Tag Archives: James Comey

Mar 25 2018

09:50 – Doesn’t Add Up. Never Has. Never Will. 09:50 The FBI Lied, Not Steele…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 25, 2018 by

Senator Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo.  99.99% of the interview is country club Senator Graham repeating the same South Carolina white wine spritzer talking points he’s famous for.  That is to say lots of words amounting to nothing. The gastric equivalence of cucumber and mayonnaise triangle sandwiches on crust-less Wonder bread with a side of celery.

However, there is a reminder at 09:50 of a key and important point that tries to surface yet continues to get whacked down by the annoying duplicity of swamp creatures and a media that completely ignores the obvious.  Lindsey Graham claims Christopher Steele lied and told the FBI he never talked to media.

We do not know this to be true, and neither does he.

.

It is far more likely the FBI:… #1) Ignored Chris Steele talking to media because they needed his Clinton-Steele dossier for a false FISA application; and #2) the FBI later told congress they didn’t know about Steele talking to media, but they really did; and #3) the FBI falsified FD-302 reports of their interview with Chris Steele to cover their tracks.

Here’s how we know:

Christopher Steele had no motive to lie to the FBI about his media contacts.

The FBI had tons of motive to lie about their knowing Steele talked to the media.

It’s just common sense.

Christopher Steele wasn’t meeting in secret with the media, it was well known.  He was traveling around to meet them in August and September 2016.  Why would he lie to the FBI about such transparently well known action in October?  Answer: He wouldn’t.

Toward the end of December, the FBI provided the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, with FBI investigative documents (likely FD-302’s) from their contacts with Christopher Steele.  According to most reasonable timing we can discover Steele met with FBI officials sometime around October 1st, 2016.

From the U.K. lawsuit against Christopher Steele (pdf here), Steele admits to having shopped the Clinton-Steele dossier to U.S. media outlets “in person” in late September (New York Times, WaPo, New Yorker and CNN), and mid-October, 2016 (New York Times, WaPo, and Yahoo News), per instructions from Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS):

(Source – Page #8, pdf)

Additionally, in late October, 2016, Christopher Steele briefed Mother Jones via Skype.

According to the HPSCI intelligence memo, the FBI sought a FISA application based on the Steele Dossier on October 21st, 2016.  From the evidenced  UK court records at least two briefings with reporters, containing five outlets, took place prior to the FBI using the Clinton-Steele dossier in their FISA application.

The “late September” briefings with the New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker and CNN took place prior to Christopher Steele meeting with FBI officials early October.

The implication therein is that the FBI had to know prior to their October 21st, 2016, court application that the information they were presenting to the FISA court was being heavily shopped to media outlets. This would be immediately disqualifying.

However, in the released HPSCI memo, it is noted that Christopher Steele lied to the FBI about those media engagements taking place.  See:

The HPSCI memo notes the FBI relationship with Christopher Steele was terminated after the FISA application (Oct. 21st, 2016), as a result of the Mother Jones article from October 30th, 2016.  Media contact by an FBI material witness is immediately disqualifying.

The question is: did the FBI submit the FISA application under false pretenses?  Did the FBI actually know Christopher Steele was shopping the dossier to the media prior to their FISA court submission?

The HPSCI memo gives the FBI the benefit of doubt by presuming the FBI were unaware or “lied to“.

The FD-302’s (FBI investigative interview notes), which appear to have been turned over to Senate Chairman Chuck Grassley, could contain the evidence to support the FBI being duped; – OR – show the FBI knew, and proceeded in using the dossier despite disqualifying knowledge of media involvement; – OR – the FBI could have manipulated the FD-302’s.

These important questions loom over the FBI classified documents behind the Grassley criminal referral.

In an effort to get the answer to those questions into sunlight; and with the understanding that Chairman Grassley has the FBI documents; Grassley produced a memo for declassification that facilitates understanding how the FBI claims it used the Clinton-Steele dossier during their investigation.

On January 5th, 2018,  The Grassley Memo approach surfaced. Grassley issues a statement on the reason for the criminal referral. He lets us know that he ALSO has a classified memo that he is trying to get released! Unlike Nunes he needs to go through DOJ:

January 24th, 2018, Grassley Speech: “Hiding From Tough Questions” – In his 17 minute speech Grassley reveals important details about his investigation into Steele and the FBI.

Thanks to the brilliant work of DaveNYviii we can walk through this carefully, and watch the outline in a logical sequence.

FIRST – The Criminal Referral:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

SECOND – The Discrepancies:

“If those [FBI] documents are not true, and there are serious discrepancies that are no fault of Mr. Steele, then we have another problem—an arguably more serious one.”

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The FBI, via Agent Peter Strzok, was already caught (text messages with his co-hort Lisa Page) admitting to falsifying FD-302 material during this exact time frame.

At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.

On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:

September 2nd, 2016 FBI Press Release:

“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.

We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)

The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents.  On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview.  This investigative release was big news at the time.

The 302’s are the specific FBI forms used to document interviews/interrogations. They detail questions asked and answers given as well as who was present during the interview.

Inside the September 2nd, 2016, FBI release were two files:

•One file was 47 pages (full pdf here) and includes a full summary of the Clinton email investigation.

•The second file is 11 pages (full pdf here) and is the actual FBI investigator notes during the Hillary Clinton interview.

This second file is the “FD-302” (embed at the bottom for reference).  This is the 302 file FBI Agent Peter Strzok is referencing in the text message to Lisa Page.  Remember, Peter Strzok was one of the FBI people who actually interviewed Hillary Clinton.

What FBI Agent Peter Strzok is admitting in the September 10th text message, is that there are details within the interview of Hillary Clinton that he (and others) intentionally withheld from the September 2nd, 2016, release.

Specifically, evidence withheld in the 302’s would be some of the FBI questions and some of the Hillary Clinton answers to those questions.   In essence, the FBI held back actually releasing the full account of the interview.

According to the Strzok text message, the reason for withholding some of the details of the Hillary Clinton interview is because there are “very INFLAMMATORY things” within it; and once congress finds out what was withheld the details will “absolutely inflame” them.

Peter Strzok then goes on to say when/if the full FOIA is released, presumably post-election, Jim, Trisha, Dave and Mike are going to have to figure out how to deal with the discrepancy:

…”I’m sure Jim and Trisha and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that will play out as they talk among themselves.”

•”Jim” is likely James Baker, the disgraced Chief Legal Counsel for FBI Director James Comey.  He was busted out of a job right before congressional questioning.

•”Trish” is likely Trisha Beth Anderson, Office of Legal Counsel for the FBI.  [Anderson was hired for the DOJ, by AG Eric Holder, from Eric Holder’s law firm.]

•”Dave” was likely David Laufman the Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence.  Laufman sat in on the questioning of Hillary Clinton and resigned RIGHT AFTER these Strzok/Page text messages were released. [SEE HERE]

•And “Mike” was almost certainly Mike Kortan, the FBI Communications Director who also resigned right after the Nunes memo was released, when confronted by FBI Director Christopher Wray about an unauthorized FBI statement which attempted to undermine the HPSCI memo content. [See HERE and HERE]

So it would appear, James Baker and Trisha Anderson, the legal advisers at the top of the FBI leadership apparatus, in addition to Lisa Page the DOJ attorney assigned to the staff of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, were all legally aware the September 2nd, 2016, FOIA release was manipulated by the FBI to conceal part of Hillary Clinton’s questions and answers.

Perhaps now we can better understand the importance of this specific text message as it was released by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.

This message by Strzok shows a team of FBI officials intentionally conspiring to withhold “inflammatory” Clinton investigation evidence, from congress. And the decision-making goes directly to the very top leadership within the FBI.

Peter Strzok justifies his knowledge of the intentionally withheld 302 interview material by claiming: “because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation”.  However, to evaluate the filter this investigative team are applying we only need to look at the wording of their public release which accompanied the material:

Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. (link)

They felt obligated only to release information about “classified” or “improperly stored or transmitted” information.   That’s a rather disingenuous investigation.

There’s no mention of any FBI intent to investigate action or conduct undertaken by Hillary Clinton or her team to hide the use of classified or improperly stored information; or any intent to look at a cover-up, scrubbing, or conduct that happened AFTER it was discovered that she unlawfully used a personal e-mail server during her tenure.

We can see from the wording of the FBI public release, and the overlay of the text message from interviewer Peter Strzok, a deliberate effort to inquire into only the surface issues of classified information transmission and storage.  There was no investigative intent to go beyond that, and no information released, intentionally, that might disclose any larger issues.

If the FBI was legitimately conducting an investigation, and providing the subsequent evidence from within that investigation,  the FOIA would include all material relevant to the investigation, which would include all 302 (essentially Q&A) pages. However, the set of questions and answers the FBI released on Sept. 2nd 2016 was not the full set of Questions and Answers. They withheld something, likely “inflammatory”, per FBI Agent Strzok.

FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.

Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold  information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.

REFERENCE and RESOURCES:

File #1 of Document release – Investigation Summary:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/322860635/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-HWBLlhbfv51rhuuPdJ8r

File #2 – The Summary of Interview – The 302’s:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/322860731/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-u0DDwNVYNippWK8p67Xs

.

Mar 25 2018

Sunday Talks: Insufferable Wall Street Mouthpiece, Chris Wallace -vs- Treasury Secretary Mnuchin…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House  on March 25, 2018 by

Oh, here we go. Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch has a decades-earned nickname, “Mr. Wall Street”, Chris Wallace is the insufferable media mouthpiece for the financial interests of the guy who signs the front of his paycheck.  This is Wall Street -vs- Main Street.

.

When Main Street economic principles are applied Wall Street will initially lose. There’s no way for this not to happen. Most of Wall Street is built on the Multinational platform of economic globalism. Weaken the grip of the multinational corporations and financial interests on the U.S. economy and Wall Street will drop… this is not difficult to predict. This is also necessary.

U.S. stocks, centered around U.S. domestic companies, will go up. U.S. stocks, centered around multinational companies -invested heavily overseas, and dependent on exploitation of the U.S. trade deficit- will go down.

As Secretary Wilbur Ross, U.S.T.R. Robert Lighthizer and U.S. President Trump have previously affirmed, they are going to restore the U.S. manufacturing base or lose office trying.

Additionally, the U.S. GDP is measured by deducting the value of imports from the value of everything produced domestically.  Therefore, initially as the economy expands, and as more Americans have more money to buy more stuff, lots of the things they buy will come from overseas.  This increase in purchasing of imports drives down the GDP despite the overall economic activity expanding.

I hope everyone has been prepared with prior information on how the economic system works so we can understand this weird and predictable dynamic.  Increased consumer spending can actually drive down the GDP if the stuff we are buying is imported.

Mar 25 2018

Sunday Talks: National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro Discusses Confronting China…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 25, 2018 by

National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo for a discussion of ongoing trade initiatives.

Keep in mind, while simultaneously confronting China head-on, USTR Lighthizer has current trade deals, centered around reciprocity, being negotiated with: NAFTA [Mexico and Canada (round #7)], the EU, South Korea (almost done), Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Australia and Japan (almost done).

.

A rolling stone gathers no moss.

Mar 25 2018

Sunday Talks: Maria Bartiromo Interviews Devin Nunes…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House  on March 25, 2018 by

Maria Bartiromo has an interview with Devin Nunes encompassing multiple topics from China and Trade to the FBI/DOJ investigation.

.

HPSCI recommendations below:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/374810422/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-GIc3EXLab0ZWrW92UfKg

Mar 25 2018

Change of Plans – Due To Conflict diGenova No Longer Joining Trump Legal Team…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 25, 2018 by

President Trump is no longer planning to utilize the services or representation of the legal husband and wife team of Joseph diGenova and Victoria Toensing, within the ongoing Mueller probe, due to conflicts.

“The President is disappointed that conflicts prevent Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing from joining the President’s Special Counsel legal team,” his lawyer, Jay Sekulow, said in a statement. “However, those conflicts do not prevent them from assisting the President in other legal matters. The President looks forward to working with them.”

[…] DiGenova and Toensing released a statement on the announcement Sunday, saying: “We thank the President for his confidence in us and we look forward to working with him on other matters.”  (link)

Just guessing, but it doesn’t seem surprising there would be a conflict considering Toensing is representing an FBI whistle-blower in the Clinton Uranium-One scandal.

 

Mar 25 2018

Important Context: Understanding The Eagle, Panda and Red Dragon…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House  on March 25, 2018 by

Nuance and subtlety is everything in China.  Culturally harsh tones are seen as a sign of weakness and considered intensely impolite in public displays between officials; especially within approved and released statements by officials representing the government.

There is no doubt in my mind that President Trump has a very well thought out long-term strategy regarding China.  President Trump takes strategic messaging toward the people of china very importantly.  President Trump has, very publicly, complimented the friendship he feels toward President Xi Jinping; and praises Chairman Xi for his character, strength and purposeful leadership.

To build upon that projected and strategic message – President Trump seeded the background by appointing Ambassador Terry Branstad, a 30-year personal friend of President Xi Jinping.

To enhance and amplify the message – and broadcast cultural respect – U.S. President Trump used Mar-a-Lago as the venue for their visit, not the White House.  And President Trump’s beautiful granddaughter, Arabella, sweetly serenaded the Chinese First Family twice in Mandarin Chinese song showing the utmost respect for the guests and later for the hosts.

Why the constant warm messaging?

What is the purpose?

What does all this have to do with a trade confrontation?

Historic Chinese geopolitical policy, vis-a-vis their totalitarian control over political sentiment (action) and diplomacy through silence, is evident in the strategic use of the space between carefully chosen words, not just the words themselves.

Each time China takes aggressive action (red dragon) China projects a panda face through silence and non-response to opinion of that action;…. and the action continues. The red dragon has a tendency to say one necessary thing publicly, while manipulating another necessary thing privately.  The Art of War.

President Trump is the first U.S. President to understand how the red dragon hides behind the panda mask.

It is specifically because he understands that Panda is a mask that President Trump messages warmth toward the Chinese people, and pours vociferous praise upon Xi Jinping, while simultaneously confronting the geopolitical doctrine of the Xi regime.

In essence Trump is mirroring the behavior of China while confronting their economic duplicity.

China has no cultural or political space between peace and war; they are a historic nation based on two points of polarity.  They see peace and war as coexisting with each other.

China accepts and believes opposite or contrary forces may actually be complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world, and they may give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another.  Flowing between these polar states is a natural dynamic to be used -with serious contemplation- in advancing objectives as needed.

Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome.  If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war.  In politics or economics the same perspective is true.  It is a zero-sum outlook.

Therefore, when you see China publicly use strong language – it indicates a level of internal disposition beyond the defined western angst.  Big Panda becomes Red Dragon; there is no mid-status or evolutionary phase.  Every American associated with investment, economics and China would be well advised to put their business affairs in order accordingly.

President Trump will not back down from his position; the U.S. holds all of the leverage and the issue must be addressed.  President Trump has waiting three decades for this moment.  This President and his team are entirely prepared for this.

We are finally confronting the geopolitical Red Dragon, China!

The Olive branch and arrows denote the power of peace and war. The symbol in any figure’s right hand has more significance than one in its left hand. Also important is the direction faced by the symbols central figure. The emphasis on the eagles stare signifies the preferred disposition. An eagle holding an arrow also symbolizes the war for freedom, and its use is commonly referred to the liberation fight of righteous people from abusive influence. The eagle on the original seal created for the Office of the President showed the gaze upon the arrows.

The Eagle and the Arrow – An Aesop’s Fable

An Eagle was soaring through the air. Suddenly it heard the whizz of an Arrow, and felt the dart pierce its breast. Slowly it fluttered down to earth. Its lifeblood pouring out. Looking at the Arrow with which it had been shot, the Eagle realized that the deadly shaft had been feathered with one of its own plumes.

Moral: We often give our enemies the means for our own destruction.

Mar 25 2018

Report: New NSA John Bolton Planning Deep State Purge Within National Security Council….


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 24, 2018 by

The National Security Council is a large intelligence bureaucracy, within the Washington DC intelligence apparatus, consisting of dozens of principles and hundreds of staff.   Many of those staffers are career officials, holdovers from prior administrations.

According to Foreign Policy, incoming National Security Adviser to the President, John Bolton, is planning a significant ‘clean house’ removing a significant number of people within the system.

(Via FP) Incoming National Security Advisor John Bolton and people close to him are expected to launch a massive shake-up at the National Security Council, aiming to remove dozens of current White House officials, starting with holdovers from President Barack Obama’s administration, according to multiple sources.

Those targeted for removal include officials believed to have been disloyal to President Donald Trump, those who have leaked about the president to the media, his predecessor’s team, and those who came in under Obama.

“Bolton can and will clean house,” one former White House official said.

Another source said, “He is going to remove almost all the political [appointees] McMaster brought in.”

A second former White House official offered a blunt assessment of former Obama officials currently detailed or appointed to the NSC: “Everyone who was there during Obama years should start packing their shit.”  (read more)

This should have happened earlier…. but at least it’s a good restart now.

Mar 24 2018

Gordon Chang Discusses President Trump’s Plan to Remove the Panda Mask From The Chinese Red Dragon…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 23, 2018 by

Author of “The Coming Collapse of China”, Gordon Chang, discusses the effect of President Trump’s tariffs on China and the epic battle ahead.  Last night China announced their feeble retaliatory actions – SEE HERE.  A professionally nervous Maria Bartiromo, frames a series of questions from the perspective of Wall Street.

Fortunately Gordon Chang understands the Red Dragon, and more importantly understands Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping’s geopolitical goals through economic conquest. Mr. Chang is one of the few people who appear regularly in media and know the truth behind the Panda Mask.

.

People often talk about the ‘strength’ of China’s economic model; and indeed within a specific part of their economy -manufacturing- they do have economic strength.

However, the underlying critical architecture of the Chinese economic model is structurally flawed and President Trump with his current economic team understand the weakness better than all international adversaries.

China is a central planning economy.  Meaning it never was an outcropping of natural economic conditions.  China was/is controlled as a communist style central-planning government; As such, it is important to reference the basic structural reality that China’s economy was created from the top down.

This construct of government creation is a key big picture distinction that sets the backdrop to understand how weak the economy really is.

Any nations’ economic model is only as stable (or strong) as the underlying architecture or infrastructure of the actual country.

Think about economic strength and stability this way: If a nation was economically walled off from all other nations, can it survive?  …can it sustain itself?

In the big picture – economic strength is an outcome of the ability of a nation, any nation, to support itself first and foremost.   If a nations’ economy is dependent on other nations’ for it to inherently survive it is less strong than a nation whose economy is more independent.

You might not realize it, but China is an extremely dependent nation.

When the central planning for the 21st century Chinese Economy was constructed, there were several critical cultural flaws, dynamics exclusive to China, that needed to be overcome in order to build their economic model.  It took China several decades to map out a way to economic growth that could overcome the inherent critical flaws.

Critical Flaws To Exploit:

♦Because of the oppressive nature of the Chinese compliant culture, the citizens within China do not innovate or create.  The “Compliance Mindset” is part of the intellectual DNA strain of a Chinese citizen.

Broadly speaking, the modern era Chinese are not able to think outside the box per se’ because the reference of all civil activity has been a history of box control by government, and compliance to stay (think) only within the approved box.  The lack of intellectual thought mapping needed for innovation is why China relies on intellectual theft of innovation created by others.

American culture specifically is based around freedom of thought and severe disdain of government telling us what to do; THAT freedom is necessary for innovation.  That freedom actually creates innovation.

Again, broadly speaking Chinese are better students in American schools and universities because the Chinese are culturally compliant.  They work well with academics and established formulas, and within established systems, but they cannot create the formula or system themselves.

♦ The Chinese Planning Authority skipped the economic cornerstone.  When China planned out their economic entry, they did so from a top-down perspective.  They immediately wanted to be manufacturers of stuff.  They saw their worker population as a strategic advantage, but they never put the source origination infrastructure into place in order to supply their manufacturing needs.   China has no infrastructure for raw material extraction or exploitation.

China relies on:  importing raw material, applying their economic skillset (manufacturing), and then exporting finished goods.  This is the basic economic structure of the Chinese economy.

See the flaw?

Cut off the raw material, and the China economy slows, contracts, and if nations react severely enough with export material boycotts the entire Chinese economy implodes.

Insert big flashy sign for: “One-Belt / One-Road” HERE

Again, we reference the earlier point: Economic strength is the ability of a nation to sustain itself.  [Think about an economy during conflict or war]  China cannot independently sustain itself, therefore China is necessarily vulnerable.  China cannot even feed itself.

China is dependent on Imports (raw materials) AND Exports (finished goods).

♦The 800lb Panda in the room is that China is arguably the least balanced economy in the modern world.  Hence, China has to take extraordinary measures to secure their supply chain.  This economic dependency is also why China has recently spent so much on military expansion etc., they must protect their vulnerable interests.

Everything important to the Chinese Economy surrounds their critical need to secure a strong global supply chain of raw material to import, and leveraged trade agreements for export.  China’s economy is deep (manufacturing), but China’s economy is also narrow.

China could have spent the time to create a broad-based economy, but the lack of early 1900’s foresight, in conjunction with their communist top-down totalitarian system and a massive population, led to central government decisions to subvert the bottom-up building-out and take short-cuts.  Their population controls only worsened their long term ability to ever broaden their economic model.

It takes a population of young avg-skilled workers to do the hard work of building a raw material infrastructure.  Mine workers, dredge builders, roads and railways, bridges and tunnels etc.  All of these require young strong bodies.   The Chinese cultural/population  decisions amid the economic builders precluded this proactive outlook; now they have an aging population and are incapable of doing it.

This is why China is now dependent on their position as an economic trade bully.  They must retain their supply chain: import raw materials – export finished goods, at all costs.

This inherent economic structure is a weakness China must continually address through policies toward other nations.  Hence, “One-Belt / One-Road” is essentially a ‘bully plan’ to ensure their supply chain and long-term economic viability.

This economic structure, and the reality of China’s dependency, also puts China at risk from the effects of global economic contraction.

♦U.S. President Donald Trump and the U.S. economic team understand this dynamic and fully understand the inherent needs of China.  When you are economically dependent, the ‘bully plan’ only works until you encounter a ‘stronger opponent’.   A stronger opponent is an economic opponent with a more broad-based stable economy, that’s us.

President Trump, Commerce Secretary Ross, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin and U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer, represent the first broad-based national team of economic negotiators who know how to leverage the inherent Chinese economic vulnerability.

Mar 24 2018

National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro Discusses Tariff Position Against China…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 23, 2018 by

National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro appears on Fox Business News to discuss the “reciprocity” proposals and the ongoing confrontation with China. Despite the honest examples provided, it is transparent from the delivery Navarro is attempting to calms the nerves of Wall Street.  “EC” Economically Correct, presentation – Watch:

Mar 24 2018

Whoops – Someone Noticed Trump’s Trade Confrontation With China Will Actually Boost U.S. Metal Makers…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on March 23, 2018 by

Without apology CTH continues to state all opposition to President Trump finds the epicenter of motive behind the economic policy.  There are trillions at stake.

Yes, there are ideological differences, but do not doubt for a moment the existential threat is the core principle behind America-First economics.

Multinational corporations and global financial interests have more than a generation of effort invested within the modern trade and economic constructs that President Trump is challenging head-on.

Politicians do not construct legislation, K-Street lobbyists do. Hundreds of millions have been spent purchasing politicians as a sales force to protect those financial interests. Challenge their financial trade schemes and you are threatening the livelihood and financial systems that generate massive wealth for very powerful people.  Additionally, the downstream effect threatens the affluence of the professional political class.

That said, there are American interests who will benefit, it’s just not popular within the cocktail party circuit to admit it:

(Bloomberg)  China’s plan to counter U.S. import tariffs may throw global aluminum and steel traders into a tizzy, but the net result could be a boon for American primary-metal producers.

The retaliatory plan to slap tariffs on U.S. aluminum scrap and some steel products may boost American supplies, lowering raw-material prices, says Zaner Group LLC’s Peter Thomas. That could coax some metal producers to restart unused capacity in Rust Belt states if infrastructure spending picks up.

“In Indiana they’re going to be making a huge push to get things fired up,” Thomas, a Zaner senior vice president, said Friday by phone.

One aluminum scrap trader agrees with the premise, but he says the other side of the coin is that suppliers could be the biggest losers. Marvin Polikov, a vice president at aluminum scrap trader Metal Exchange in St. Louis, also says companies need a lot of time before they can, and probably would, restart unused refineries. (read more)