The recent brutal assault on journalist Andy Ngo in Portland brings Antifa in the spotlight again. What is the longer term significance of this event, for Antifa, and America as a whole? What is Antifa exactly, and what are its historical origins? How has media coverage of Antifa influenced its behavior today? And how do anti-masking laws fit into the picture? Today we sit down with Jack Posobiec, a One America News Network host, who was once a U.S. Military Intelligence officer and later acted as Special Projects Director for Citizens for Trump. He is the author of 4D Warfare: A Doctrine for a New Generation of Politics. If you like what you’re seeing, please make sure to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE! – Jan
Chopper pressers are the best pressers. Sunday evening as President Trump is departing New Jersey en route back to the White House he delivers remarks to the press pool and answers questions: [Video and Transcript]
[Transcript] – Morristown, New Jersey – THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. We’ve had great economic numbers that came out. You saw that over the weekend; you saw it on Friday. We have just spectacular economic numbers. We’re doing better than any nation on the planet. And we’re very honored by that.
In addition to which, we’re paying interest rates, which the previous administration essentially didn’t pay. So we’ve had tremendous numbers coming out and that’s a big thing. Our economy is doing incredibly.
I want to congratulate the women’s soccer team on winning the World Cup. That’s an incredible achievement. It was a very exciting game. I got to see a little bit of it. And they’re great players, and it’s a great honor to have them capture it for the United States — fourth time — and that’s a tremendous thing. So congratulations to the team on the World Cup.
And if you have any questions, go ahead.
Q Iran says it’s going to start enriching and breaking the Iran deal. What do you say to that?
THE PRESIDENT: Iran better be careful because you enrich for one reason — and I won’t tell you what that reason is, but it’s no good. They better be careful.
Q Mr. President, do you have a reaction to the British ambassador’s comments that were reported about today?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I haven’t seen it. But, you know, we’ve had our little ins and outs with — with a couple of countries. And I would say that the UK and the ambassador has not served the UK well, I can tell you that. We’re not — we’re not big fans of that man, and he has not served the UK well. So I can understand it. And I can say things about him, but I won’t bother.
Q On the census — any decision on the census and what you’ll do?
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, we’re moving ahead with the census. They’re spending $15 billion or some ridiculous amount of money on a census. I don’t know why we can’t do that through the computers of the world because, frankly, that’s the way you can do a census today and probably a lot more accurately.
But they’re spending 15 to 20 billion dollars on a census. They’re asking everything, except “Are you a citizen of the United States?” How ridiculous is that? So we are moving forward; we have a couple of avenues. And our Attorney General is doing a fantastic job, in many ways, and I think he’s got it under control.
Q What about a presidential memorandum? What about a presidential memorandum on the border?
THE PRESIDENT: We can do a memorandum. We can do an executive order. We’re looking at different things, but there are other alternatives. And, again, I believe our Attorney General — he’s a fantastic man and I think he’s got it very well under control.
Q Mr. President, can I ask you, sir, about the border — in particular, the conditions there?
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, I think the New York Times story is a hoax. I think anything the New York Times writes nowadays –they’re — they’re really — you know, they use the word “unhinged” — the New York Times. I call it the “failing New York Times” for a reason. Check out their unfunded liability and see what they’re worth. They’re a failing — they’re already a failed New York Times.
But when they write a story like that, I went to my people, and they said, “Sir, it’s not true.” We told them about a crisis. They said it was “manufactured.” They laughed and they scoffed for months, and then it turned out that it wasn’t manufactured. It’s a crisis. We were right about that.
We told them that the detention centers are really full, and they’ve got to change the loopholes and they have to change asylum; they have to change the immigration laws. We could do it quickly, but we have no votes to do it because the Democrats won’t vote. We need some of their votes.
But the New York Times story is a fabrication. Now, I look at things in the — I saw, visually — I had people there that told me the job that they are doing is incredible. And, in all cases, if you look — people that came from unbelievable poverty — that had no water, that had no anything where they came from — those are people that are very happy with what’s going on because, relatively speaking, they’re in much better shape right now.
The Border Patrol and all of the law enforcement that’s working on the border — it’s incredible what they’re doing. They’ve had to become nurses. They’ve had to become janitors. They’ve had to become things that they were never trained to do, all because the Democrats refuse to change the loopholes and the asylum laws, the immigration laws. So I think it’s a disgrace.
And the New York Times is basically a partner with the Democrats, the way I look at it. They should never be allowed to write stories like that. It’s a disgrace.
Q Did the numbers fall in June (inaudible)?
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, the numbers are going down because Mexico is doing a lot. Mexico is building up to over 20,000 soldiers at the border, so the numbers are going down. Yes.
Q Do you believe female athletes should be paid as much as their male counterparts?
THE PRESIDENT: I would like to see that. And you also have to look at numbers because, when you look at World Cup soccer, that’s one thing, and you also have to look at soccer professionals out there. You have to see who’s taking in what.
So I don’t know what those numbers are. I would like to see that. But, again, you have to look at the great stars of the men’s soccer and the great stars of the women’s soccer, and you have to see, year round, how are they all drawing — what’s the attendance for women’s soccer outside of World Cup. But I would like to see it, yes.
Q Mr. President, do have any comment on Jeffrey Epstein, who was charged?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don’t know about it. That I don’t know about.
Q Will you invite the women’s team to the White House?
THE PRESIDENT: What?
Q Will you invite the women’s team to the White House — the soccer team?
THE PRESIDENT: We haven’t really thought about it. We will look at that, certainly.
Yeah, Jeff.
Q When you said earlier that Iran should “be careful,” what are you thinking about, in terms of a response?
THE PRESIDENT: Iran is doing a lot of bad things. And remember this: The Obama agreement, which was the most foolish agreement that you’ll ever find — it expires in a very short period of time. So whether you have this conversation now or in a number of years from now — a few number of years — it’s a very important conversation, except, the way they want it, they would have automatic right to have nuclear weapons. Iran will never have a nuclear weapon.
Thank you very much.
Q (Inaudible) this week on China — Ambassador Lighthizer and Secretary Mnuchin, I guess, would they meet with the Chinese this week?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we’re doing very well with China. That’s right; they’re meeting. But we’re — most importantly, we’re doing very well with the tariffs. We’re taking in billions and billions of dollars from China. We’ve never taken in ten cents from China. China has ripped us off during Obama and Biden; during, in all fairness, Bush and other Presidents; and Clinton, obviously.
And right now China is not very happy because thousands of companies are leaving China and they’re going to other places, including the United States, because they don’t want to pay tariffs. And the other thing is, China is paying the tariff. They’re devaluing their currency and they’re pumping money in. That’s paying for the tariff. Our people have not been paying for the tariff.
Thank you.
Q Do you have any problem with the Fed then, with regard to what they should do?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, if the Fed knew what it was doing, they would lower rates and they would stop quantitative tightening.
If you look at Europe, what they’re doing is they’re pumping money in and they’re having rates lowered so they can compete with us. Just remember, the European Union was set up in order to compete with the United States. Okay? And when they have a man — Draghi — if you look at what he’s done, I mean, he’s made them somewhat competitive. Now, despite everything, they’re not doing well and we’re doing great. Europe is not doing well at all. They’re doing great.
But we’re put in an unfair playing field when they cut interest rates and when they pump in a lot of money. And we’re doing just the opposite; we’re taking money out and interest rates have gone up.
If the Fed didn’t do what it did or if it did even half, we would have a Dow that would be — as good as it is; we’re doing so good — but we would have a Dow that would be anywhere from 5- to 10,000 points higher.
Q Is Jerome Powell’s job safe, sir?
Q Mr. President, will you visit the migrant detention center in Clint, Texas — the one in the New York Times story?
THE PRESIDENT: What we’re going to do is I’m going to start showing some of the detention centers because — to the press. I want the press to go in and see them. And I just spoke to Mark Morgan. And I just spoke with, as you know, Kevin.
So we’re going send people in. We’re going to have some of the press go in and see them, because they’re crowded and we’re the ones who were complaining about they’re crowded. They’re crowded because people come up. But, now, thanks to Mexico, it’s slowing down greatly, and I think you’ll start seeing some very good numbers. But it is crowded. But we want to have the press go in and see because, you know, the New York Times — it really is fake news.
Gordon Chang appears on Fox News with Charles Payne (filling in for Bartiromo) to discuss the downstream consequences from the G20 meeting between President Trump and Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping.
While he generally frames the picture accurately, lately Chang has been hit or miss. He accurately outlines how a win/win trade deal is not possible from the perspective of Beijing and their zero-sum outlook; however, he misses on the issues around Huawei; misses the entire hostage dynamic with Kim Jong Un; and then hits again on Hong Kong.
.
♦ On China President Trump appears to be working on a complete and total decoupling from the U.S. However, there are steps required in the interim that are in flux (EU and USMCA). Once those matters are resolved we will likely see the decoupling.
♦ On North Korea, just because DPRK state media spouts something doesn’t mean Kim Jong-Un has any control over it. Beijing has majority influence over DPRK officials.
♦ On Hong Kong, after the Kim hostage rescue; and while the China decoupling is underway; we can expect Hong Kong to be a larger part of Trump’s Indo-Pacific initiative.
A rather unusual tweet from Christine Pelosi, daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, outlining a concern around the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein: “it is quite likely that some of our faves are implicated.”
Considering the frame-of-reference, the social circle and political network the Pelosi family, the use of the term “our faves” has rather looming implications:
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Financier Jeffrey Epstein was arrested late on Saturday on suspicion of sex trafficking of underage girls and will appear in federal court in Manhattan on Monday, a source familiar with the matter said, meaning he will face charges similar to those he avoided in a 2007 plea deal.
Epstein, 66, was being held in New York City’s Metropolitan Correctional Center, according to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons website.
Asked by email if Epstein planned to plead not guilty to any charges, a lawyer for Epstein, Jack Goldberger, replied, “Yes.”
A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York, which is handling the case, declined to comment. (read more)
One of the best testimonials to President Trump’s pragmatic perspective is his ability to rise above the ridiculous partisan political attacks and look at issues from a non-political solution-driven perspective.
In the latest example California Governor Gavin Newsom has been antagonizing the administration yet outlines how President Trump, a builder-in-chief, immediately called him and expressed his full commitment to helping California recover from two serious earthquakes that hit the state in two consecutive days. After Newsom toured some of the damaged areas he spoke to reporters at a press briefing.
Governor Newsom said he and President Trump talked about the challenges California has recently face, including two devastating wildfires just six months ago. “There’s no question we don’t agree on everything, but one area where there’s no politics, where we work extremely well together, is our response to emergencies”, Newsom said. “He’s committed in the long haul, the long run, to help support the rebuilding efforts” the governor said of President Trump.
Acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Ken Cuccinelli, battles through the manipulative ‘open-border’ narrative of CBS Margaret Brennan to discuss ICE removals, border conditions, and asylum laws:
.
How the heck did never-Trump leader Ken Cuccinelli end up with a position in this administration? This is the same guy who tried to lead a 2016 convention effort to change the rules and remove Donald Trump as the Republican nominee.
ADD: After thinking about it, this series of Sunday talk appearances is likely a trial run to test Cuccinelli and see if he has genuinely had a ‘come-to-MAGA‘ change in outlook.
Ellison Barber of Fox News reporting the ICE removals are likely to begin shortly:
.
On June 22nd, 2019, President Trump agreed to postpone any deportation enforcement after a call with Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
Two weeks from June 22nd, would be July 8th, 2019.
However, a review of Nancy Pelosi’s congressional calendar reflects Pelosi’s House has been out of session since June 28th, and does not return until July 9th.
This schedule and deadline is exactly why House Democrats are pulling border stunts and urgently pushing media narratives in the headlines. Pelosi had no intention of fixing the legislative issues; instead, she used the time-delay to create maximum political position for herself, democrats in congress and their media allies.
WHITE HOUSE – Yesterday, a single, unelected district judge in Seattle issued an injunction that prevents the government from ensuring the detention of those aliens who cross the border unlawfully until the completion of their immigration court proceedings.
The decision ignores an express statutory prohibition on granting class-wide injunctive relief against enforcement of the immigration laws and also holds unconstitutional a statute passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress during the Clinton administration that specifically prohibits the release of certain immigrants on bond.
The district court’s injunction is at war with the rule of law. The decision only incentivizes smugglers and traffickers, which will lead to the further overwhelming of our immigration system by illegal aliens.
No single district judge has legitimate authority to impose his or her open borders views on the country. We must restore our democracy and ensure Americans have the voice to which they are entitled under our Constitution. (link)
Before President Trump and Chairman Xi Jinping met in Osaka at the G20, Beijing requested the removal of current tariffs as a contingency for a Trump-Xi meeting. The tariffs are causing two issues: (1) China is bleeding cash via subsidies to offset the tariffs and retain export position; (2) ancillary manufacturing companies are exiting China to avoid tariffs into the U.S. market.
Understanding how the static dynamic -he intentionally created- was favorable to the U.S., President Trump reasserted that current tariffs were not going to be removed.
After the Osaka meeting, President Trump and Chairman Xi agreed to re-open talks between the two teams with no new tariffs; however, as stated before the G20 summit the preexisting tariffs would remain.
Beijing is increasingly recognizing how the current status is disfavorable to their economy; and asserting that no further trade talks can take place until the U.S. promises to remove all tariffs as part of a completed agreement.
(SCMP) China has insisted that all tariffs on Chinese imports added by the United States during the trade war must be scrapped immediately as part of any deal to end the year-long conflict, which would require the Trump administration to give up its position that some levies remain in place even after an agreement is reached.
US President Donald Trump agreed to pause placing new tariffs of up to 25 per cent on an additional US$300 billion of Chinese imports not yet subject to taxes after his meeting with Xi Jinping at the G20 summit last weekend in Japan.
But for any deal to be reached, US tariffs of 25 per cent on US$250 billion of Chinese imports that remain in place must be removed, said Ministry of Commerce spokesman Gao Feng on Thursday, underscoring that there are still many issues to be resolved to end the conflict as it approaches its one-year anniversary on Saturday. (read more)
The position of Beijing is tenuous. President Trump was not inclined to even begin further talks; the status-quo actually favors the U.S. position. Few companies with operations that require access to the U.S. market are willing to commit to any further China investment while the trade conflict exists. A process of “deglobalization” or regional shift is underway.
The U.S. economy remains strong. As a result of economic nationalism, right now the U.S. is the wealthiest consumer base in the globe. Many companies are re-positioning to be closest to their most valuable consumers, and there is massive proactive investment in Mexico as passage of the USMCA trade agreement is likely.
Justin from Canada held a political strategy session with Nancy Pelosi and looks like he agreed to postpone any Canadian Parliamentary vote until after Pelosi passes the USMCA in the U.S. congress. It’s likely Pelosi wants to wait until after the 2020 election to avoid giving President Trump a win. However, this means Justin from Canada has agreed to allow his own economy to further collapse just to assist the OrangeManBad objective.
Yesterday as the U.S. celebrated another 224,000 new jobs created, Canada posted their June results:
Canadian Economy Loses Over 2,000 Jobs, Unemployment Rate Rises – Spencer Fernando
Economists had expected a gain of 10,000 jobs. The latest jobs report shows the Canadian economy losing 2,200 jobs in June. The unemployment rate rose,
spencerfernando.com
271 people are talking about this
Yes, Justin is rolling the dice and hoping he can win reelection without having a positive USMCA outcome to point toward. However, the China trade issue actually dilutes any negative value Pelosi and Justin can generate by holding up the USMCA.
As a direct outcome of how Trump has positioned the U.S. trade strategy there are two simultaneous issues defeating the Trudeau-Pelosi scheme.
Specifically because Trump created: (1) a process of deglobalization away from China; and (2) a regional investment process in Mexico; President Trump now holds key leverage in both directions. Part of that leverage is seen in the political shift within Mexico to assist on the Central American migration issue. The potential for national security tariffs on Mexico is now less than 60 days away (POTUS gave Lopez-Obrador a 90-day corrective window).
There is no current reason for President Trump to change the stalemate with China, and Pelosi’s scheme to hold-up the USMCA only makes things worse for Beijing. Without the USMCA ratified President Trump’s best play, to ensure strategic trade objectives are accomplished, is to delay any China talks or agreement. Doing nothing is a strategic decision.
The longer this goes on the weaker Beijing becomes. Simultaneously the longer this goes on the more multinational corporations will look toward the U.S. for direct investment, -OR- look at Mexico as a safe hub, close to the U.S. market, where they can avoid controversy.
If Beijing follows through with a threat to disengage until current tariffs are removed, they are only hurting their own economy. It is only because President Trump has guided the trade reset to this specific place in time that this current dynamic is possible.
As a consequence, the tariffs will continue until panda behavior improves.
The latest National Quinnipiac Poll of Democrat presidential candidates reflects a significant surge by Kamala Harris, a static position for Elizabeth Warren, and a slight drop for Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.
Kamala Harris went from 7% in April to 20% in July. Elizabeth Warren went from 15% in April to 14% in July. Joe Biden went from 24% in April to 22% in July. Bernie Sanders went from 16% in April to 13% in July. That’s the top four.
Certainly Harris seems to be the biggest winner from the first debate; however, the biggest loser is not Joe Biden. In April -at the time of his campaign launch- Pete Buttigieg was at 14%, now he’s down to 4%. Buttigieg is the biggest loser. As anticipated, all other candidates are essentially irrelevant.
Quinnipiac – […] “Round 1 of the Democratic debates puts Senator Kamala Harris and former Vice President Joe Biden on two different trajectories, as support for Harris surges but continues to slip for Biden.
Biden’s once commanding lead has evaporated. There are other red flags for him in areas where he still leads, including double digit drops among Democrats and Democratic leaners who view him as the best leader, or as the best candidate to defeat President Trump in 2020,” said Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Mary Snow.
Democrats and Democratic leaners were also asked which candidate they thought had the best chance of winning against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, regardless of who they support in the primary. Biden tops the field with 42 percent, which is a drop from the 56 percent that he received on April 30. Harris comes in a distant second with 14 percent in today’s poll, up from 2 percent in April. Sanders receives 13 percent, and no other candidate reaches double digits. (See full polling results)
The media is most certainly doing what they can to lift Kamala Harris, a review of most media stories show a narrative of appreciating value amid the influential social circle of mainstream democrat media reporters.
Biden and Bernie are fraught with the problem of toxic male whiteness as expressed by the overwhelming majority of activists within the DNC ranks.
Bernie currently has the Communist, Socialist, Antifa and Occupy groups defending him. Unfortunately for the jackbooted moonbats, the ‘free stuff’ alignment with AOC is now a liability. The more AOC goes stupid the more it hurts the dem-socialists.
Joe Biden is a candidate adrift in a massive political ocean sitting on a pool float, trying to survive.
Elizabeth Warren has the beltway FemGen limo-liberals as a pretty solid constituency; however attempts to grow into the ‘ima-git-me-a-beer‘ base are fraught with a lack of authenticity.
Kamala Harris has assembled all of the disparate one percent groups into a sizable enough coalition of professional grievance to outlast Warren’s lack of minority status.
By the end of August the Final Four will make up the viability field. Currently that looks like Biden, Harris, Warren and Bernie. However, as Biden and Bernie are dispatched the Harris -vs- Warren situation will come down to drop-out endorsements.
Obviously momentum is a temporary condition and things could change, but Biden needs to give a good performance at the next debate or his deflating pool float will drown him.
Here’s the trend data specific to Quinnipiac polling:
Progressives in the media and politics complain that Kim Jong Un is playing President Trump, who settles for a self-aggrandizing photo opp, but is not projecting American strength (LOL). The Left also criticizes Trump for using the North Korea summit and G-20 meeting to cozy up to strongmen like Kim, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. Is the U.S. President an “agent of unpredictability”, or does he understand better than President Obama or his predecessors how to create global stability? This episode of Bill Whittle Now is just one of 48 shows per month produced by the Members at BillWhittle.com, whose mission to advance time-tested conservative principles is important enough for them to invest their own funds in it. They also run their own exclusive private blog as a refuge for reasoned thought, civil dialogue and lots of laughter. Give these people a month and you’ll never want to leave them. Try a 30-day risk-free Membership. If you don’t think it’s worth more than your investment, just write us for a full refund. Start your assessment now at https://BillWhittle.com/register/
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 