What is emerging is precisely what I reported. I know for a fact that there were very high up people who sold even everything that they had at the end of January including stocks and bonds and it was on the basis of a coming virus. I believe if investigated, this will be the biggest inside trading scandal in all of history.
Sen. Richard Burr Burr sold off a significant percentage of his stocks shortly before the market crashed on February 13th selling between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings in 33 separate transactions.
Burr is the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and a member of the health committee. He clearly had access to the government’s most highly classified information about threats to America’s security and public health concerns.
However, it turns out that Burr’s brother-in-law, Gerald Fauth, who has a post on the National Mediation Board, also sold between $97,000 and $280,000 worth of shares in six companies the same day.
What is quite interesting is that just before his sell-off, Burr had assured the public that the federal government was well-prepared to handle the virus. He wrote that on a Feb. 7 op-ed that he co-authored with another senator. He wrote: “the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus.”
Nevertheless, according to a recording obtained by NPR, Burr had given a VIP group at an exclusive social club a much more dire preview of the economic impact of the the coronavirus. He told them that it could curtail business travel, cause schools to be closed and result in the military mobilizing to compensate for overwhelmed hospitals.
Burr’s stock sales have been under investigation by the FBI. Burr defended his actions, saying he relied solely on public information, including CNBC reports, to inform his trades and did not rely on information he obtained as a senator.
What is really interesting is the source of his information. Insider trading you get to retire in prison for 20-years where you can have your meals cooked for you and you do not have to deal with robo-calls, and you at last get to live tax free.
Every university, agency, and official including at the UN and the WHO, anyone connected with the Climate Change movement, including Green Peace, should now be compelled to reveal all the transactions in February.
There is ABSOLUTELY now way that Burr relied on information from CNBC the day after the high was made. They did not call for a total market crash. I believe based upon his actions, he was told in February what they were planning to do. Someone inside the NIH already new the plan. Let’s see where that info leads. It’s really not that hard – just follow the money!
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and U.K. Secretary of State for International Trade Elizabeth Truss announced today [joint statement] the beginning of a series of fast-tracked trade negotiations toward a new free trade agreement. [USTR Release]
In the foreground is a trade agreement between the U.S. and the United Kingdom. However, in the more strategic background context these negotiations create leverage for the U.K. in their post-Brexit negotiations with the European Union. First from today:
LIGHTHIZER – […] The US negotiating team will be led by Dan Mullaney, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Europe and the Middle East; and the UK negotiating team will be led by Oliver Griffiths, Director for US Negotiations at the Department for International Trade. Over 200 staff from U.S. and UK government agencies and departments are expected to take part in the negotiations.
An opening plenary today will kick off the detailed discussions, followed by multiple virtual meetings from Wednesday 6 May to Friday 15 May. The negotiations build on the work conducted through the U.S.-UK Trade and Investment Working Group, which was established in July 2017, partly to lay the ground work for these negotiations.
A comprehensive U.S-U.K trade agreement will further deepen the already very strong trade and investment ties between the United States and UK by creating new opportunities for American and UK families, workers, businesses and farmers through increased access to the other’s market.
The United States and the United Kingdom are the first and fifth largest economies in the world, respectively. Total two-way trade between the two countries is already worth about $269 billion a year. Each country is the other’s largest source of foreign direct investment, with about $1 trillion invested in each other’s economies. Every day, around one million Americans go to work for UK firms, while around one million Britons go to work for American firms. (more)
An important geopolitical overlay helps to better understand the specifics of this dynamic.
The United States is essentially a self-sustaining economy. Meaning, if you think about a nation as an independent construct able to sustain itself; our imports are enhancements not priorities. Our domestic resources, energy development, food production and essential internal needs are capable of sustaining our population. The import of products is valuable, but in the bigger picture not fundamentally necessary for survival.
The United Kingdom is very similar in this regard. The U.K. has abundant energy resources, food and agricultural development, and is positioned as an independent economy absent the dynamic of internal politics regulating those functions. Domestic politics surrounding left-wing climate change (energy development etc), to restrict internal development, are a function of ability, not necessity. The U.K. has abundant coal, oil and natural gas; it also has abundant agriculture. [The U.K weakness is military defense.]
Because both nations are similar in their ability to be non-dependent on trade, a free trade agreement is essentially a second-tier negotiation on products and services that enhance the independence. This is a unique dynamic not found in all trade discussions. Two independent economic systems negotiating on trade enhancements to each-other.
This is a much different dynamic than negotiation with a dependent country like China. China cannot feed itself, it needs to import raw materials to sustain itself; thus the importance of the One-Belt/One-Road Beijing initiative. China is a massive economy, but China is also a dependent economy; subject to damage from external dynamics.
Similarly, due to advanced political ideology, Canada cannot sustain itself economically; however, they are dependent by choice. Currently Mexico is not self-sustaining; they too are dependent on both access to the U.S. market and the import of industrial goods. However, unlike Canada our southern trade partner is working toward self-sustenance.
♦ Dependence or Independence is the ultimate context for all trade negotiations.
Dependent countries do not inherently carry negotiation leverage, and must create leverage through access to their economy (China again). The more independent the internal economy is within any nation, the less dependency they have. Less dependency means more leverage… more leverage means better terms (with nationalist negotiators).
A U.S-U.K trade agreement would not be based on “essential” trade products or “vital” trade services. The trade is not essential, but it is complimentary.
A U.S. and U.K. trade agreement is based on mutual enhancements or mutual benefits. This is an important distinction to keep in mind because it plays into the larger geopolitical dynamic.
The U.K. is currently in a post-Brexit negotiation phase after they spit away from the European Union. Strategically, it is smart for the U.K. to enter into trade discussions with the U.S. for needed products and services they might currently be gaining from the EU.
The timing of trade discussion with the U.S. gives Prime Minister Boris Johnson leverage toward the EU. President Trump and Boris Johnson have previously discussed this.
Additionally, the U.S. and E.U will eventually have to work out a new trade agreement because President trump is realigning all existing U.S. trade terms.
The U.S. already carries all of the leverage in any discussion with the EU; both in terms of market size, need for EU to retain access to the U.S. market, and the generous one-way tariff benefit currently maintained by the EU (which Trump is about to confront). Enhancing the U.S. leverage by providing a super-highway for transatlantic trade between the U.S. and U.K. puts the EU at an even further strategic disadvantage with the U.S.
If President Trump told the EU to drop their market restrictions (protectionist tariffs and non tariff barriers); and the EU refused to negotiate…. well, Trump could just shut the EU trade door completely (think German autos) and collapse their economy. The EU needs us more than we need the EU.
Remember the important dynamic: The EU hitched their wagon to China… China cannot purchase from the EU without the dollars from their U.S. trade imbalance…. If Trump shrinks U.S. purchasing from China; Beijing has less money to spend on EU industrial goods…. When we punch China on the nose, the EU gets the nosebleed.
Again, all of this is leverage for the U.S. and vulnerability for the EU.
Thus, the Trump benefit in a complimentary trade discussion with Boris Johnson is really the pending benefit of leverage over the EU.
Not accidentally, a Johnson benefit in a complimentary trade discussion with Trump is really the current benefit of leverage in their post-Brexit negotiations with the EU.
Because most of the trade sectors will be lower tier; and because the bigger goal for President Trump would be the building of leverage to confront the EU; I would expect the biggest trade gain for the U.S. will be helping the U.K. with military purchases.
There will be a lot of small-ball stuff. However, the bigger headline within a fast deal will likely be Boris Johnson purchasing advanced military hardware from us, and in return the U.K. will have preferential access to sell into the United States market based on reciprocal value.
That preferential access will form the basis for a trade hub inside the U.K. which will be the gateway to a transatlantic super-highway. The UK will then negotiate with EU companies based on access to their trade hub. Boris Johnson control the hub.
Once an alternative trade route is established Trump will start negotiating with the EU for new terms based on reciprocity. If the EU balks, Trump reminds them he can just close direct EU trade access while reminding them EU companies can use the hub.
The EU will have no choice except to acquiesce to Trump’s terms, drop their protectionist unilateral tariffs and drop their non-tariff barriers. We finally dissolve the Marshal Plan and enter a new trade era based on actual reciprocity.
One of the unfortunate impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic is the elimination of most ceremonial gatherings for the 2020 graduating class. Despite the inability to celebrate with gatherings of families and friends, President Trump and First Lady Melania send their congratulations to the graduates:
WHITE HOUSE – Congratulations on your upcoming graduation! The First Lady and I are very proud of you.
Over the past weeks and months, you, your classmates, teachers and administrators, and our Nation have experienced times of uncertainty and adversity. Much like our country, you have risen to the challenge with remarkable poise and determination, demonstrating the character traits that define the American spirit—resiliency, responsibility, and a stalwart drive to succeed.
Though this season of celebration has been disrupted by the coronavirus pandemic, our country and communities need you now more than ever. Your leadership will be essential in the days and weeks to come in helping your fellow Americans recover from this hardship. I remain confident that the future of our Nation will be brighter than ever before.
As you arrive at this important milestone in your life, your heart should be filled with tremendous pride. Your resolve during this unprecedented time will serve you well as you embark on your next chapter. We hope you will continue to use your unique, God-given abilities to strengthen our great Nation.
We wish you the best of luck in all of your future endeavors.
QUESTION: Hi Mr. Armstrong
Thanks for your efforts. you are truly amazing!
You have said that we should expect inflation to increase due to decreased supply. How should we prepare for that?
I do not have the stomach for investing in commodities futures. However, investing in the shares of commodities producing companies is something that I can handle. Does Socrates have anything to say to me about the best way to prepare for this new inflationary cycle?
Respectfully,
J
ANSWER: We have Socrates running studies on every individual company looking to assemble a group for this wave that should be the best of the lot. It really takes something like this because human opinion is not going to be worth much when we are heading into unprecedented waters where charts have never gone before.
Make sure you buy one year’s worth of food in cans. If you have the space to do vertical farming, it might come in handy in the years ahead.
Michael Flynn’s defense attorney appears for a brief interview with Sean Hannity to discuss the recently unsealed documents showing FBI strategic planning to target Lt. Gen Flynn prior to their interview on January 24, 2017. WATCH:
.
A few notes of caution. Don’t fall into the outrage trap; the DOJ will certainly justify the FBI notes as a valid discussion on investigative strategy, nothing more.
Second, Bill Barr did not appoint Missouri Attorney Jensen in an effort to support General Flynn. AG Barr was ordered by the FISA court to review every case and all evidence that touched upon the fraudulent Carter Page FISA application. Be careful about projecting a motive onto Bill Barr around these revelations. Without that FISC ordered sequestration review order; the DOJ/FBI may not have moved on this.
Lastly, despite the known corruption within the existing FBI leadership {outlined here}, and we can now add the FBI hiding these documents for 3 years, AG Bill Barr continues to pour effusive praise upon the FBI. That reality doesn’t reconcile with a good intent.
When the FISA Court responded to the DOJ Inspector General report in December and January 2020 they requested an action plan from the DOJ and FBI to respond to the issues raised about misrepresentations to the court.
The DOJ/FBI replied to the FISA Court admitting the last two FISA renewals (April, June ’17) used against Carter Page were insufficiency predicated while withholding opinion on the original application (Oct ’16) and first renewal (Jan ’17).
To address the consequences of fraudulently obtained FISA warrants the DOJ and FBI informed the court they would begin a process to “sequester” all collected evidence from all four FISA warrants. [FISA COURT LINK]
Sequestering the evidence is essentially a search for what investigative material the FISA warrants were used to obtain; ie. the search for the fruit of the poisoned tree; and then a review of all DOJ/FBI cases that may have utilized that investigative material.
In late January the DOJ contacted the FISA court and asked for an extension to the deadline. The FISA court granted an extension until February 5th [LINK] The final response from the DOJ has not been declassified or released by the FISC for public review.
However, with media reporting of AG Barr using “outside prosecutors” to review current, former and ongoing cases, it simply makes sense this ‘outsider’ effort is part of the DOJ/FBI sequestration review.
If you consider that several DOJ offices may be involved with the material under review, including the Southern District of New York; The Eastern District of New York; The Eastern District of Virginia; The Washington DC District, and even Main Justice itself; it makes sense that outside DOJ personnel would be needed for this review.
Additionally, all of the various FBI field offices who may have used the FISA authorizations as the underpinning evidence to gain separate Title-1 and/or Title-3 warrants, wiretaps or National Security Letters, in their various investigative cases would also need to be reviewed. This is an aspect the media is not discussing while they write opinions about AG Bill Barr bringing in outside DOJ attorneys.
The media are framing the use of outside attorneys as Bill Barr working on behalf of President Trump to undermine current and former prosecutions. However, understanding the FISC order requiring the sequestration effort, the use of outsiders is absolutely necessary.
The same U.S. Attorneys, prosecutors and FBI agents who used evidence gathered from the FISA warrants cannot be the same attorneys, agents and prosecutors making decisions about what parts of the warrants were used to gather evidence and how each part of any case was assembled by the use therein. It is a simple matter of a conflict of interest.
Additionally, the Robert Mueller team of FBI investigators and special counsel prosecutors certainly used the fraudulently obtained FISA warrants as part of their investigative evidence collection. Common sense would tell us this had to be the case or the FBI and Mueller team would not have requested renewals of the FISA warrant.
If the FBI & Special Counsel were not using the FISA warrant(s) to capture information, they would not have needed them renewed. Despite media spin to the contrary, the simple truth of renewals holding investigative value is evident in the renewal itself (ie. common sense).
Under this rather extensive effort to find exactly which investigations -over the course of three years- were touched directly, or indirectly, by the four FISA warrants; and/or which investigative paths may have been influenced downstream or enhanced -by varying degrees of importance- by evidence stemming from the FISA warrants; a reasonable person could see how AG Bill Barr would need to put a team together to retrace the investigative steps and make the sequestration determinations.
Obviously, for reasons of biased intent, corporate left-wing media would like to ignore why outside prosecutors are needed under this framework. Ignored in part because honest reporting would require an admission the FISA warrants were fraudulently obtained; and in part because the left-wing media have never informed the public of the DOJ/FBI sequestration effort in the first place. Likely more than half the country has no idea the DOJ and FBI have been told to go find the material.
There have been numerous articles, thousands of words, and endless hours of pundit protestations about Bill Barr using outside DC lawyers to review all of the previous DOJ Attorney activities; yet not a single time have they ever acknowledged the originating order from the FISA court requiring the DOJ/FBI to conduct the review. Imagine that?
New York Times – Mr. Barr has also installed a handful of outside prosecutors to broadly review the handling of other politically sensitive national-security cases in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, the people said. The team includes at least one prosecutor from the office of the United States attorney in St. Louis, Jeff Jensen, who is handling the Flynn matter, as well as prosecutors from the office of the deputy attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen. (more)
Likewise, considering AG Barr has been ordered by the court to review all the targets, cases and evidence, we should not be projecting an altruistic “clean up” effort… Arguably, one could say Barr is being forced to reopen, and revisit, all of this material. Certainly Bill Barr would not willingly expose the corrupt intents of his friends Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein…. So we should watch carefully.
It would certainly be ironic if the FISA court ends-up in 2020 as the least corrupt institution within a DC network fraught with institutional corruption.
When it comes to DC politics, we cannot be too cynical.
Many people forget that Senator Chuck Grassley has skin in this investigation. Grassley has always suspected Flynn was framed. Back in June of 2018, Senator Grassley was very suspicious of what Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was doing to facilitate the targeting of Michael Flynn when he said:
…”If the facts are inconsistent with the plea agreement, that would be an entirely different kettle of fish.”… (more)
Earlier today Grassley reacted to the previously hidden FBI documents showing that Michael Flynn was targeted for removal by the FBI “small group”. WATCH:
“If the facts are inconsistent with the plea agreement, that would be an entirely different kettle of fish.”
JUNE 2018 – The Department’s reply to my May 11, 2018 letter seeking information about the circumstances surrounding Lt. General Michael Flynn’s reported conversations with the Russian ambassador and FBI records related to those conversations is insufficient. The letter only recounts a series of publicly known facts about Lt. General Flynn’s plea agreement and relies on improper excuses in refusing to provide the requested information. The Committee requires this information to fulfill its Constitutional function and its charge under Senate Rules to conduct oversight of the Department of Justice.
First, as you know, some of that information was first requested on a bipartisan basis before your confirmation. The Committee has waited patiently for much more than a year for the criminal inquiry related to Lt. General Flynn to conclude. It has been more than five months since his guilty plea. Thus, there is no longer any legitimate reason to withhold facts from the Senate about the circumstances of his conversations with the Russian ambassador and his FBI interview.
Second, the Department’s letter erroneously suggests that complying with Congressional oversight would result in “the reality or the appearance of political interference” in a “pending criminal prosecution.” There is no pending prosecution. The guilty plea was more than five months ago.
The Department’s letter describes in detail what everyone already knows. Lt. General Flynn admitted to the Statement of Offense with the able assistance of counsel. All that remains is for Lt. General Flynn to be sentenced. Simply disclosing facts to the Committee could not possibly “interfere” with the case at this late date, assuming those facts are consistent with the representations that prosecutors arranged for Lt. General Flynn to swear to in federal court.
If the facts are inconsistent with the plea agreement, that would be an entirely different kettle of fish. (more pdf link)
The first of the sealed documents provided to the Flynn defense have been unsealed. The documents include emails between: FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, his FBI counsel Lisa Page, as well as FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI Agent Joe Pientka in the lead-up to the January 24, 2017 interview of Michael Flynn.
This specific release is the court filing of five pages that was initially turned-over to the Flynn defense team last Friday. [The pdf is here] [There are an additional 11 pages of documents from another production earlier today; those are not in this release]
The documents today also include handwritten notes taken by FBI counterintelligence chief William “Bill” Priestap; which show him both questioning and outlining the purpose of the interview: to remove National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
According to the Priestap notes it appears the position of the FBI on January 23, 2017, was that Michael Flynn had violated the Logan Act by having a conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on December 29, 2016, prior to the inauguration.
This was a ridiculous position, there was no violation of the Logan Act; however, it was this position from which the questioning the next day, January 24 2017, would be based.
The next page of notes discusses the “Afterwards”:
The redactions are likely “the transcript“; where the FBI has the transcript of the call between Michael Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak. The redaction would be continued to protect the source of the material (“sources and methods”).
Interestingly, on the second day, the actual day of the interview, it appears Bill Priestap had second thoughts and was questioning the goal of the interview: “I thought about it last night and I believe we should rethink this”…
FBI Asst. Director for Counterintelligence Bill Priestap then asks the question: “what is our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”
The premise of “wrongdoing” vis-a-vis a Logan Act violation was ridiculous. As the incoming National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn would be talking to many counterparts throughout the globe. Even Priestap started to realize what they were doing was “playing games.”
[…] Multiple officials confirmed to Just the News that the author of the notes is William Priestap, the now-retired FBI Assistant Director for Counterintelligence and the ultimate supervisor for fired agent Peter Strzok, who led the Russia probe.
[…] A special prosecutor is reviewing DOJ’s and the FBI’s handling of the Flynn prosecution, which led to the former Trump adviser and retired general pleading guilty to lying to the FBI under a plea deal with Special Counsel Robert Mueller in the Russia case.
Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell filed a court motion last week saying new evidence has emerged showing Flynn was “framed” and his conviction should be dismissed. The officials said the notes are part of that new evidence and had been withheld from Flynn’s defense team for years even though they were potential evidence of innocence.
More evidence is being produced in the next few days that will further illuminate the FBI’s conduct in the case that is now at the center of the DOJ investigation, officials said. (more)
Keep in mind, the Mueller special counsel knew this all along…
Keep in mind, former DAG Rod Rosenstein knew this all along…
Also keep in mind, current FBI Director Chris Wray and current FBI Legal Counsel Dana Boente knew this all along….
These documents have been inside the DOJ and FBI for more than three years; while they prosecuted him and drove his family into bankruptcy.
NOTE: Just before this was published the court has released the notes. More will follow…
It appears U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Jensen from Missouri, who was brought in to review all of the DOJ case files surrounding Michael Flynn, has provided an additional eleven pages of exculpatory FBI notes. Michael Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell describes the latest notes as: “even more appalling than the Friday production“.
The Flynn defense and the DOJ (likely Jensen) have filed a joint motion with the court asking for the documents to be unsealed after a classification review. However, as Techno Fog noted looking at the cover letter, it appears these notes were already in the custody of the Special Counsels Office (“DOJSCO”)
Breaking…. As this was being assembled, the court has unsealed some of the notes.
Notice how President Trump always says: “you’d have been at war with North Korea”. Notice how President Trump doesn’t say: “you’d have been at war with Kim Jong-un”.
Again, this has always looked like one of the most complex geopolitical hostage rescue operations in history. China controls the DPRK, which includes the entire military apparatus in/around control over the North Korean people.
The world presents North Korea as a rogue regime without noticing/admitting that in reality North Korea is a proxy province of China.
Chairman Xi is the captor.
Chairman Kim is the captive.
President Trump is the hostage rescuer…. and so they dance.
POTUS knows the status of Kim; both Kim and Trump have discussed the dynamic. Chairman Xi doesn’t like the Kim and Trump relationship; because it has disrupted the entire purpose of the DPRK as a proxy province providing Beijing plausible deniability.
Yesterday Maria Bartiromo caused a stir when she tweeted that sources told her “Michael Flynn will be exonerated this week. It was a total fraud. A set up.”
Today, in an interview with Georgia Rep. Doug Collins Ms. Bartiromo expands on what she was told.
Apparently, former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker made notes surrounding the FBI meeting where agent Peter Strzok and agent Joseph Pientka interviewed National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. According to Bartiromo James Baker’s notes are exculpatory in that they show the intent and purpose of the FBI interview was to set-up Lt Gen. Flynn.
.
Baker was removed from his position December 21, 2017, around the same time when James Wolfe was removed from the SSCI. James Baker resigned from the FBI on May 4, 2018, right in the middle of the 2018 FBI cover-up operations. When Baker resigned the James Wolfe indictment was hidden & sealed (since March ’18); the Julian Assange indictment was hidden and sealed (since March ’18); and two months later the FBI lied to the FISA court (July 12, 2018).
The in the spring and summer of 2018 the DOJ/FBI was trying to: (1) protect Robert Mueller’s fraudulent investigation; (2) hide their prior corruption, including fisa; and (3) delay everything until the Democrats could take the House in the mid-terms.
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 