Trump Probes Find No Collusion, So House Democrats Mount Fresh Attacks


Published on Feb 18, 2019

SUBSCRIBED 121K

Robert Mueller and Senate probes find no collusion between President Donald Trump and Russia, so House Democrats launch at least three new investigations of their own. Will this spell #winning for Democrats in the 2020 elections. Bill Whittle Now is a production of the Members at https://BillWhittle.com

How Long Before We Hear About FBI Recordings in The White House?…


January 5th, 2017, an Oval Office meeting with President Obama, VP Joe Biden, James Comey (FBI), Michael Rogers (NSA), John Brennan (CIA), James Clapper (ODNI), Sally Yates (DOJ) and Susan Rice.   At the conclusion of the briefing, President Obama asks Sally Yates and James Comey to remain.  Together with Susan Rice, this is where the “by the book” comment comes into play. As recounted by Rice:

“President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”

Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe is now highlighting how the FBI conducted a criminal and counterintelligence operation under the auspices that President Trump was possibly an agent of a foreign government.  Let’s look at the big picture…

FBI Director James Comey told congress (March 20th, 2017) the reason the intelligence community did not disclose their counterintelligence operation against candidate, president-elect and President Trump was “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”  As such the required congressional oversight notifications were bypassed.

We learn in hindsight the Trump Transition team was under electronic surveillance.  This surveillance also included the capture of all of their transition email accounts, the content was later given -without prior approval- to Robert Mueller by the GAO.  This is not disputed.

Remember, as an outcome of the concern and in combination with the counterintelligence operation, the incoming National Security Advisor, General Michael Flynn, was designated as a national security risk by the intelligence apparatus that he would be part of. Flynn was under electronic surveillance as part of the Obama authorized operation.

On January 27th, 2017, FBI Director James Comey attended a Green Room dinnerwith President Trump just about a week after the inauguration. This is the meeting where, according to Comey, President Trump asked for “loyalty”.  [This is also the date when Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates confronted White House counsel Don McGahn about Flynn’s interview with the FBI a few days earlier on Jan 24th.]

It would only be a few weeks later [Follow Link] when President Trump remodeled the “Green Room” (presidential dining room) adding a flat screen TV and a chandelier he paid for personally. During the remodel the dining room was “taken down to the studs”, and according to a quote later delivered by Time Magazine:

TIME – […] But few rooms have changed so much so fast as his dining room, where he often eats his lunch amid stacks of newspapers and briefing sheets. A few weeks back, the President ordered a gutting of the room. “We found gold behind the walls, which I always knew. Renovations are grand,” he says, boasting that contractors from the General Services Administration resurfaced the walls and redid the moldings in two days. “Remember how hard they worked? They wanted to make me happy.”

On February 14th, 2017 President Trump and James Comey were again alone was in the Oval Office. February 14th was also the day when the head of the Secret Service, Joseph Clancy, announced his resignation.  Clancy’s resignation was effective March 4th, 2017.

After he was fired James Comey testified to congress on June 8th, 2017, saying he delivered his memos of the meetings with President Trump to his friend at Columbia University, Professor Daniel Richman, on/after May 15th. He said the intent was to initiate a “special prosecutor”:

“I woke up in the middle of the night on Monday night, ‘cause it didn’t dawn on me originally that there might be corroboration for our conversation; there might be a tape.” [Referring to Monday May 15] “And my judgment was I needed to get that out in the public square so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. I Didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. So I asked a close friend of mine to do it.”

However, the content of the memo was leaked to the New York Times on or before Thursday May 11th for an article that was originally posted at 5:26pm:

Quite simply James Comey lied to congress about when and why he initiated leaking the memos to his friends in the media.  Comey claimed a tweet from President Trump spurred him to share his memo.

The tweet from President Trump (May 12th) was in response to the New York Times article (May 11th) which was quoting from the Comey memo.  So Comey was lying when he said he gave the memo to the New York Times (Via Daniel Richman) on Monday May 15th.

This false motive, claimed by Comey, was highlighted by President Trump’s attorney at the time:

I bring up this example because of the Trump tweet that surrounds it.

President Trump tweeted about a “recording” after reading the New York Times article that was written from the memo account of James Comey; however, the tweet was also made after the Green Room was “taken down to the studs” and remodeled.

Everyone assumed President Trump was talking about a recording that he might have made of the Comey conversation; however, in hindsight given the nature of what is described above – wouldn’t it be more likely the recording was external to the White House; as a part of the surveillance.

“By the book”.

If they truly believed a foreign adversary was in control of the Trump administration; a claim they already made to the FISA court; why wouldn’t the Obama intelligence apparatus be wiretapping the White House?  Remember: “by the book.”

In hindsight we already know the Trump campaign, Trump transition team and Trump administration were under surveillance.

♦On May 8th, 2017, President Trump invited three journalists to tour the White House and discuss his first few months in office. [Link] This is where he initially showed part of the redecoration that included the dining room where he and James Comey had discussions.

♦On May 9th, 2017, President Trump fired James Comey.  That evening Andrew McCabe became Acting FBI Director and visited President Trump at the Oval Office.

♦On May 10th, 2017, President Trump invited Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Kislyak into the oval office.  [We now know that simultaneous to this meeting back at the FBI McCabe had launched a criminal and counterintelligence investigation against President Trump.] Later that same day, May 10th, after the Lavrov and Kislyak meeting, Trump invited McCabe to come back to the White House.

♦On May 11th, 2017, the New York Times using Comey’s leaked information wrote about the “loyalty meeting”.  This same day McCabe is testifying to congress and informing them President Trump’s firing of Comey: “there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date.” {Go Deep}

Stand back and think about the sequence above carefully.

I’ll bet you a donut President Trump was aware of the White House being bugged.  That’s why he invited Lavrov and Kislyak to the Oval Office, and then later called McCabe.   President Trump was proving to the listening ears there was no Trump-Russia collusion.

The FBI bugs were known, and allowed to remain in place all the way up to August 2nd, 2017.

(Via Politico) […] building-wide renovation blitz scheduled for the next two weeks, while President Donald Trump heads to his golf club in Bedminster, N.J

The air-conditioning project is bigger project that will shutter the West Wing during Trump’s absence.

“The maintenance people work hard, but when you’ve got a place that runs 24-7, it’s hard to keep it all in decent shape,” said a White House official.

The main situation room was recently closed for two weeks so that the iconic main table could be refurbished, according to a former official.

[…]  “It’s the only ‘leaks’ they can fix,” quipped the former official. (link)

Dan Scavino Jr.

@Scavino45

The timing was rather interesting and noted by others:

While the renovations may have been planned for months, the timing is extremely interesting, especially when you consider that General Kelly was recently named the new chief of staff.  One has to wonder whether or not the renovations are a cover for what would be a massive undertaking to essentially debug the entire White House which may have surveillance equipment held over from the previous administration. (link)

[Also see CNN REPORT HERE]

What happened at the same time the FBI investigation bugs were removed from the White House?  Well, check out the dates:

August 2nd, 2017, Robert Mueller requested an updated “scope memo” from Rod Rosenstein:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/375478974/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-4DaehSp6U38EiB8eNVXS

.

Any questions?

Here’s what CTH wants to know.  How long will it be, if ever, before we officially hear that the FBI had planted listening devices inside the White House?

In hindsight, the Kislyak and Lavrov invitation on May 10th is the big “tell”:

WHITE HOUSE – President Donald J. Trump met today with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov of Russia, following on the visit of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to Moscow last month.

President Trump emphasized the need to work together to end the conflict in Syria, in particular, underscoring the need for Russia to rein in the Assad regime, Iran, and Iranian proxies.

The President raised Ukraine, and expressed his Administration’s commitment to remain engaged in resolving the conflict and stressed Russia’s responsibility to fully implement the Minsk agreements.  He also raised the possibility of broader cooperation on resolving conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The President further emphasized his desire to build a better relationship between the United States and Russia. (WH link)

.

Now watch again:

Advertisements

Number Eight – Bernie Sanders Announces Presidential Bid…


Plowing the field.  The Bern crowd has no idea how the DNC machine is setting them up. Senator Bernie Sanders announces his decision to run again for the presidency in 2020.

.

Two points:  First, Bernie’s primary value is his voter list; he has leveraged this multiple times for indulgences from within the party apparatus. Second, Bernie is the perfect plough (a delegate splitter) to carve up and re-assemble constituent parts.

The unofficial ‘chosen one’, the intended party donor candidate, will not surface until April or May 2019.  The DNC is predictable. It’s still too early for the anointed candidate to surface.  Bernie holds an identical 2020 responsibility to Marco Rubio in 2016.  The apparatus has undeployed dirt on Bernie; they didn’t need to use it in 2016 because the outcome was predetermined.  Bernie was not previously vetted.

Knowing it’s likely the ♦UniParty DNC is following a similar ♦UniParty RNC strategy, we can start to put the personal characteristics and political traits together and contrast them against 2016. Here’s the way it looks so far:

  • Senator Ted Cruz was to 2016…. as Senator Elizabeth Warren is to 2020
  • ♦Governor Jeb Bush was to 2016 as….
  • Senator Marco Rubio was to 2016… as Senator Bernie Sanders is to 2020
  • Governor John Kasich was to 2016… as Senator Cory Booker is to 2020
  • Senator Lindsey Graham was to 2016 as….
  • Governor Mike Huckabee was to 2016 as….
  • Senator Rand Paul was to 2016…. as Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is to 2020
  • Dr. Ben Carson was to 2016 as…
  • Governor Chris Christie was to 2016 as…
  • Governor Scott Walker was to 2016 as…
  • Senator Rick Santorum was to 2016…. as Senator Sherrod Brown is to 2020
  • Governor George Pataki was to 2016 as….
  • Governor Rick Perry was to 2016…. as Senator Kamala Harris is to 2020
  • Governor Bobby Jindal was to 2016…. as Julian Castro is to 2020
  • Carly Fiorina was to 2016 as…. Senator Amy Klobuchar is to 2020
  • Governor Jim Gilmore was to 2016… as Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is to 2020

Reminder, anyone who is announcing their presidential bid ahead of Pelosi delivering the impeachment narrative is not part of the DNC plan. The “Chosen One” will surface during the April/May to June/July period when the legislative crew, the DNC crew and the media crew execute the impeachment plan.

Once we get a few more names on the DNC side, we can start to have fun with the celebrity squares graphics.

Report: DOJ Deputy Rod Rosenstein Expected to Depart by Mid March…


Fox News is reporting that Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein is anticipated to resign mid-March and be replaced by a hand-picked deputy by AG William Barr.  Initial reporting is that Jeffrey Rosen will be the replacement.

FOX – Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is expected to leave his role at the Justice Department by mid-March, a senior DOJ official told Fox News on Monday. (read more)

This timeframe would align with prior reporting that Rosenstein would exit mid-March simultaneous to the completion of the Robert Mueller investigation.

NBC REPORT WASHINGTON — Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who had been overseeing the special counsel investigation, plans to step down after Robert Mueller submits his report, according to administration officials familiar with his thinking.

A source close to Rosenstein said he intends to stay on until Mueller submits a report to the Justice Department on the Russian meddling investigation. The source said that would mean Rosenstein would remain until early March. (link)

Jake Gibson

@JakeBGibson

113 people are talking about this

If accurate, Jeffrey Rosen, Barr’s choice as deputy to replace Rod Rosenstein, was an attorney at Kirkland & Ellis, Barr’s former law firm, and is currently deputy transportation secretary.  Interestingly that is a connection to Mitch McConnell via Mitch’s wife Elaine Chao who is the current Transporation Secretary.

Previously Mr. Rosen served General Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor for the White House Office of Management and Budget during the George W. Bush administration. Before that, he was also with the Department of Transportation, serving as General Counsel.

Rosen has a B.A. in economics and a J.D. from Harvard.

President Trump Tweets Interesting Response to McCabe’s Soft Coup Diatribe…


President Donald Trump tweets a reaction to the 60 minutes interview by former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe; where McCabe outlined a concerted effort by the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to participate in a seditious ‘soft coup’ scheme against the president:

One of the points of disagreement amid those who research the deep weeds on ‘spygate’  has always been the oval office meeting between President Trump, DAG Rosenstein and Robert Mueller on the day before Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel.

For over a year the TTP group has highlighted this meeting as Rosetta-Stone evidence that Mueller, Rosenstein and Trump were working together to deconstruct deep state usurpers. However, that perspective always seemed to be a rather absurd stretch.

Given the latest series of points highlighted by the public admission of the soft-coup plotters, a more Occam’s razor likelihood is that DAG Rosenstein didn’t actually wear an electronic wire to record the president, but rather chose instead to carry a human recorder to accomplish the same objective.  Robert Mueller was likely that human recording device.

AG Bill Barr has a mess on his hands.

Remember, back when this entire nonsense began, President Trump strongly said he had nothing to do with any coordination with Russia; nothing to do with collusion with Russia; and also stated he was okay with the investigation as it looked into the propriety of people within the 2016 campaign. However, these statements were also with the assumption, held by himself as a result of -perhaps false- confirmations from James Comey, that he himself was not a target.

few weeks ago HPSCI member Devin Nunes was speculating that President Trump was the actual target all along.  The latest admissions by former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe specifically outlined how he opened two additional investigations of President Trump as a result of the Comey firing.  One investigation was criminal (obstruction of justice), and a second was counterintelligence (was the obstruction due to Trump being a Russian asset.

If the reporting (based on leaks) that has surfaced in the two-plus years of the investigation is accurate; and if Andrew McCabe did open two additional FBI investigations of President Trump on May 10th, 2017; then it is likely the clarification memo that Mueller requested from Rosenstein was about that issue.

If the mandate given to Robert Mueller was to specifically investigate the sitting president of the United States as an active participant, and subsequent target, for a counterintelligence operation, then DAG Rod Rosenstein -and Mueller- would have to hide that mandate from everyone and anyone.  Thus Mueller and Rosenstein would keep the August 2017 Scope Memo hidden from review…. which is exactly what they did.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/375478974/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-4DaehSp6U38EiB8eNVXS

.

President Trump would be the target and none of the principles would be able to discuss the key elements specifically because of this extra-constitutional issue.

All of President Trump’s prior commentary would be based on a (2017/2018) assumption that he was not the target of the FBI probe that was eventually turned over to Mueller by Rosenstein.  If the origination instruction from Rosenstein to Mueller includes the specific charge to investigate the President; then all prior assumptions -including those held by President Trump- are invalid.

Examples:

  • Rosenstein (or any DOJ/FBI official) would always be engaging with POTUS as a target.  All conversation would be clouded by that aspect. As a result, Rosenstein could never be fully honest with President Trump; or answer any question therein.
  • Any action taken by President Trump (emphasis on “any”) would therefore potentially be direct influence by the President toward an investigation that held him as a target.  He could never be permitted to approach the investigation…. yet he would never find anyone with an honest answer as to why he cannot approach the investigation.

We previously pondered this aspect when we outlined “the declassification conundrum“.  However, at the time we did not evaluate the classifications issue from a targetperspective; we were evaluating the issue as if President Trump was the victim of the illegal targeting.

If you flip the paradigm and now look at what actions President Trump could take, while reconsidering that he is the principle target, well, two years of contradictory things start to make more sense.

The conversation, and inability of Rosenstein to be honest with POTUS, changes the dynamic of this tweet:

POTUS writing: “may have a perceived negative impact on the Russia probe” takes on a whole new meaning when you consider a conversation where Rosenstein cannot be honest with the target of the “Russia probe”…. and the target has essentially no idea.

Remember, throughout 2017 and 2018, the basic assumption -due to visible and public declarations by the DOJ- was that Mueller was conducting an investigation into Russian interference with the election; and/or other matters that may surface as an outcome of that investigation.  However, we never knew (still don’t) the actual content of the August 2017 clarification mandate that Rosenstein gave to Mueller (see below):

If accurate, we can imagine a conversation where Mueller approaches Rosenstein in July and August 2017:

Mueller: “Rod, if you want me to consider President Trump a specific target of the investigation, you’re going to have to give some specific expansion of the investigation, in writing, to look into all the stuff inside this dossier.”

Rosenstein: “OK Bob, I’ll put it in writing, but we’ve got to keep this part away from view or the targets will know we’re using an unvetted dossier, which could be portrayed as political opposition research funded by Clinton, as evidence against them…. fair enough?”

Accepting Devin Nunes prior speculation as accurate (after much more thought, it likely is); and accepting Andrew McCabe is accurate in his admission of opening two investigations of Trump after the Comey firing; the redacted portion of the published mandate would be the part where President Trump is outlined as a target.

A direct target, or an indirect target, matters not.  What matters is that President Trump is A TARGET.   That would explain why Mueller requested that Rosenstein write down a much more expanded explanation for the mandate that no-one, [NO-ONE other than Judge Ellis (Manafort case)], has ever seen.

Knowing he would be entering into this foray where President Trump is the target, you can easily see why Mueller would want to meet with President Trump ahead of accepting the job.  The entire enterprise would be fraught with tenuous extra-constitutional issues. Mueller’s target is the most powerful person in the world; and the ramifications are rather stunning.

Any action taken by President Trump to declassify documents, that would show the dubious structure of the originating FBI investigation, would now be considered as: the target of the investigation undermining the investigation into himself.

Under this principle, congress requesting President Trump to declassify documents showing the unlawful nature of the investigative origination is an exercise in futility.

Congress is asking the target of the unlawful investigation to declassify evidence that was assembled against him.  The target then turns to the people who are investigating him and says please declassify….. however, the receiver (DOJ) is getting a request from their target.

Getting a declassification request from Congress is one thing; but getting a declassification request from the target of their investigation is a request they can neither fulfill nor explain their lack of fulfillment.

From the position of the DOJ:

As a counterintelligence target President Trump cannot declassify evidence, nor can he direct anyone to declassifying any evidence on his behalf.

FUBAR

Ultimately the only person who can correct this issue appears to be the same person who started this entire mess, Rod Rosenstein.  Which likely explains why he said he will leave the DOJ when Mueller is finished.

WASHINGTON — Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who had been overseeing the special counsel investigation, plans to step down after Robert Mueller submits his report, according to administration officials familiar with his thinking.

A source close to Rosenstein said he intends to stay on until Mueller submits a report to the Justice Department on the Russian meddling investigation. The source said that would mean Rosenstein would remain until early March. (link)

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein initiated the continued investigation into President Trump by authorizing, and later clarifying, that Mueller is to proceed with the special counsel mandate that includes President Trump as a target.

….And knowing that dynamic completely changes the background review about how corrupt Andrew McCabe’s allies in the FBI and media started leveraging against Rod Rosenstein for their own benefit.

Sunday Talks: Representative John Ratcliffe Discusses McCabe’s ‘Soft Coup’ Effort….


Representative John Ratcliffe appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the DOJ and FBI ‘soft coup’ attempt headed by Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

Ratcliffe also discusses the outlook with newly confirmed Attorney General William Barr and what actions he hopes AG Barr will take in the wake of mounting evidence that Andrew McCabe, James Baker, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and former Acting AG Sally Yates were coordinating an effort to remove President Donald Trump.

 

Reminder: Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe Also Launched a Criminal Investigation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions…


As Andrew McCabe makes current media statements to confirm how he opened a counterintelligence investigation (July 31, 2016) against candidate Donald Trump, and a criminal investigation against President Donald Trump (May 10th, 2017), it is worth reminding ourselves that McCabe also launched a simultaneous criminal investigation against Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

It is also worth noting in both current and prior reporting that it was/is CBS announcing the revelations from Andrew McCabe and his Lawfare team:

FLASHBACK CBS Reports (March 2018) – […] The investigation was opened before special counsel Robert Mueller was appointed, Reid reports. A Justice Department official says Sessions was not aware of this investigation until he found out about it from reports.

ABC News first reported that McCabe had been in charge of the investigation into Sessions. Sessions’ testimony raised alarm bells, but this is the first time it has been reported that there was actually a criminal probe of Sessions’ actions. (read more)

In hindsight it would appear the criminal probe against AG Jeff Sessions was intended to create a firewall that would isolate the Attorney General and keep prying eyes away from the ‘soft coup’ efforts of the seditious small group.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/377540616/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-VnQlT8HQJOAa4hTVK8wZ

Sunday Talks: Rush Limbaugh Discusses Border Security and DOJ/FBI ‘Soft Coup’…


Influential radio host Rush Limbaugh appears on Fox News with Chris Wallace to discuss the necessity of President Trump’s border security declaration; the DOJ and FBI scheme to conduct a ‘soft coup’ against the president; and how the democrat party is positioning themselves for the 2020 election.

The first half of the interview discusses the national security declaration; then the subject shifts to former FBI Deputy Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein and the ‘soft coup’; and then finishes with discussion over the Green New Deal and the likelihood of democrat success in the 2020 election.u

There are Trillions at Stake…


There’s a lot of news this week reflecting a great deal of oppositional alignment against the presidency of Donald Trump. CTH can get down in the weeds of each specific issue to discuss the motives and intents (we will, and do), but the big picture MUST remain at the forefront of understanding. If we lose track of the big picture, the weeds are overwhelming.

…“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”

~ Niccolò Machiavelli

♦POTUS Trump is disrupting the global order of things in order to protect and preserve the shrinking interests of the U.S. middle-class.  He is fighting, almost single-handed, at the threshold of the abyss. Our interests, our position, is zero-sum; if POTUS Trump fails, there will never be another available route to confront the Big Club.

President Trump’s aggregate opposition seeks to repel and retain the status-quo. They were on the cusp of full economic control over the U.S. just before candidate Trump snatched away their victory.  There are trillions at stake. They won’t make that mistake again.

Summary of Action: President Trump has structured a plan to break down the multinational trade interests, and their “controlled markets.”  Step-by-step President Trump is executing this plan; while his opposition, including Mitch McConnell, tries to stop him.

President Trump is disrupting decades of multinational financial interests who use the U.S. as a host for their ideological endeavors. President Trump is confronting multinational corporations and the global constructs of economic systems that were put in place to the detriment of the host; the American Middle-Class. There are trillions at stake; it is all about the economics; all else is chaff and countermeasures.

Familiar faces, perhaps faces you previously thought were decent, are now revealing their alignment with larger entities that are our abusers. In an effort to awaken the victim to the cycle of self-destructive codependent behavior, allow me to cue a visual example from U.S. Senator John Thune. WATCH:

.

What South Dakota Senator John Thune is showcasing here is his full alignment with big multinational corporate agriculture (BIG AG).

Big AG is not supporting local farmers. Big AG does not support “free and fair markets.” Big AG supports the interests of multinational corporations and multinational financial interests.

For the multinational interests the U.S. is the host; from an economic nationalism perspective they are the parasite.

It is critical to think of BIG AG in the same way we already are familiar with multinational manufacturing of durable goods.

We are already familiar how China, Mexico and ASEAN nations export our raw materials (ore, coking coal, rare earth minerals etc.). The raw materials are used to manufacture goods overseas, the cheap durable goods are then shipped back into the U.S. for purchase.

It is within this decades-long process where we lost the manufacturing base, and the multinational economic planners (World Trade Organization) put us on a path to being a “service driven” economy.

The road to a “service-driven economy” is paved with a great disparity between financial classes. The wealth gap is directly related to the inability of the middle-class to thrive.

Elite financial interests, including those within Washington DC, gain wealth and power, the U.S. workforce is reduced to servitude, “service”, of their affluent needs.

The destruction of the U.S. industrial and manufacturing base is EXACTLY WHY the wealth gap has exploded in the past 30 years.

With that familiarity, did you think the multinationals would stop with only “DURABLE GOODS”?

They don’t.

They didn’t.

The exact same exfiltration and exploitation has been happening, with increased speed, over the past 15-20 years with “CONSUMABLE GOODS“, ie food.

Raw material foodstuff is exported to China, ASEAN nations and Mexico, processed and shipped back into the U.S. as a finished product.  [Recent example: Salmonella Ritz Bits (whey); Nabisco shuts New Jersey manufacturing plant, moves food production to Mexico… the result: Salmonella crackers.]  This is the same design-flow with food as previously exploited by other economic sectors, including auto manufacturing.

Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Monsanto, Nestlé, PepsiCo, Bunge, Potash Corp, Cargill or Wilmar, all stay out of the public eye by design. Most megafood conglomerates have roots going back a century or more, but ever-increasing consolidation means that their current corporate owners may have been established only a few years ago. Welcome to the complex world of Big Ag:

Start with the so-called Big Six [PDF]. Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow AgroSciences, DuPont, Bayer, and BASF produce roughly three-quarters of the pesticides used in the world. The first five also sell more than half the name-brand seeds that farmers plant, including varieties modified for resistance to the very pesticides they also sell. Meanwhile, if farmers want fertilizer, a list of 10 other companies, starting with PotashCorp, account for about two-thirds of the world market.

Once the plowing, planting, nurturing, and harvesting are done, around 80 percent of major crops pass through the hands of four traders: ADM, Bunge, Cargill, and Louis Dreyfus. These companies aren’t just financiers, of course—Cargill, for example, produces animal feed and many other products, and it supplies more than a fifth of all meat sold in the United States.

And if you ever had any ideas about going vegetarian to avoid the conglomerates, forget about it: ADM processes about a third of all soybeans in the United States and a sixth of those grown around the globe. It also brews more than 5.6 billion liters of ethanol for gasoline and pours more than 2 million metric tons of high-fructose corn syrup every year. And it produces a sixth of the world’s chocolate. {Continue – and go Deep}

Multinational corporations, BIG AG, are now invested in controlling the outputs of U.S. agricultural industry and farmers. This process is why food prices have risen exponentially in the past decade.

The free market is not determining price; there is no “supply and demand” influence within this modern agricultural dynamic. Food commodities are now a controlled market just like durable goods. The raw material (harvests writ large) are exploited by the financial interests of massive multinational corporations. This is “contract farming”.

Again, if President Trump can successfully pull us out of NAFTA your food bill will drop 25% (or more) within the first year.  Further, if U.S. supply and demand were to become part of the domestic market price for food, we would see the prices of aggregate food products drop by half.   Some perishable food products would predictably drop so dramatically in price it is unfathomable how far the prices would fall.

Behind this dynamic we find the international corporate and financial interests who are inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.

When we understand how trade works in the modern era we understand why the agents within the system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.

♦The biggest lie in modern economics, willingly spread and maintained by corporate media, is that a system of global markets still exists.

It doesn’t.

McCabe’s Recent Statements Contradict McCabe’s Prior Testimony…


When a liar lies they often have trouble keeping their statements consistent.  Former FBI Director Andrew McCabe gave an interview to CBS and wrote an op-ed, a book excerpt, in the Atlantic with outlining a specific sequence of events, dates and statements surrounding the days immediately after James Comey was fired.  However, a review of the timeline and the statements he delivered to CBS is contradicted by his prior congressional testimony.

In his published book excerpt (The Atlantic) McCabe outlines a series of contacts and meetings with President Trump on May 9th, 2017, the day Comey was fired, and then again on May 10th, 2017, the following day.

McCabe (Via The Atlantic) On Wednesday, May 10, 2017, my first full day on the job as acting director of the FBI, I sat down with senior staff involved in the Russia case—the investigation into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. As the meeting began, my secretary relayed a message that the White House was calling. The president himself was on the line.

[…] As requested, I went back to the White House that afternoon. The scene was almost identical to the one I had walked into the previous night. (more)

Note “the previous night” would have been Tuesday May 9, 2017, the day Comey was fired.  So McCabe met with POTUS the evening of the 9th, and the afternoon of the 10th.

Now listen and watch McCabe discuss with Scott Pelley the date he decided to open the criminal investigation of President Trump under the auspices of obstruction of justice.

The key part begins at 01:00 as McCabe is describing the first meeting with the president in the Oval Office, May 9th, just hours after Comey was fired:

.

McCabe: I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency, and won the election for the presidency, and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage; and that was something that troubled me greatly.

PelleyHow long after that was it you decided to start the obstruction of justice and counterintelligence investigations involving the President?

McCabeThe next day I met with the teams investigating the Russia cases; and I asked the team to go back and conduct an assessment to determine: where are we with these efforts, and what steps do we need to take going forward? I was very concerned that I was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid ground, in an indelible fashion, that were I removed quickly, or reassigned, or fired, that the case could not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace. I wanted to make sure our case was on solid ground and if somebody came in behind me and closed it and tried to walk away from it, they would not be able to do with without creating a record of why they made that decision.

Recap:

•May 9th, 2017, Comey fired.
•May 9th, 2017, (Evening) McCabe meets with POTUS.
•May 10th, 2017, McCabe meets with his team. Opens “obstruction” investigation.
•May 10th, 2017, (Afternoon) McCabe meets again with POTUS.

That’s the sequence as described by McCabe in his 2019 book excerpt and CBS interview to correspond with his justification for opening up a criminal case of obstruction against the sitting President of the United States.

McCabe’s decision to open a criminal “obstruction” investigation on May 10th, 2017, corresponds with the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages (same dates):

(text message link)

However, on May 11th, 2017, the day after those two meetings with President Trump; and the day after McCabe opened a criminal investigation; McCabe was testifying to congressabout Russia interference in the election. His story was entirely different in 2017.

With the Comey firing still fresh in the headlines McCabe was asked about whether President Trump was obstructing or interfering:

♦Senator Rubio: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. McCabe, can you–without going to the specifics of any individual investigation, I think the American people want to know, has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

Director McCabe. As you know, Senator, the work of the men and women of the FBI continues despite any changes in circumstance, any decisions. So there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date. Quite simply put, sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.

♦Senator Collins. So has there been any curtailment of the FBI’s activities in this important investigation since Director
Comey was fired?

Director McCabe. Ma’am, we don’t curtail our activities. As you know, are people experiencing questions and are reacting to
the developments this week? Absolutely. Does that get in the way of our ability to pursue this or any other investigation?
No, ma’am. We continue to focus on our mission and get that job done.

♦Senator Heinrich. When did you last meet with the President, Director McCabe?

Director McCabe. I don’t think I’m going to comment on that.

Senator Heinrich. Was it earlier this week?

Director McCabe. I have met with the President this week, but I don’t really want to go into the details of that.

Senator Heinrich. But Russia did not come up?

Director McCabe. That’s correct, it did not.

♦Senator Lankford. Thank you. Let me just run through some quick questions on this. Director McCabe, thanks for being here as well. Let me hit some high points of some of the things that I’ve heard already, just to be able to confirm. You have the resources you need for the Russia investigation, is that correct?

Director McCabe. Sir, we believe it’s adequately resourced.

Senator Lankford. Okay, so there’s not limitations on resources? You have what you need? The–the actions about Jim Comey and his release has not curtailed the investigation from the FBI? It’s still moving forward?

Director McCabe. The investigation will move forward, absolutely.

Senator Lankford. No agents have been removed that are the ongoing career folks that are doing the investigation?

Director McCabe. No, sir.

Senator Lankford. Is it your impression at this point that the FBI is unable to complete the investigation in a fair and
expeditious way because of the removal of Jim Comey?

Director McCabe. It is my opinion and belief that the FBI will continue to pursue this investigation vigorously and completely.

♦Senator Harris. Has–I understand that you’ve said that the White House–that you have not talked with the White House
about the Russia investigation. Is that correct?

Director McCabe. That’s correct.

[Transcript link]

On May 11th, 2017, two days after Comey was fired; and after back-to-back days meeting with the President; Andrew McCabe is telling congress not only has President Trump not interfered with -or obstructed- the investigation, but there has been zero discussion between himself, the President, and/or the White House about the FBI investigation.

However, McCabe is now saying he opened the criminal “obstruction” investigation the day prior to his testimony. In 2019 he’s selling an entirely different story and contradicting himself from his 2017 congressional testimony.

Perhaps that series of contradictions explains why McCabe is now “qualifying” his claims from yesterday about discussing the 25th amendment with Rod Rosenstein:

Melissa Schwartz

@MSchwartz3

1,438 people are talking about this