Erdogan Tells Turks in Germany to Vote Against Merkel


While the Democrats want to make a huge issue out of Russia hacking their files and releasing evidence that they were truly corrupt and how Clinton was just a liar blaming Russia rather than themselves, interference in the elections of other countries is par for the course. I have reported how Obama has interfered in Canada, Britain, and France. This is standard operational procedure. Now Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan publicly told all Turks living in Germany to vote against Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats on September 24th.

For Erdogan to publicly try to influence the German elections as Obama did in Britain tell them to get to the  ‘back of queue‘ if they voted for BREXIT, demonstrates the lack of unity between the NATO allies and major trade partners.

Ties between Ankara and Berlin have been strained in the aftermath of last year’s failed coup as Turkish authorities have sacked or suspended 150,000 people and detained more than 50,000 people, including German nationals. Erdogan’s response has been to Merkel’s voiced concern that he has used the coup as a pretext to quash dissent in Turkey. Erdogan has adopted a clear authoritarian role for himself trying to tie it to the roots in political Islam. Erdogan has accused Merkel of being anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim. He pronounced:

“I am calling on all my countrymen in Germany: the Christian Democrats, SDP, the Green Party are all enemies of Turkey. Support those political parties who are not enemies of Turkey,” 

“I call on them not to vote for those parties who have been engaged in such aggressive, disrespectful attitudes against Turkey, and I invite them to teach a lesson to those political parties at the ballot box.” 

The tensions between Germany and Turkey are on a crash course between 2018 and 2020.

Angela Merkel is being Called a Traitor for the Refugee Crisis


The EU has abandoned Italy while simultaneously demanding that the refugees must be taken care of. Nearly 100,000 refugees have arrived in Italy since the start of this year alone. The Italian government cannot cope with the refugee crisis and Brussels said they cannot exempt them from the restraint of busgets. That means that money for Italians must be diverted to the refugees and they keep coming.

Italy is being pushed to the limit and cannot possible cope with this burden alone while Brussels refuses to compensate them. Let any country refuse to accept refugees and Brussels is quick to condemn them, but wont pay for them itself.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is solely responsible for the refugee crisis. She is starting to be greeted with shouts of “traitor” by discontent German protesters. Nevertheless, Merkel continues to defend her decision to allow hundreds of thousands of refugees into the Germany.

Merkel only received 16,233,642 votes during the 2013 election which was  37.2% of the popular vote of Germany. So the majority of Germans are really not supporting Merkel. Because they get to form collation governments, that someone who received less that any President in the political history of the USA gets to run Euorpe. Even Donald Trump won  46.1% of the American popular vote. So someone who would never get into office under the USA system gets to dominate Europe.

Barcelona Terrorist Attack – Is Europe Lost?


Barcelona, one of the most beautiful cities in Europe, was the target of the Islamic State in their latest terrorist attack to kill people on a wholesale basis. Spain has now mounted an all out sweeping anti-terror operation after an Islamist militant drove a van into crowds in Barcelona, killing 13 people and possibly injuring 100 before fleeing, in what police suspect was one of multiple planned attacks.

Islamic State claimed responsibility for the deadly attack along the city’s most famous avenue on Thursday, which was packed with tourists taking an afternoon stroll. Police said they had arrested two men, a Moroccan and a man from Spain’s north African enclave of Melilla.

Meir Bar-Hen, the Jewish Barcelona Barrister, said the Jews in Spain should not repeat the mistake of the Jews in Algeria or Venezuela: “Go ahead rather than too late.” Bar-Hen urged the Jews Spain to buy and emigrate land in Israel: “I tell my church: We are destined to perish. Europe is lost. “

This refugee crisis in Europe has been the greatest mistake perhaps in modern history. It is one things to set up camps and help people displaced by war. It is totally different to open your doors and let single men in hiding among women and children.

Rogoff Tell Central Banks More Negative Interest Rates Will Be Needed


Kenneth Rogoff,  the Professor of Economics at Harvard University, is stuck in a time warp where he cannot think out of the box even once. He is telling the central banks that the next recession they will have to resort to negative interest rates and they should prepare now. Despite the fact that negative rates have failed to work in Europe or Japan, seems to be nothing to really consider. So what after almost 10 years of failed policies at the European Central Bank, it will eventually work maybe in 12 or 13 years. It just requires patience.

This is the problem with academics. They don’t get the calls for help. These policies have created a Pension Crisis on the horizon and wiped out so many states. Keynes himself argued that there were times to lower taxes to stimulate. That is just never considered even once.

European Refugee Crisis will Engulf Europe by 2032


Migrants sit in a boat during a rescue operation by the Italian navy off the coast of Sicily on Nov. 28. Italy is looking to revamp the way it handles the hundreds of thousands of migrants who arrive annually.

 

The European Refugee Crisis is really completely out of control. The bulk of these people are by no means refugees. You see no women and children here in the boat – only young men. Now Spain is the new target and will overtake Greece as the second-biggest gateway for economic invader entering Europe by sea. The sudden surge in migration to Spain comes following a crackdown on human smuggling along the Libya-Italy sea route, which has been the main entry route to Europe. Africans are migrating to Europe because there is little to do at home.  Egypt will grow to 100 million people while Nigeria to soon reach 400 million. Europe will be swallowed up whole as it was when the Roman Empire was subjugated by the Barbarians who crossed the Rhine River.

When the Barbarians took over Europe, they at first issued coinage in the Roman tradition. But this began to rapidly diminish. Nevertheless, history is repeating. Europe is being swallowed up once again. By the time we see the other side of 2032, Europe will be a shadow of its former glory just as the main language of California will be Spanish not English. Things are definitely changing

The Plague of One-Dimensional Analysis


Blood-Moon-NASA

The Blood Moon is a term that has been sometimes used to refer to four total lunar eclipses that happen in the space of two years. This is a phenomenon astronomers call a lunar tetrad. The eclipses in a tetrad occur six months apart with at least six Full Moons between them. Just saw one last night that was close and is preparing to the total lunar eclipse that will take place on August 21st, 2017. This event lined up with the Economic Confidence Model which was very interesting (2015.75).

However, all the reports of impending doom due to the Blood Moon prophecy that the world would end back in 2015 were clearly exaggerated, especially since 8 tetrads since 1 AD have coincided with Jewish holidays without the world going coming to an end.

Now the 21st, we have a total eclipse over the United States. The world will not come to an end. Yet this type of analysis is always the same – one-dimensional. They always seek to tie some effect to a single cause. This is in all fields even medicine as well as economics. This is just a human tragedy why too many people try to be analysts and just make a mess of the whole thing

Can the Sanction Work on North Korea


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, can the sanctions against North Korea succeed now that China is implementing them as well?

ANSWER:  The UN sanctions are curbs on everything from lead and fish exports to questionable North Korean companies. North Korea is in the middle of a serious drought that’s ruining crops. Food is an issue there so this intensifies an already dark humanitarian picture where estimates are that 40% of the population is already malnourished. Only the people can create regime change.

North Korea is in a very severe recession particularly since 2015. The sanctions directly impact the mining and manufacturing industries, which account for just over 30% of GDP. The increase in food shortages will not deter Kim Jong Un from his ambition of developing an arsenal of nuclear-tipped missiles. Only the people can overthrow him for he could care less about the people.

North Korea’s dependency on Chinese fuel is China’s main ace-in-the-hole. If the fuel is cut off, then we are looking at curtaining his air force and their electricity production will decline significantly.

To the extent that the sanction force the people to rise up, then they can work. Otherwise, Kim will not yield as long as he retains power.

Governments to Control Large Cash Transactions


 

I have been pointing out the crisis we face moving forward. The gist of this is the total fiscal mismanagement of government for which we, the people, are always blamed. This hunt for taxes has led down the path of arguments for eliminating currency. While people think Bitcoin is an answer, they do not understand government’s hunt for taxes no less the lack of a true rule of law. The government need only pass a law that anyone who fails to report what they have in Bitcoin is criminal and they get to confiscate all your assets.

Switzerland has its “wealth tax” which they argue is nothing just 0.02%. However, it requires you to report all assets worldwide. They then know precisely what you have and it is merely one vote away at anytime to raise the tax or impose criminal penalties for failure to report everything. Yet, once Switzerland has that info, under G20 they must share it with all other governments.

We have stood by and watched India cancel all high denomination notes. Try walking around with €500 notes in Europe and they look at you funny or won’t accept them. ATM machines have been reduced in Europe to taking a maximum of €200 in cash at best. This is all th hunt for taxes because government cannot function ethically no less morally.

Now the German Federal Minister of Finance, Wolfgang Schäuble, is proposing to control all large cash transactions claiming this will prevent black money transactions and money laundering. Of course, they see these two issues not as typical crime like drugs, but tax avoidance.

Schäuble is coming up with an alternative for the resistance to eliminating cash is rising globally. He knows he cannot abolish cash. If you cannot eliminate cash, then Schäuble said there should be an upper limit placed on cash transactions, from which cash transactions must be registered and reported to the tax authorities. This is also happening in Europe where you cannot pay for a hotel bill greater than €1000 in France. Schäuble said cash transactions must be registered declaring who are the parties to the transaction on each side to prevent the black money transactions, money laundering and terrorist financing.

It has become painfully obvious that the real winner in the Terrorism War was Osama bin Laden. What this single man did was change the entire world into a hunt for taxes destroying our liberty and right to privacy. He destroyed our liberty like no other invader in history. Osama bin Laden has certainly made the list of the top 10 most influential people in history, but has not surpassed Karl Marx.

Schäuble previously said he was against eliminating cash and imposing ceiling on cash payments as were the French and Italy. Schäuble is joining the ever increase microscope to hunt down citizens for taxes always using Bin Laden as the excuse. Even the IMF recently published a handbook on how the reduction of cash could be implemented as silently as possible.  Australia is stalking children going to private schools and has declared “cash is for criminals!”

This trend is only going to end in revolution. Historically, all revolutions are about money.

The Legal Challenge to Quantitative Easing


General view of the buildings of the Court of Justice of the European Communities

It has taken almost 10 years for the ECB’s controversial government bond purchases to finally reach the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to be reviewed as to their constitutionality. There have always been serious questions whether the PSPP (Public Sector Purchase Program) was compatible with the ban on monetary budgetary funding that has been imposed upon member states. Italy, for example, asked for an exemption from the budgetary constraints to take care of the refugees, The EU Commission said absolutely no!

The German high court has been hearing a case that proposes it rule that financing government budgets would not be covered by the mandate of the European Central Bank (ECB). That has long been a thorn in the side of Draghi that he was acting unconstitutional at the end of the day. The ECJ has been requested to expedite the procedure, because “the case requires a quick settlement” after almost 10 years?

The background of the case is three constitutional arguments are fairly straight forward against the PSPP. The ECJ has not answered these issues which has been preventing the German court from finally decide the constitutional complaints.

The argument claims that the European System of Central Banks, with the program for the purchase of securities of the public sector which it has set up, is contrary to the prohibition of monetary government financing (Article 123 TFEU) and the principle of limited individual authorization (Article 5 1 TEU in conjunction with Art. 119, 127 et seq. TFEU).Therefore, the Deutsche Bundesbank should not participate in this program and the German Bundestag and the Federal Government are obliged to take appropriate measures against the program.

The plaintiffs in Germany wanted the Bundesverfassungsgericht to stop the Bundesbank’s participation in the ECB program. Germany, they argued, would suffer a complete loss if the bonds failed. The risk to the German national budget is disproportionate was their main point.

The ECJ has a political mandate which is strangely different from the Supreme Court of Germany or the United States for that matter.The ECJ has a mandate to promote integration within the EU, which is clearly a political element. If we add this political element, that one can see that the ECJ can view the purchase of government bonds as a permissible means of integration.

The ECB has clearly altered the bond market destroying liquidity. Banks are rushing to sell their bonds to the ECB in anticipation of rising rates which will cause their bond holdings to decline. Hence, the ECB has actually functioned as a place to dump financial toxic-waste.

The Germany Federal Constitutional Court has thus suspended further litigation pending the ECJ ruling.


The Federal Constitutional Court announced in a Press Release No. 70/2017 of 15 August 2017

Decision of 18 July 2017
2 BvR 859/15, 2 BvR 980/16, 2 BvR 2006/15, 2 BvR 1651/15
With the decision published today, the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court has suspended the procedure concerning the question whether the Public Sector Purchase Program (PSPP) of the European Central Bank is compatible with the Basic Law for the purchase of public sector securities and asks the Court of Justice of the European Union several questions For a preliminary ruling. According to the Senate, there are important reasons for the fact that the decisions underlying the bond purchase program are in breach of the ban on monetary budgetary financing and go beyond the mandate of the European Central Bank for monetary policy and thus fall within the competence of the Member States. The Senate seeks the implementation of the accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 105 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Union, since the nature of the case requires its speedy completion.

Facts:

The PSPP is part of the Expanded Asset Purchase Program (EAPP), a framework program of the European Central Bank (ECB) for the purchase of assets. The PSPP accounts for the largest share of the total volume of the EAPP. On 12 May 2017, the EAPP achieved a total volume of EUR 1 862.1 billion; Of this total, EUR 1,534.8 billion accounted for the PSPP.

The complainants, by their constitutional complaints, claim that the European System of Central Banks, with the program for the purchase of securities of the public sector which it has set up, is contrary to the prohibition of monetary government financing (Article 123 TFEU) and the principle of limited individual authorization (Article 5 1 TEU in conjunction with Art. 119, 127 et seq. TFEU). Therefore, the Deutsche Bundesbank should not participate in this program and the German Bundestag and the Federal Government are obliged to take appropriate measures against the program.

Important considerations of the Senate:

1. Article 38 (1), first sentence, of the Basic Law guarantees to German nationals the right to democratic self-determination, which is enforceable with the constitutional complaint, in the scope protected by Article 79 (3) of the Basic Law. On the basis of the responsibility of integration, the German constitutional authorities have the duty, within the limits of their competences, to work towards compliance with the integration program. It is the task of the Federal Constitutional Court to examine whether measures taken by bodies, bodies and other bodies of the European Union are based on apparent excesses of competence or affect the non-transferable area of ​​the constitutional identity, with the result that German state institutions are not allowed to participate in their condition or implementation ,

2. There are doubts as to whether the PSPP decision is compatible with the ban on monetary budgetary financing.

(A) Article 123 (1) TFEU prohibits the ECB and the central banks of the Member States from purchasing debt securities directly from the institutions of the European Union and the Member States. Purchases on the secondary market may not be used to circumvent the objective pursued by Article 123 TFEU. A program dealing with the purchase of government bonds on the secondary market must therefore be provided with sufficient guarantees to ensure effective compliance with the prohibition of monetary government financing. The Senate is of the opinion that the Court of Justice of the European Union considers the terms which it sets out to limit the scope of the OMT program of 6 September 2012 within its scope as a legally binding criterion The purchase of government bonds.

(B) The PSPP covers bonds issued by States, state enterprises and other government bodies, as well as by European institutions. These bonds are purchased exclusively on the secondary market. However, for an infringement of the PSPP decision against Article 123 TFEU, it is argued that details of purchases are announced in a manner which could give rise to factual certainty on the markets that the Eurosystem will also purchase issued government bonds, The time limits between issuance of a debt instrument on the primary market and its acquisition on the secondary market is not verifiable, that acquired bonds are held to maturity until now, and that bonds with a negative return are obtained from the outset.

3. The PSPP decision could not be covered by the mandate of the ECB.

(A) monetary policy should be distinguished, in particular, from the economic policy which is primarily the responsibility of the Member States, in accordance with the wording, system and objective of the Treaties; The objective of a measure to be determined objectively, the means chosen to achieve this objective, and its link with other arrangements.

(B) From the Senate’s point of view, the PSPP decision could not be seen as a monetary policy measure, but rather as a predominantly economic policy measure, on the basis of an overall view of the relevant delineation criteria. While the PSPP has a stated monetary policy objective and is committed to the pursuit of this objective of monetary policy, But the economic policy implications arising from the volume of the PSPP and the associated predictability of the purchase of government bonds are already directly reflected in the program itself. This would render the PSPP disproportionate in relation to the underlying monetary policy objective. Moreover, the decisions constituting the basis of the program do not provide a comprehensible explanation which would allow the continuous continuity of the program to be reviewed on an ongoing basis during the several years of implementation of the decisions.

4. On the basis of the risk allocation between the ECB and the Bundesbank, the budgetary right of the German Bundestag, protected by Article 20 (1) and (2) in conjunction with Article 79 (3) of the Basic Law, and its overall budgetary responsibility by the PSPP decision Or its implementation in view of possible losses of the Bundesbank, can not be foreseen at present.

(A) An unlimited risk allocation within the Eurosystem and the resulting risks to the national central banks’ profit and loss account would constitute a violation of constitutional identity within the meaning of Article 79 (3) of the Basic Law if it were to recapitalize the national central banks with budgetary resources Which the Senate has committed to the approval of the German Bundestag in its jurisprudence to the EFSF and the ESM. For the success of the constitutional complaints, it is therefore important whether such a risk allocation can be excluded under the primary law.

(B) the decision-making by the Governing Council on the nature and extent of the risk-sharing between members of the European System of Central Banks is hardly determined by primary law. This could allow the ECB Council to amend the rules on risk-sharing within the Eurosystem, which could lead to risks to the national central banks’ profit and loss account and, moreover, to the overall budgetary responsibility of the national parliaments. Against this background, the question arises whether an unlimited risk allocation in the event of default of bonds of central governments and equivalent issuers between the national central banks of the Eurosystem against Article 123 and Article 125 TFEU and Article 4 (2) TEU With Article 79 (3) of the Basic Law).

Wall Street Banks Stunned At Trump’s Proposed Reform


 

Trump’s economic consultant adviser, Gary Cohn, has declared a return to the separation system in the US banking system in effect restoring Glass-Steagall Act which dates from the 1930s and was adopted as a result of the Great Depression yet abolished in 1999 by the Clintons. Trump had already spoken during the election campaign for a new version of the Glass-Steagall Act. So Cohn is simply repeating this position. Yet we have to look deeper here. Why is a former Goldman Sachs guy now against the Glass-Steagall Act?

In the banking sector, restoring the Glass-Steagall Act will reduce competition for Goldman Sachs. JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup would all be cut-off from investment banking services. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley would be benefactors. Expect now that Congress will drag its feet to protect the banks making sure this will not take place in the short-term. Much of the argument focuses on reducing the size of banks and separating the powers between investment and commercial banking will prevent the too-big to fail problems.