The Alabama Senate Republican run-off to fill the vacant seat from AG Jeff Sessions has become a referendum on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.  This is a very valuable situation for voters who understand how individual races, at specific moments, can create inflection points and change political history.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s defeat in 2014 was an example of one such moment.  Cantor’s defeat by challenger Dave Brat actually killed comprehensive immigration legislation, which included amnesty, 48 hours before the vote was scheduled to take place.

Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell is actively working to undermine the Make America Great Again legislative priorities of Republican President Donald Trump.  There is a grand list of McConnell’s activity showing direct and specific evidence in that regard:

•President Trump already gave congress a budget that reduces a trillion in spending; the Senate republicans balked and said reducing spending is not an acceptable goal. •Those same republicans and Democrats are suing President Trump trying to force the State Department to spend money on USAID and NGO’s. •Those same Senate republicans supported Omnibus spending bills. •Those same Senate republicans will not support removing ObamaCare. •Those same Senate republicans are fighting renegotiated trade deals including NAFTA. •Those same Senate republicans supported TPP. • Those same Senate republicans supported launching ridiculous Russian conspiracy investigations; and the list goes on, including •those same senate republicans using a strategic maneuver to block their own Republican President from recess appointments.

Well, you get the picture. There’s ample evidence of Senate Republicans opposing the President, and most of that opposition is fueled by Leader Mitch McConnell.

This is where the value of the Alabama Senate Race comes into play.  Senator Mitch McConnell has endorsed Luther Strange, and has assigned his political and financial teams to help Mr. Strange.  Mitch McConnell is up to his old tricks using Super-PAC money to attack the other Republican in the race, Roy Moore.

Back in 2014 McConnell and his crew targeted Mississippi Republican Chris McDaniel, who was challenging “their guy” Senator Thad Cochran.  The methods McConnell used to destroy McDaniel were horrific and included running ads labeling McDaniel as a racist.  The GOP even paid democrats to vote in the primary in a successful scheme to get rid of McDaniel. Hence, McConnell’s crew gained the name “The Shameful Seven”.

However, in the current 2017 Alabama race Roy Moore is currently leading Luther Strange in polling by a wide margin.  The runoff election is September 26th, and if Mitch McConnell and his tens of millions of dollars can be defeated, it would send a signal to Washington DC that Mitch needs to be removed from leadership.

Former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore has taken a commanding 18-point lead in Alabama’s Republican Senate primary runoff, according to a poll released Wednesday.

The Opinion Savvy-Decision Desk HQ poll released Wednesday finds Moore with 50.3 percent support in the state, compared to just 32.2 percent for his challenger, Sen. Luther Strange (R-Ala.).

Moore … has seen his lead over Strange swell after coming in first place in last week’s primary. Moore won only 38 percent of the vote, compared to 32 percent for Strange. (read more)

China is the #1 investor in Pakistan, and by extension of President Trump’s strategic decision to put Pakistan in the spotlight for supporting extremist elements within Afghanistan, China is also in the geopolitical spotlight. It’s a brilliant play by President Trump and Secretary Tillerson.

If there was no symbiosis between China and Pakistan, there would be no reason for China to have an opinion. However, understanding the nature of how their geopolitical ally has been called out, China is now exposed, and responds by trying to get the burden of responsibility removed from Pakistan.

BEIJING (Reuters) – The United States must value Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan and respect its security concerns, China’s top diplomat Yang Jiechi told U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in a phone call, according to Chinese state media.

China’s Foreign Ministry defended its ally Pakistan earlier this week after President Donald Trump said the United States could no longer be silent about militants using safe havens on Pakistani soil. (read more)

The Chinese regime is essentially defending Pakistan by saying the U.S. must accept that Pakistan has no choice except to be willfully blind to the cross-border Islamic extremism.  Team USA is saying no to this acceptance.

President Trump has already made the case that all nations who do not support terrorism and extremism must “drive out” the underlying hate and ideologues who espouse it.

There’s no downside to Pakistan being directly linked to Afghanistan/Taliban, simply because Pakistan is directly FACTUALLY linked to Afghanistan/Taliban. Additionally, inherent in the Trump Doctrine of economics and trade used to secure national security objectives, there are going to be ‘winners’ and ‘losers’; ‘allies’ and ‘adversaries’.

In the BIG geopolitical picture people get nervous because Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Fair enough. However, Pakistan’s #1 economic ally is China. China has massive investments in Pakistan. China is attached to Pakistan. Both China and Pakistan have nuclear weapons. Dealing with China and Pakistan is congruent.

Meanwhile, India has nuclear weapons. Afghanistan’s #1 economic ally is India. India has massive investments in Afghanistan. India is attached to Afghanistan. India has nuclear weapons. President Trump is positioning India as a favored nation to the United States; and Trump is also accepting China and Pakistan are connected.

India, is massive economic leverage. India is nice; Pakistan – notsomuch.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered a speech today in Kentucky.  A speech which yet again personifies the disconnect between the insufferable professional republicans within the party and the MAGA insurgency that has taken it over.

WATCH SPEECH HERE

CTH has been transparent with our support for Donald Trump, and the specific reason for it.  We want the GOPe machine torn down, dispatched to earth orbit, and nuked while there regardless of consequence, because we’re sick of having to be brutalized and used by Republican liars hiding within it. Period.

If President Trump shows up to the next MAGA rally in a banana costume, 5″ stiletto heels and starts twerking a cardboard cutout of Mitch McConnell, he’d still have our full support.

Senate Majority Mitch McConnell is the personification of the intransigent GOPe.  He is quite simply that vindictive doddering fool down the road with the signs on his law forbidding anyone to dare touch the grass.  The entire neighborhood hates him.  Harsh? No, try reality. THAT is the face of the swamp. Mr. Mumbles.  Good grief, no wonder Democrats are always grinning.

For CTH, the elimination of the GOPe machine is ultimately more valuable than anything else.  We gave the GOP the House (2010, 2012, 2014, 2016) and the Senate (2014, 2016) and yet we never have received a single benefit to the election victories We The People provided.  Why is that?

Here’s where a paradigm shift is needed for many of the political followers who don’t have a deep and specialized knowledge of the Republican agenda.

Citizens United was touted by conservatives as a victory. Why?

Was it because Citizens United was genuinely a win for freedom of speech, or was it actually and substantively because Obama declared it a loss?

Again, paradigm shift time – Citizens United was as much a defeat for “our side” as it was for “their side”.  We didn’t need Citizens United to win a massive electoral victory in 2010, Obama’s “Shellacking”; we just showed up to the polls and voted against his policies.

However, the Republican professional political class did need Citizens United to try and stop our efforts in 2012 and again in 2014. I’ll explain.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, led by President Tom Donohue, is the power brokerage for the GOP “establishment”. In short, whatever the CoC wants, their lobbyists on K-Street will insure the CoC gets through campaign contributions to influence the GOP as a Party.

The U.S. CoC is the operational arm of Wall Street, not, I repeat, NOT, Main Street.

The Citizens United  decision is what allowed Wall Street to fund the U.S. CoC, which in turn funded the GOP establishment machine.  If politics is a blood sport, Citizens United just authorized the unlimited use of STERIODS for the paid gladiators.

How does Wall Street differ from Main Street?

The answer to that question can most easily be reflected by explaining why the Republican Establishment, the professional political class, supports ObamaCare, Common Core and Comprehensive Immigration Reform to include Amnesty.

Wall Street and ObamaCare:

Wall Street, through the CoC, advocate for policies that benefit their interests; their financial interests. The cost of worker healthcare is a liability embedded in the cost of the products sold. If the United Auto Workers healthcare plan costs $10,000 per person, that cost is embedded in the price to manufacture a car.

Unlike their global competitors U.S. businesses (manufacturers) have these costs as part of their product cost, the cost of goods sold.

Globally, other nations have various forms of “government provided” healthcare, and so their products don’t carry the cost directly.   In an effort to level the manufacturing playing field, the U.S. CoC, Wall Street, are firm advocates of removing the cost of healthcare from U.S. goods.

Wall Street, supports ObamaCare for an expanded profit margin on financially capitalized businesses – ie. higher profits = higher stock valuations.

Simultaneously, unions support ObamaCare (see SEIU, AFL-CIO et al, visits to White House during ObamaCare construct) because ObamaCare removed the healthcare liability from the union retirees benefits. ie. increased solvency.

The globalists, and progressive Democrats support ObamaCare because it aids their constituency, unions; and also expands the influence of government control which is based on a collective outlook and elimination of the individual freedom.

Wall Street therefore supports both Republicans and Democrats when it comes to the retention of ObamaCare.

That’s why you don’t see Republican Majorities trying to remove it – it’s all hat and no cattle; a ruse, a fraud. Only the promises of actual removal being used to get Pavlov’s sheeple masses to pull levers with hopes/promises of getting repeal pellets.

The GOPe has NO INTENTION of removing ObamaCare.

Wall Street and Immigration:

Like ObamaCare, Wall Street wants comprehensive immigration reform to include amnesty. Again, focused almost entirely on the reduction of the labor costs for goods and services. These are financial balance sheet determinations, not considerations of what’s best for the middle class U.S. worker.

Democrats and Republicans both want immigration reform to include amnesty. Democrats for a voting block and more collectivist ideological approaches, Republicans to do the bidding of their financial interests – The CoC, Tom Donohue, etc.

The multinational agriculture lobby is massive.

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

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

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

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

Neither Democrats nor Republicans are willing to build a border wall to stop illegal immigration.

Wall Street and Common Core Education:

Like ObamaCare and Immigration, Wall Street wants the federalization of education. In part because it generates a consistently similar pool of eligible, who are increasingly Latino, workers; and in part because education is BIG BUSINESS.

Just look at your property taxes to see how much of your local property tax dollars are apportioned to public School and Education funding.

Democrats and Republicans both support Common Core. Democrats because it expands the financial base of local schools to allow greater room for increased labor union (teacher, NEA) wages; and because Common Core affords, yet again, an ideological watering down of individualism in favor of collectivism. Republicans support Common Core because it’s big business, and the CoC funds their advocacy.

Both Democrats and Republicans support Common Core.

In 2013 CoC President Tom Donohue went on record saying his 2014/2015 legislative priorities were:

1 – Full implementation of ObamaCare without repeal.
2 – Comprehensive Immigration Reform to include Amnesty.
3 – Full implementation of Common Core educational standards.

Wall Street, through K-Street, through the CoC, fund these legislative priorities.

The Citizens United decision allowed Wall Street, through K-Street, through the CoC to fund established legislative representatives to continue these legislative priorities.

Conversely, Citizens United, through Wall Street, through K-Street, through the CoC, created the system of Super-PAC’s that funds attacks against any political opponent who would unseat their selected and established candidate. You only need to look at 2014’s Virginia (Ken Cuccinelli), or Mississippi (Chris McDaniels), or Kentucky (Matt Bevin) to see how strongly these interests will work to insure victory.

The same process, with funding from the same groups and individuals, is taking place right now in the Alabama Senate race.

The last half of this discussion segment might leave you in stitches. Very funny segment, especially when you really think about the reality, collapse and sheer desperation of the current Democrat party.  Muttering through the woods while triggered.   Enjoy:

President Donald Trump gives a keynote speech to the National Convention of the American Legion and signs the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act:

There are Trillions of Dollars at Stake. CTH has been highlighting the hidden motivation for years.  Opposition is all about the economics folks.

Against President Trump’s promise to renegotiate trade deals, withdraw from TPP and TTIP, walk away from the fraudulent economic scheme within the Paris Climate Treaty, and renegotiate or pull out of NAFTA.  Well,… it’s called a strategy session folks:

President Trump uses economic leverage as a national security policy; and to understand who opposes President Trump specifically because of the economic leverage he creates, it becomes important to understand the objectives of the global and financial elite who run and operate the institutions. The Big Club.

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

That is: global financial exploitation of national markets:

♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.
♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.

♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.

Against the backdrop of President Trump confronting China; and against the backdrop of NAFTA being renegotiated; revisiting the economic influences within the import/export dynamic will help conceptualize the issues at the heart of the matter. There are a myriad of interests within each trade sector that make specific explanation very challenging; however, here’s the basic outline.

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

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

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

It’s not.

It’s not natural at all. It is a process that is entirely controlled, promoted and utilized by large conglomerates and massive financial corporations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Instead of the traditional ‘supply/demand’ equation determining prices, the corporations look to see what nations can afford what prices. The supply of the controlled product is then distributed to the country according to their ability to afford the price. This is how the corporation maximizes it’s profits.

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

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

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

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

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

Under modern globalism this process no longer takes place. It’s a complete fraud. Currently, massive multinational corporations control the majority of product inside each nation and therefore control the entire global product market and price.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth.

It is never discussed.

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

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

Again, this is highlighted in the example of taxpayers subsidizing the food sector (EBT, SNAP etc.), the corporations can charge U.S. consumers more. Ex. more beef is exported, red meat prices remain high at the grocery store, but subsidized U.S. consumers can afford the high prices. Of course if you are not receiving food payment assistance (middle-class) you can’t eat the steaks because you can’t afford them. (Not accidentally, it’s the same scheme in the ObamaCare healthcare system)

Individual flower growers in Florida go out of business because they didn’t join the global market of flower growers (controlled market) by multinational corporate flower growers in Columbia and South America, who have an umbrella company registered in Mexico allowing virtually unrestricted access to the U.S. market under NAFTA.

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

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

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

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

The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upsets the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focus exclusively on bilateral trade deals, with specific trade agreements targeted toward individual nations (not national corporations). ‘America-First’ is also specific policy at a granular product level looking out for the national interests of the United States, U.S. workers, U.S. companies and U.S. consumers.

Under President Trump’s Trade positions, balanced and fair trade with strong regulatory control over national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped.

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

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

RELATED:

♦The Modern Third Dimension in American Economics – HERE

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

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

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

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

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

At the end of the first round of NAFTA renegotiations, Sunday, I shared a confidence level of “3” on a 10 point scale; as to whether a deal was likely. [Explained Here]

On Monday Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and U.S Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer debriefed President Trump the on the results of the first round (5 days).   USTR Lighthizer and Secretary Ross were both at the White House during the eclipse viewing.

On Tuesday, following that briefing, President Trump shares his opinion on NAFTA. WATCH:

.

Remember, this statement follows the discussions with Ross and Lighthizer a day earlier.  It would appear that President Trump did not like the information they shared.  Knowing that POTUS Trump isn’t going to accept or compromise on an economic deal that doesn’t fix the issues; and knowing he’s wanted to walk away from NAFTA in favor of bilateral trade deals from the outset; I might need to lower my confidence to a “1” or lower…

Super-Mega-MAGA-Winning!