to Wikipedia, the Quds Force reports directly to the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei. General Soleimani, who was obliterated by Trump’s missile attack, had led the Quds force. The general was responsible for hundreds of American deaths over the past two decades. Now Khamenei wants revenge.

This sort of revenge stuff has been going on in the Middle East for eons, which is one of the main reasons the United States shouldn’t be over there to begin with. The conflicts in that region are never-ending, not solvable, and not in our interest. Trump was right when he talked about the Middle East being nothing but ’sand and death.’

Regardless, Obama’s actions helped finance Iran’s terrorist activities, which led to the deaths of more Americans in the Middle East.

Let’s not forget that.

—Ben Garrison