With Trump As President Prepping Is More Important Than Ever


Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

I don’t believe it is as pervasive as certain people may think, but there is a notion among some in the liberty movement that with Donald Trump in the White House the need for crisis preparedness has subsided. Because preppers and survivalists tend to lean towards the conservative side of things, the urgency for prepping almost always explodes when the Democratic party is “in power.” As they say, for example, Barack Obama was perhaps the greatest gun salesman in history with the gun industry growing over 158% during his two terms.

Now with Republican dominance in Congress, Senate and White House, there is a possible temptation for conservatives to become complacent and comfortable once again. In 2017 so far, ATF background checks have dropped by at least half a million since this time last year, and gun company stocks are turning negative. There are also rumors floating around that survival food companies are suffering from a severe crunch in sales. Though I have not yet found this to be substantiated, I can verify that many preppers I deal with on a daily basis seem to have relaxed their guard.

I would point out that this is not necessarily all due to Trump. The gun market is likely saturated after eight years of Obama, and one must also consider that as the U.S. economy continues to decline, surplus cash used for prep gear is going to dry up. That said, I do think it is important to examine any assumptions liberty activists might have in terms of a Trump driven “recovery.”

When I began publishing my post-election analysis on what I felt was a predictable Trump win, I did find anger among some activists who decided I was being “too pessimistic,” and that I should join the movement in celebration. Being that I called a Trump presidency half a year in advance based on the premise that the globalists needed a conservative scapegoat for the next phase of the ongoing financial crisis, it was hardly a moment of celebration for me.

There is a common delusion among those that invest themselves in politics that all that is needed to reverse the course of any nation or situation is a “strong leader” with ample cheerleading from the populace. In reality, social and geopolitical disasters are usually far beyond the means of any one politician to change. Economic disasters are even more irreversible. I wish I could pretend to be optimistic, but I am rather well studied in the history of these kinds of events.

Conservatives are especially vulnerable to the idea of a “protector on a white horse” coming to their rescue; a God-fearing hero and statesman, a general and leader of men. But, such people do not exist. There are no supermen. There are no worldly saviors. There are only common men, with common failings, destined to face extraordinary obstacles. The great men of history are not born before hand — they are forged in the crucible of crisis. Great men are not great men until proven otherwise. To assume any political leader is a great man beforehand is foolish, to say the least.

This is why blind faith in a post-Trump renaissance is misplaced. It is something that has yet to be proven, and in the meantime, there are numerous and highly visible dangers on the horizon that demand continued vigilance and preparedness. I will examine one of these primary dangers now…

The Growing Threat Of Civil Unrest

As I noted in my post-election analysis, the political Left has been shell shocked by the rise of Trump and their emotional response would undoubtedly be to double down and become progressively more volatile and more violent. I predicted that this would be evident as winter broke and the cold weather subsided.

The first signs of this are surfacing as May Day is becoming a rally date for social justice mobs bent on disrupting any agenda the Trump administration might have for enforcing immigration laws. The largest of these protests is to be held in Los Angeles, but similar protests are planned nationwide as well.

From what we have seen from previous rallies, it would not be unfair to expect rioting in May. I say this because a tone shift in the left is taking place and extreme reactions are more frequent. The following video illustrates this clearly, I think…

Warning – Explicit

In case you missed it, this guy just pulled an AR-15 on someone simply because they had a MAGA flag on their truck. Not only that, but he FILMED HIMSELF doing it and and apparently posted it on social media. That is how brazen and insane these people are becoming.

Think of it this way — could you have even imagined something like this happening during the 2012 election? It is important not to become conditioned to such behavior as being “normal.”

To be sure, this sort of thing will not be happening in certain parts of the country. In my state of Montana, the assailant would have been shot two dozen times over by our highly armed population regardless of his politics just on the self defense principle. And frankly, I am fine with that. Citizens providing security for citizens is the American way.

What I do have a problem with, though, is the increasing potential for an extreme response from conservatives in the face of leftist lunacy. Meaning, I worry about martial law with conservative support, which in my view is more and more likely over the next two years.

Contrary to popular belief among tough-government champions, martial law often instigates more violence than it solves. The harsher the crackdown, the more vicious the push-back; the more vicious the push-back the more totalitarianism is rationalized by authorities. It’s a terrible cycle.

Preparedness in terms of self defense should be self-explanatory here. During widespread mob action the rule of law is usually the first casualty, even when martial law is instituted. You also never know when some nutcase might declare you a “Trump supporter” (whether you are one or not) as he reaches for a weapon.

It is fascinating to me the level of cognitive dissonance with some liberty activists who seem to think Trump’s first term will be anything other than pure chaos. George Soros, an elitist who often funds the very groups organizing mobs to protest Trump, said it plainly:

“I think Trump will fail.”

“What’s more Soros predicted that the market’s Trump high will soon turn into a hangover. He called Trump unpredictable and unprepared, and said that combination will end up bad for the market.”

Soros and his globalist colleagues do not need to field guesses; they ENGINEER the outcomes that they “predict.” Social unrest at this fragile time would result in the exact market instability Soros mentioned, among other problems.

Look, you may believe Trump is being threatened on all sides by the so-called “deep state,” or you may believe that he has willingly surrounded himself with global elitists because he is a Trojan horse. Either way, the diagnosis for the future is not rosy. It would be naive to think that the globalists would not do everything in their power to foment calamity in the near term. It would be equally naive to believe that such an agenda could be repelled through political means.

The answer, as always, is a prepared citizenry. This can act as a deterrent as much as a measure of comfort. The more prepared the public is for any eventuality, the less affected we will be by disaster. The less affected we are by disaster, the less fearful we will be when it strikes and the less likely we will be to make stupid decisions such as throwing our support behind martial law and the wholesale erasure of the constitution. The more prepared we are, the fewer options available to the establishment when attempting to lure us into poor collective decisions.

Prepping means freedom in the face of uncertainty, and times have never been more uncertain. To summarize: A Trump White House calls for more caution, not less.

President Trump -vs- Deep State, Big Club and U.S. Media…


The term: “for domestic consumption” is a term generally familiar to political observers who are accustomed to filtering out and separating ‘noise’ from ‘action’ when reviewing remarks made by international leaders outside the U.S.

However, in modern U.S. geo-political review it becomes important to apply the same cognitive transparency toward U.S. President Trump as he faces the three-headed swamp guardian, Cerberus.

The three heads of the modern Cerberus we identify as: •Deep State (foreign policy adversaries), •Big Club (domestic economic adversaries) and •U.S. Media.

All three oppositional entities view the insurgent Presidency of Donald Trump as adversarial to their long-term globalist interests.

Against the backdrop of Jordans King Abdullah II visiting President Trump in the White House; and knowing Jordan has approximately 2.8 million Syrian refugees, most of whom oppose Syrian President Bashir Assad; and in the aftermath of a “chemical agent” attack in Syria – President Trump was in a precarious position. The Deep Globalist State had laid their trap.

Within the 30,000 foot review, and against the historic backdrop of precedent for this type of action, we find the motive. However, it’s a motive that is virtually impossible to discuss from the office of the presidency while the adversarial U.S. media is also poised to strike.

Knowing King Abdullah is an ideological ally in the quest for the longer goal of peace, President Trump takes an outward approach (two-nation domestic consumption) to blame Syria’s Bashir Assad. This strategic approach deflects the fangs of Deep State, inoculates against a follow-up attack by MSM, and protects the domestic position of Abdullah.

The prudent President Trump approach also allows the freedom alliance of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi (Egypt), King Abdullah II (Jordan), King Salman (Saudi Arabia), Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Israel), and Mahmoud Abbas (Palestinian Authority) to move forward toward a much larger, more stable and more significant geo-political alignment. King Abdullah publicly signaled these intentions today during remarks with President Trump at the White House.

The back-channeling signals and conversations with Vladimir Putin (Russia), and Bashir Assad (Syria) become more important than the public optics for ‘domestic consumption’. Actions speak louder than words. Knowing the rather extensive ground work that has already taken place, there’s no immediate reason to believe Putin and Assad do not recognize President Trump’s larger strategy.

♦ Immediately following his inauguration, President Trump spoke to Saudi Arabia’s King Salman and gained his ideological and financial support for building a safe zone for Syrian’s as they rebuild.

♦ A week later, President Trump spoke at length to Egypt’s Fattah al-Sisi about their efforts.

♦ At the beginning of February – King Abdullah III of Jordan traveled to Washington to meet with Vice-President Mike Pence and discuss aide and assistance for regional security.   Previously, in November 2016, King Abdullah spoke to President-elect Trump

♦ A week later – Benjamin Netanyahu arrived in Washington DC for a very warm and optimistic meeting with President Trump for talks on regional security.

♦ At the beginning of March – Egyptian foreign minister Sameh Shoukry visited Washington, met with members of Congress and held a long discussion with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson,

♦ Mid-March Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas met with an envoy from President Trump and told him that a peace deal is possible under the new president.

♦  On Monday – Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi came to the White House for an official state visit, and a very warm greeting by President Trump.

♦  Today – Jordan’s King Abdullah II follows al-Sisi with a visit to the White House and receives another very warm greeting by the U.S. President

Jordan’s King Abdullah and Egypt’s Fattah al-Sisi have a very close regional relationship.

Egyptian President al-Sisi previously secured most of the Sinai border region.  The current challenge, for all regional interests, is to keep the extremist elements in check and undermine their destabilizing efforts.  A big part of that stability includes Syria, Russia and the U.S. defeating the remnants of ISIS.

Under-reported in Western media, during the fall/winter of 2014 and spring/summer of 2015 al-Sisi removed every Hamas tunnel and relocated thousands of homes to create a miles-wide buffer zone no longer useful by terrorists.

gaza border sinai 2

gaza border sinai

Netanyahu-and-General-el-Sisi-of-Egypt-333-x-248The scope of what Egypt did to secure the Southern and Eastern border of Israel/Gaza is quite remarkable, and they have paid a high price battling extremists every inch of the way.

Simultaneously, as his Egyptian forces were removing the most significant security threat, al-Sisi brokered a peace deal between Abbas and Netanyahu and forced the Palestinian Authority to speak with one voice.   That’s why Egypt was so furious when John Kerry insisted on poking his nose into the agreement.

After the peace deal, and after he constructed the border security zone, Fattah al-Sisi then set up the construct for a Joint Arab Intervention Force.

We have continued to express optimism for a confluence of events, people and activity that is happening quietly, and could stun the geo-political world.  The timing is right, because we view these activities through a different prism.  We review against the backdrop of President Obama’s mid-east failure, equitable misery.

The reality of President Obama’s expressed foreign policy of regime change -regardless of cost or consequence- has left millions of Mid-East communities in peril; far worse off today than they were nine years ago.  In an odd and accidental way, President Obama created equitable misery.

• The Egyptian people, in no way a populist entity favorable to Israel, suffered through two years of brutal dictatorship from the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohammed Morsi.  Their very survival only due to a successful return of cultural and economic stability at the hands of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

• The Syrian people, again holding no favorable disposition toward Israel writ large, only just now coming out of the shadows of a horrific five-year civil war and seeing sunlight for the first time in half a decade.  Breathing room.

• The Libyan people, caught amid an ongoing crisis of regional and tribal strife suffering through ongoing extremist violence that has taken them into the depths of economic and social chaos.  And before the fighting is even over, Europe is outlining demands of the North African gates.

• The Jordanian people, again a tenuous and precarious Muslim nation, who has watched the most barbaric and horrific consequences from extremist violence in their lifetimes.  The Jordanians are aiding more than 2.8 million refugees from the civil war in Syria.

The end result of almost all far-left policies when carried out to their natural conclusion is equitable misery.  At no moment in recent history has the choking consequence of a decade-long ideological war left a larger population of people so exhausted than at this very moment.

Think of the nationalist possibility.  ♦ Fattah al-Sisi (Egypt), ♦ King Abdullah II (Jordan), ♦ Benjamin Netanyahu (Israel), ♦ Mahmoud Abbas (Palestinian Authority), ♦ King Salman and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (Saudi Arabia), and ♦ U.S. President Donald Trump.  Together they have a remarkable canvas.

A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The NSC Meeting…


The anti-Trump media jumped into a level of gleeful frenzy today amid a required security filing noticing that Senior Trump Adviser Steve Bannon was no longer a member of the “principals committee” on the National Security Council.

The hilarity cemented itself when competing media outlets were arguing about Steve Bannon being on the NSC, or being kicked-off the NSC, while Bannon walked past them en route to today’s NSC meeting.  Wait, wha… huh?   Yeah -{Insert Laugh Track HERE}-

Nothing ever happens in a vacuum, and today is no exception.   No, Steve Bannon is not being removed from the Senior advisory role to President Trump and will attend NSC meetings with the President.  Bannon’s security clearance therein remains unchanged.

However, Bannon is removing himself from the Principal’s Committee of the H.R. McMaster NSC (*note* he never attended the committee meetings, well, that is, he did, once), now that the political weaponization of NSC intelligence operations has been removed; and McMaster has recalibrated the incoming intelligence agencies to remove the political intelligence they were previously used to sending.

What does that prior paragraph mean?

Start by reminding yourself of the current headlines about National Security Adviser Susan Rice requesting raw intelligence to the NSC based on Obama’s political agendas’, not national security.

HR McMaster, the current National Security Adviser of President Trump, had to reset and re-instruct each of the heads of the intelligence agencies who provide intelligence to the NSC to remove the political intelligence.

McMaster needed to visit with each agency, CIA, NSA, State Department and Defense to reorient them on what national intelligence the Trump administration wishes to receive within the National Security Council.

President Trump doesn’t want the national intelligence agencies sending him updates on what Senator Schumer had for lunch, where and who he dined with.  Instead President Trump prefers the intelligence agencies focus on global security issues that are actually vital to the national security interests of the country.

H.R McMasters instructions toward he intelligence agencies has just freed up thousands of hours of operational intelligence (spying and analysis) to focus on real threats unrelated to domestic politics.  Subsequently with the new direction established, Steve Bannon doesn’t need to be a pre-filter for NSC raw intel any longer.   Bannon can now be a consumer of that intelligence, just like President Trump.

White House Chief Legal Counsel Don McGahn’s job also just got a lot less stressful.

Secondly, with the anticipation of President Obama’s Nat Sec Adviser Susan Rice remaining in the headlines as more is discovered about her role in the weaponization of intelligence for political use, there’s no better time for political Bannon to exit the NSC Principals Committee than right now.

It would be a little sketchy for Rice’s political weaponization of the NSC to be exposed in the media headlines while Steve Bannon, painted as a pure political partisan, sat on the Principals Committee of the Trump NSC.

Report: Rice Unmasking Requests Were for Surveillance of “Daily Lives” of Trump Officials…


CTH Susan Rice Back Story:

Today, Catherine Herridge is reporting the unmasking requests made by former National Security Adviser were requests for details of daily surveillance of President Trump’s transition team regarding their daily life activity.

(New York) The intelligence reports at the center of the Susan Rice unmasking controversy were detailed, and almost resembled a private investigator’s file, according to a Republican congressman familiar with the documents.

“This is information about their everyday lives,” Rep. Peter King of New York, a member of the House Intelligence committee said. “Sort of like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired just to find out what the other person is doing from morning until night and then you try to piece it together later on.”

On the House Intelligence Committee, only the Republican chairman, Devin Nunes of California, and the ranking Democrat Adam Schiff, also of California, have personally reviewed the intelligence reports. Some members were given broad outlines.

Nunes has consistently stated that the files caused him deep concern because the unmasking went beyond the former national security adviser Mike Flynn, and the information was not related to Moscow. (read more)

US Population Migrating South to Less Taxed States


USA Map Migration

The US Census report has shown that the net migration from the New York City area has surged during 2016, and that even included myself. Indeed, much more people are leaving the New York region than any other major metropolitan area in the country. Since 2010, the New York area has lost almost 4.5% of its population. This included New Jersey, Connecticut, Long Island, and the lower Hudson Valley. The number of people who left in 2015 was 187,034. Last year, 2016, that number jumped to 223,423. The number of international immigrants settling in the tri-state area declined from 181,551 to 160,324. The international migration has slowed and this trend means that taxes will only rise.

Meanwhile, Cook County, Illinois has lost more population than any other county in the United States from July 2015 to July 2016, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau report. Clearly, the highest taxed states are losing the most people. Nevertheless, the data clearly shows that the higher the state tax rate, the greater the migration outward.

The State of New York as a whole lost 95,591 people and California came in second losing 93,915 with New Jersey losing 76,175, Illinois lost 52,804, and Michigan losing 47,347.

The three states at the top of the list for destinations are Texas posting a gain of 109,887 people, Florida 61,395, and Colorado 41,501.

Getting the Facts Straight – Are they Just Oblivious to our History?


1863$100GoldCertificate

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, I was reading one analyst who claims we need a new dollar. He said that in 1832 Gold coins were produced at a face value of $20 each, and the one ounce Silver coins retained their $1 valuation and were issued in 1792. He concluded: “In summary. A Silver coin standard in 1792. A Gold coin standard in 1832. Paper Gold/Silver Certificates in 1900. Then Federal Reserve notes in 1933. This is where it stands now. Each century a new US Dollar. So why do we need a new US Dollar?” You have shown pictures of gold backed currency before 1900 and you wrote $20 gold pieces were not minted until the California Gold Rush in 1849. Are any of these statements remotely correct? This is very confusing.

SF

US1794$1-r

1795USGold$10ANSWER: Sorry, but no. They are all wrong. Just pick up a US coin catalog and you will quickly see the first silver dollar was minted in 1794, not 1792. There were no silver dollars minted at all between 1805 and 1840 and the first $20 gold coin was indeed issued during 1849 because of the California Gold Rush. The largest gold coin previously was $10 and it was issued in 1795 and here too there were no $10 gold coins issued after 1804 until 1838. So, I’m not sure where 1832 comes into play. The first gold back paper currency was issued in 1863, not 1900. That’s another strange statement.

None of these facts are remotely close to being true.

1792-Birch-Disme

cromwell-oliverAs far as 1792, Thomas Birch struck experimental coins the Disme (10 cent), Half Disme, and the One Cent. These were not the coins officially adopted by the US government and are considered to be patterns. The debate was rather profound at that time whether the coins should bare the portrait of the president as was the case of Cromwell during the English Glorious Revolution. Others rejected that concept and said it would appear to be a monarchical practice. George Washington is said to have also rejected the idea of placing himself on the coinage.

1793-Penny-HalfPenny

The Birch coins were therefore patterns struck during the period of debate with the portrait of Liberty. Therefore, the official coinage of the United States did not begin until 1793 with a half-penny and penny, with the silver denominations following in 1794. The first 5 cent coin was not issued until 1866 with the inflation of the Civil War. The first 3 cent coin appeared in 1851 struck in silver and the 2 cent in 1864 in bronze. The half dime was struck in silver in 1794 until 1805. Half dimes were not reissued until 1829.

What these people totally lack in their accounts is the fact that there was a crisis from the very beginning with trying to peg the dollar to European currencies despite the fact it was a silver and gold standard. In 1792, congress adopted a bimetallic standard and the 15 to 1 ratio of silver to gold. The precious metal content of a US dollar was fixed at 371¼ grains of silver or 24¾ grains of gold. Just like trying to fix the British pound in the ERM or the Swiss peg to the Euro, everything went nuts and forced the suspension of silver coinage in the United States.

By 1795, an ounce of gold in the US had a ratio of 15:1 and was under pressure because in Paris it was worth 15½ ounces of silver to one ounce of gold. By 1799, the ratio continued to expand reaching 15¾ ounces. This presented a huge arbitrage opportunity, so bullion dealers bought United States gold coins using Spanish silver coins and they shipped them to Europe to be melted and re-sold. The net capital outflow was huge and American coin was vanishing rapidly. Finally, in 1804, President Thomas Jefferson was forced to order that no more gold $10 eagles and silver coins were to be struck. All we see are copper coins being produced at this point in time.

Then by 1813, the silver/gold ratio continued to expand reaching 16¼ to 1 as gold had become very scarce. At this point in American economic history, 98% of all U.S. gold coinage would have be melted down by the bullion dealers. Gold became rare and none was being imported to the US officially. Any gold that did make it to the States was not for the US mint but only in private transactions. Beginning in the 1820s, some new gold finds were made in Georgia and North Carolina. However, the supply of gold in America was never enough to allow gold coins to circulate widely. The $5 gold half-eagles continued to be struck, but marginally with about 50,000 coins annually. In 1920, the new finds in gold sparked a sharp rise in production reaching 263,806 $5 coins. However, the show of economic power dwindled rapidly falling to under 15,000 coins struck in 1823.

There was no “bullion fund” authorized by a congress to buy bullion to be coined. Congress was strapped for cash. The U.S. dollars were accepted as the equivalent of Spanish dollars in the Caribbean, and since unworn Spanish pieces had a higher silver content than the U.S. coins, it became profitable to export the American dollars, exchanging them for the Spanish pieces which were then melted down. This is why Jefferson suspended production of silver dollars in 1804, which lasted for nearly 40 years. From that point, the half dollar became the dominant U.S. silver coin.

A crisis in the money supply had emerged. Finally, a senate committee reported in 1830 that so few quarters, dimes, and half dimes had been struck from the birth of the nation that there was less than one coin struck for each person in the country. The total face value of silver coins struck from inception was only about $25 million in silver coins minted since 1794 and the gyrations in the ratio left about $14 million still in circulation by 1830, of which $2 million represented bank reserves. Consequently, they seem to be oblivious to this history of our monetary system.

1914FederalReserveNotes

As far as when did Federal Reserve notes begin? Sorry, that was 1914 and the Fed was created in 1913. The $500-$10,000 notes were not issued until 1918. True, gold was confiscated and there was a bank holiday in 1933, but that was not the beginning of the Federal Reserve notes. I am not sure why all these dates are so wrong and how this impacts the objective of a forecast

Vacation Real Estate – Always at the Bottom of the List


Florida-1

QUESTION: I understand that when people lose confidence in government that equities, precious metals and real estate will rise in value. Looking at real estate, will vacation rental properties also rise in value?

RM

Ringling John 1866-1936ANSWER: Generally speaking, vacation properties will not fair as well as basic properties in a reset only because people contract in their spending. The real estate boom peaked in 2007, but that was the over-leveraged  houses for the lower-end. The high-end corrected and then rallied into 2015.75. That has peaked out in REAL TERMS. The nominal values will still rise as a factor of the purchasing power of the currency, but real estate will now fall to third place in the States. Cities are still buoyant generally because of capital flight from overseas. Some places have been attacked politically, such as Australia and Vancouver. In the case of latter, the attack was just local so the foreign capital shifted to Victoria and places like Toronto.

The vacation home in a crunch will perform the worst. The big vacation home bust was 1927. That was the Florida land boom. John Ringling in the mid-1920s, entered the field of land speculation and founded Sarasota, Florida. John was once one of the world’s wealthiest men, yet he died with only $311 in the bank.

The problem with real estate on this cycle is that it has been seriously leveraged. It was FDR who came up with the 30 year mortgage to try to support real estate prices that had fallen to 10 cents on the dollar and sometimes less. If you did not have cash, you could not buy. That measure instigated to support real estate prices has now become the problem in real estate. Values depend upon borrowing. When confidence declines, people fear the future. It is at that moment that banks will be unable to lend for 30 years if there is no bid lacking the confidence long-term.

Vacation homes will be at the bottom of the list. I personally bought what was a vacation second home on the beach. I bought it for 50% of what they paid in 2007. They had a sizable mortgage on it and could no longer afford the payments on a second home. Such is life.

If We Know What’s Coming Then We Are Not Sucker-Punched


Punch

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, on the one hand you are pessimistic, but on the other you are very optimistic. Many of these analysts just say everything is going to hell from currency to stock markets.  Do we survive? Which camp are you really in?

BK

Child Touch Flame Candle ANSWER: You do not change unless you have no choice. Only those who are explorers take risks and they are far and few in the mix. The bulk of human society play it safe. So unfortunately, society must go through the crash and burn in order to create the change. This is why no civilization has ever lasted forever. What child has ever listened to their parents and did not stick their finger in the flame of a candle? We all must do that to know that fire does burn.

Weathering StormSo yes, on the one hand this is pessimistic, yet on the other it is very optimistic looking forward to the change that is coming.  There may be a storm swirling around us. However, if we know what is happening (1)we will not get sucker punched, and (2) just maybe we can be part of the mover and shakers who can make a difference and push that change in the right direction. If not, well, we can all grab a rock and meet in the Caribbean and start our own country.

How to Fix Government in 30 days or less & Why do Smart People Avoid Government


capitol-bldg

QUESTION:  You once said you could fix the mess in 30 days or less but they would assassinate you. How can you ever make our politicians responsible? My second question is, why are the really smart people not running government?

KW

ANSWER: The term limits are mandatory, but you have to cut off the incentive as well. No pension or salary after one term. People want to run for Congress and you are taken care of for life if you served even just one day. As for taking a cabinet position like Secretary of the Treasury, well you have to sell all your stock in whatever bank you are leaving and because you MUST do this, you get to sell everything tax free. They have rules to exempt themselves from everything.

Eliminate all special perks. Social Security should be for all as should the healthcare. Why should they get benefits we cannot even buy? If you limit the terms to one-time-and-out, eliminate pensions, and you subject everyone to the same benefits even while in office, then you will see things shape up. Drug Companies lobby the most. Politicians need money for re-election. If you make it one-term-and-out, you eliminate the lobbying since there is no re-election and you subject them to the same healthcare we have. Then they will not vote for things that will deprive themselves.

This is basic human nature.

Hunt MoneyAs to why really smart people are not in government? That is simple. Knowledge comes from ONLY experience. I was asked if I would take the position as Chief Economic Advisor in the Bush, Jr. White House. I laughed. First, I had a real company. I could not put that in some blind trust. Then, could you image a confirmation hearing in the Senate? I would have been accused by the Democrats or helping the Japanese and German auto manufactures against GM. They would have had a field day turning that into some sort of treason. On top of that, the only way to gain experience is doing something and that means we must make mistakes in order to learn. Do you keep putting your wet finger in a light socket assuming one time you will not get socked if you just keep it up?

Nobody I know who would be qualified to do anything in banking or the economy would EVER take such a job. Who needs that sort of magnification of every aspect of your entire life? There are only two types of people who will take such jobs. Either you do it for the perks, or you do it because you want to be remembered. You are better off with someone like Trump on that score for he cannot be bribed with money. They either have it and do it for the ego or they do it to get money and status like the Clintons. There really seems to be no in between these days.

Susan Rice Confirms Her “Unmasking Requests” Were for President Obama’s Daily Briefing (PDB)…


With a general set of narrative ‘talking points’ in hand President Obama’s Former National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, appeared this morning on MSNBC for an interview with Andrea Mitchell.  This is the ‘We-Have-To-Respond-phase‘,  which necessitates the optic.

Andrea Mitchell is considered a trustworthy ally of the Clinton/Obama political networks; as such, it is not a surprise to see Mitchell selected as the interviewer.  Mitchell’s use of wording carefully guides Susan Rice through the narrow path of self-incrimination by providing plausible deniability for verbal missteps.

You already know the routine.  MSNBC is the favorable proprietary venue. Mitchell plays the role of media-legal-adviser, her client is Susan Rice.  Live interviews are always the greatest risk (see: Evelyn Farkas)  The full interview is below:

However, that said, there are some interesting aspects to the interview:

Susan Rice @00:51 – …”Let me explain how this works.  I was a National Security Adviser, my job is to protect the American people and the security of our country.  That’s the same as the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and CIA Director.; and every morning, to enable us to do that, we receive – from the intelligence community – a compilation of intelligence reports that the IC, the intelligence community, has selected for us –on a daily basis– to give us the best information as to what’s going on around the world.”

[Note, Susan Rice is describing the PDB]

“I received those reports, as did other officials, and there were occasions when I would receive a report in which, uh, a ‘U.S Person’ was referred to.  Name, uh, not provided, just ‘U.S. Person’.

And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance in the report – and asses it’s significance, it was necessary to find out or request, who that U.S. official was.”

OK, so right there, in the very beginning of the forward narrative, Susan Rice is confirming the “unmasking” request(s) which can be pinned upon her, are directly related to her need to understand -on behalf of President Obama- intelligence for the President’s Daily Briefing (the PDB).  This was a previous question now answered.

Remember, the President’s Daily Brief under President Obama went to almost everyone at top levels in his administration.  Regarding the Obama PDB:

[…]  But while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.

In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers.

By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments. (link)

 

If you know how concentric circle political safety is constructed, you will notice that Susan Rice is now hugging the security of the Presidency.   No space.  To take Rice down, means to take down President Obama – safe play on her part.

Reverse the safety.   No-one in media or congress is going to allow President Obama to be taken down; ergo, everyone will protect Susan Rice.  They have no choice.

[Also note how when shifting from rehearsed talking point (script) to cognitive explanation of Rices’ point , the noun shifts from “U.S. Person” to “U.S. Official”.]

“I received those reports, as did other officials, and there were occasions when I would receive a report in which, uh, a ‘U.S Person’ was referred to.  Name, uh, not provided, just ‘U.S. Person’.

And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance in the report – and asses it’s significance, it was necessary to find out or request, who that U.S. official was.”

It’s subtle (like a Freudian slip), but Rice accidentally outlines her filter, her psychological trigger, for when to request the unmasking.  She’s looking for the politics behind the intelligence.  She’s looking for “U.S. Officials” in masked intelligence reports.

Mrs. Rice then follows up with a “hypothetical example” that is ridiculous as she describes.  The example provided (a sketchy dude in mom’s basement) would NEVER reach the level of PDB; it would be pre-filtered, researched and reviewed for value.  The PDB NEVER contains such banal information as Rice describes.

The interview goes much further.  There is a lot of news in this interview.  There is also a tremendous amount of double-speak and self-contradiction; in some cases between sentences that follow each other.

Notice how Susan Rice contradicts herself about what the intelligence community puts into the PDB.  Remember, Rice considers the PDB intel community to be very specific:  James Clapper (DNI), John Brennan (CIA) and Defense Department (which would be the Pentagon and NSA Mike Rogers).  And she states they would never send the President innocuous things unworthy of review….

.

.

Advertisements