The bisexual congressional representative who enjoyed multi-partner naked office exploits with her bong-smoking staff has decided to resign from office.
Also, beware of anyone in DC selling cheap ‘slightly used’ congressional office furniture. Just sayin’.
WASHINGTON DC – Freshman Rep. Katie Hill is resigning from Congress after facing allegations of inappropriate sexual relationships with staffers in her office and on her congressional campaign, according to two Democratic sources.
“It is with a broken heart that today I announce my resignation from Congress. This is the hardest thing I have ever had to do, but I believe it is the best thing for my constituents, my community and our country,” Hill wrote in a letter announcing the news after it was first reported by POLITICO.
[…] Attorneys for Hill issued a cease and desist letter earlier this week to a British tabloid after the outlet published several intimate photos of Hill, including one that allegedly depicted her holding a bong while naked. (link)
No word yet on what Ms. Hill will do after such a short tenure in federal office, but there are partnerships available at the DC lobbying firm, Canyu Spankme and Howe.
Rep. Katie Hill
✔@RepKatieHill
It is with a broken heart that today I announce my resignation from Congress. This is the hardest thing I have ever had to do, but I believe it is the best thing for my constituents, my community, and our country.
CTH has some new readers, so against the backdrop of the UniParty in Washington DC jumping into action to criticize President Trump’s decision to withdraw from Syria; and against the backdrop of President Trump authorizing an operation last night that killed ISIS leader Baghdadi, perhaps a little factual and historic refresher is in order….
The 40-minute discussion took place on the sidelines of a United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22nd 2016:
[…] Kerry’s off-record conversation was apparently with two dozen ‘Syrian civilians’, all from US backed opposition-linked NGO’s in education and medical groups supposedly working in ‘rebel-held’ (aka terrorist-held) areas in Syria.
This opposition conclave also included ‘rescue workers’ which can only be ambassadors from the White Helmets, a pseudo NGO which serves as Washington and London’s primary PR front in pursuit of a “No Fly Zone’ in Syria, and it’s being bankrolled by the US, UK, EU and other coalition states to the tune of well over $100 million (so far). (link)
When you listen to the audio recording (embedded below) it becomes immediately obvious what was going on in 2014, 2015 and 2016 as an outcome of policy from the White House. In addition, you discover why this jaw-dropping 2016 leak/story was buried by the U.S. media and how it connects to the prior 4 years of perplexing U.S. mid-east policy.
This evidence within this single story would/should forever remove any credibility toward the U.S. foreign policy under President Obama. It also destroys the credibility of a large number of well known republicans, and explains how the prior action placed President Trump into a precarious position requiring a careful approach.
The key Secretary Kerry moments are at 02:00, and again at approximately 18:30 forward.
The discussion from 18:30 through to 29:00 are exceptionally revealing and should be listened to by anyone who has wondered what was going on in Syria. Kerry even makes mention of the “Responsibility to Protect, or R2P” principle:
.
@18:30 Secretary John Kerry [transcript]:
[…] “Well, the problem is the Russians do not care about law, and we do. And, we don’t have a basis -our lawyers tell us- unless we have a U.N. Security Council resolution, which the Russians can veto and Chinese, OR unless we are under attack from the folks there, or unless we are invited in. Russia was invited in by the legitimate regime, well, it’s illegitimate in our mind, by the regime. And so, they were invited in and we’re not invited in.”
“We’re flying in airspace there, where they can turn on the air defense and we have a very different scene. The only reason they’re letting us fly is because we’re going after ISIS. If we were going after Assad, those air defenses, we’d have to take out all those air defenses, uh, and we don’t have a legal justification, frankly, for doing that unless we stretch it way beyond the law on a humanitarian basis, which some people argue we should – by the way.”
“Uh, but so far American legal theory has not gone into these so called “right to protect”, uh, and we don’t even have what we had in Kosovo where we had an, you know, an existing resolution and so forth. Uh, even though we went alone.”
“And so it’s complicated, it’s not easy. And we’ve been fighting. How many wars have we been fighting? We’ve been fighting in Afghanistan, we’ve been fighting in Iraq, we’ve fighting -you know- in the region for fourteen years. And a lot of Americans don’t believe that we should be fighting and sending young Americans over to die in another country. That’s the problem.”
“The congress won’t vote to do it. And you can be mad at us, but what we’re trying to do is help Syrians fight for their own country; and we’ve been spending a lot of money, a lot of effort to try and help do this. So, there’s an opposition there; the opposition is doing very well. Russia came in, and that’s a problem I know, because, uh, y’ know, uh, we don’t behave like Russians, it’s just a different standard.”
“So we are trying to see if we can test whether Russia, you see, is serious about a political solution. And if they are not serious, then we will help the opposition more. But I don’t think that’s particularly good for Syrians in the end because it will mean more fighting.”
Secretary Kerry is then questioned by an obvious sympathizer toward the extremist elements (calls pro-assad Sunni faction “Sunni Jews”) about why the U.S. fights the extremist Sunni (ISIS), but not the extremist Shia (Hezbollah). Kerry’s response:
“Well, they’re [Hezbollah] a terrorist organization, we’ve designated them a terrorist organization. The reason for [airstrikes against the Sunni Extremists] is because they have basically declared war on us; and are plotting against us, and Hezbollah is not plotting against us; Hezbollah is exclusively focused on Israel, they’re not attacking now, and on Syria where they are attacking in support of the, uh, in support of Assad.”
“So it a, uh, it’s…”
[Interrupted]
Question: “But how to make the majority of the Syrian people accept this approach, that because Hezbollah or the Iraqi or Iranian groups are not attacking the U.S. now when they are attacking against the terrorism in Syria?”
Kerry: “Well, they, they are targeted by the opposition who we are arming and training.”
What the recording reveals is substantive:
♦ First, only regime change, the removal of Bashir Assad, in Syria was the 2013, 2014, and 2015 goal for President Obama. This is admitted and outlined by Secretary John Kerry.
♦ Secondly, in order to accomplish this primary goal, the White House was willing to watch the rise of ISIS (’13, ’14, ’15) by placing their bet that ISIS’s success would force Syrian President Bashir Assad to acquiesce toward Obama’s terms and step down.
♦ Thirdly, in order to facilitate the objective, Obama and Kerry intentionally gave arms to ISIS and even, arguably, attacked a Syrian government military convoy to stop a strategic attack upon the Islamic extremists killing 80 Syrian soldiers.
Pause for a moment and consider those three points carefully. Because the audio, along with accompanying research now surfacing, not only exposes these three points as truth – but also provides the specific evidence toward them.
The problem in the Obama/Kerry’s secret strategy became clear when ISIS grew in sufficient strength to give the White House optimism for the scheme – however, instead of capitulation Assad then turned to Russia for help.
When Russia came to aid Bashir Assad the Syrian Government began being able to defeat ISIS and the Islamic Extremist elements within Syria. For the hidden plan of Obama/Kerry (and also McCain, Graham, et al), Russia defeating ISIS, al-Qaeda and al-Nusra, upended their objective.
Against the backdrop of this recording we can reconcile so many historic issues. We already know of a Second Presidential Finding Memo authorizing additional CIA covert action in 2012, this time in Syria. However, unlike the 2011 Libyan operation we do not know the operational name of the second action in 2012 Syria.
2012:WASHINGTON, Aug 1 (Reuters) – President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, U.S. sources familiar with the matter said.
Obama’s order, approved earlier this year and known as an intelligence “finding,” broadly permits the CIA and other U.S. agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust Assad. (link)
Further consider how this Kerry audio tape, and the now transparent Obama policy toward Syria, absolutely confirms our earlier research as contained within the Benghazi Brief surrounding Syria. [Previous post]
President Obama, Secretary Clinton (2011, 2012) and later Secretary Kerry, together with John McCain, and the CIA tentacled team within the Republican party (2013, 2014, 2015) were willing to support extremist (under all factional names) in order to overthrow Bashir Assad…
…THIS WAS THE Obama/Kerry POLICY.
This was their 2016 admitted policy, only because they were caught.
Nothing else mattered.
President Trump took office in January 2017, and began a process to kill and remove, with extreme prejudice, the ISIS forces that President Obama, Secretary Clinton and Secretary Kerry armed. He began with the end in mind, and delivered the following quote:…
During the last Mortgaged Backed Security scandal which undermined the entire world economy, they created mortgage modifications which enabled millions of delinquent homeowners to avoid having their home foreclosed. Since 2007, it has been estimated that some 8.7 million permanent mortgage modifications were created. There are still over $800 billion of these bubble-era loans outstanding. How were they allowed to survive? For at least the past five years, between 75% and 95% of all mortgage modifications have taken the past interest due that was in default, included it in a capitalization of interest arrears, which means the resolution was never for the benefit of the homebuyer.
By adding the past-due interest, they have been paying interest on the interest. This failure to address the issue by some partial debt forgiveness with respect to prior interest means that the mortgage crisis has been simply postponed. If a new financial crisis hits, the old one will simply be sent off into foreclosure and real estate values can still plummet even more in the low-end of the market.
Barrons did a good review of the problem. They came to the conclusion that re-defaults will be more likely as home values fail to get back to par and these people will just walk away. Indeed, the resolution should have been the forgiveness of past-due interest. Then the value of the homes would have been less impacted. But the bankers refused to accept the loss and as a result, real estate has been unable to recover on the low end of the market which is why the economy has not been robust as it should be boosted more by capital inflows than true economic recovery.
When we look at our broad real estate index, it has been making new highs in 2019. However, when we plot this in Euro, we can see why there have been foreign capital inflows. But the foreign capital has been buying the high-end, not the class where the mortgage bubble of 2007 impacted. From a foreign perspective, the high investment end of the markets has been above the 2007 high for the past 4 years. This is why the new highs have tended to be concentrated in the major centers like New York City and Miami – not local main streets.
Barrons reported that if we look at JPMorgan Chase (JPM) which holds the second-largest residential mortgage portfolio in the nation, we see in its second quarter of 2019 report, that almost $10 billion of modified loans (known as troubled debt restructuring)remained outstanding. Of this restructured debt, 43% were listed as having re-defaulted. Bank of America (BAC) has stated that 41% of its modified loans had re-defaulted.
QUESTION: Might you clarify this response you gave on one of your very recent blogs. You said bail-in may NOT be permitted on US soil. Did you mean that despite the laws written in the USA to allow it, you don’t think it is likely to happen to USA citizens banking in the USA?
OR were you only meaning in regards to overseas banks with locations within the USA would most likely not use bail-in.
OR because of all the EU money fleeing to USD/USA that the banks stable in the USA (for now) and thus no bail-in needed?
Do you think there would EVER be the case for a USA bank bail-in? Or is this just more conspiracy talk? For obvious reasons, this is of great concern to all of us as this USD repo madness, liquidity crisis and DB’s derivative contagion begins to spread throughout Europe into the next ECM turn in mid-January 2020.
Thank you in advance for your efforts and response to this question.
L
ANSWER: The bail-in laws were passed during the last crisis which was a popular response at that time because no bankers were ever punished for what they did in New York City. To the extent that FDIC exists, they would certainly honor that or it would be political suicide. However, the fine print is FDIC cover per person. Putting money at 5 different banks would seem to get around their limitations, but I would not count on that.
The gray area comes in two aspects.
First, there are at any given time money from one bank which can be at another (REPO) which is also why there is a liquidity crisis
Second, there are business accounts which exceed $100,000
The problem with a bail-in is that the ramifications would be far worse than the Great Depression. You would destroy businesses that would then be unable to make payroll and the unemployment would be massive – far greater than the 25% high of the Great Depression.
The BAIL-IN policy of Europe is a different animal altogether. This has nothing to do with bailing-out bankers. This stems from the refusal to consolidate debts. If banks failed in Southern Europe, then a bailout would mean money from the north could go to the south. This is the structural design. It is WHY Europe adopted the bail-in, quite different from the question of bankers’ conduct. Germany’s demand to join the Euro was that there would be no consolidation of debts. As I have said, the EU is like a family reunion with the cousin who is the drunk than people smile at, but would never lend him a dime. You can pretend it one happy family, but that is just the surface.
A bail-in would actually be devastating economically. It defeats the very idea of banking for if the burden is shifted to depositors to monitor banks when we have agencies who are supposed to do that, then why do we need governments or pay taxes?
Despite the laws, they were never thought threw and it is a huge difference between a regional bank and Goldman Sachs. The hatred was directed at the New York Banks – and rightly so. Because the federal court in New York City has protected the bankers, they have actually undermined the entire country by their stupid actions.
Recently you wrote: “Recently, this has manifested in laws that have attacked foreign investment in real estate, which is not the “hot” money that blew up the world in 1997. ”
I live in Vancouver where real estate prices are completely divorced from local wages. If it is not hot overseas money that is driving our real estate market then what is? Your analysis is appreciated as always.
Nick
ANSWER: It is foreign money pouring into Vancouver seeking to park in a world that is in economic and political chaos. This has been accelerated by the decline in the C$, which has made the prices appear cheap in other currencies. When you look at our Canadian Real Estate Index in terms of different currencies, you can see that it has been attracting capital. The problem is rather clear. Foreign capital buys the trophies. Others may raise the price of houses because they see the high-end rising, but it is not foreign capital that is bidding for the average home in general. The problem comes when they put in punitive laws that become permanent because of a trend based entirely upon currency.
QUESTION: You commented that the central banks had a difficult position when they were on the gold standard compared to post-1971. Could you explain that difference?
Thank you for the education. Its better than any classroom.
EJ
ANSWER: The United States created the Federal Reserve in 1913. Prior to World War I, central banks were long-established in Europe like the Bank of England in 1694. What you have to understand is that BEFORE World War I, the central banks of Europe were faced with two duties because there was the gold standard.
1.) The first was to defend their currency’s parity with gold and thereby the entire edifice of the international gold standard. This required raising interest rates and keeping the total volume of money and credit under control, often with contractionary effects.
2.) The second responsibility was to act as a lender of last resort for their banking system by supplying emergency liquidity. This necessitated an expansion of credit and a lowering of interest rates.
Post-1971, the central banks were no longer required to intervene to maintain the exchange rate relative to the gold standard, which is more or less similar to Hong Kong managing the peg to the dollar today.
Paul Volcker raised interest rates insanely into 1981 to stop inflation, but he ignored the consequences that would have on the value of the dollar on world markets. This was the stone that hit the standing pool of water which then at the 1985 Plaza Accord suggested that Europe create a single currency. One mistake is never corrected and never acknowledged. They constantly create a new scheme to solve the last one they created.
We have lost all of our freedoms, we are just too busy to take notice. The pretend whistleblower against Trump was orchestrated by Democrats to create an issue for 2020 to impeach Trump. The real whistleblower, Edward Snowden, has to live in Russia for they would imprison him under Treason. In Australia, a whistleblower exposure corruption in the government resulted in raids on newspapers to uncover who the whistleblower is. The press has protested but publishing redacted headlines illustrating how the press is NO LONGER free to actually report the truth. This has led to a protest by the newspapers in Australia when their offices and journalist’s homes were raided by the government.
We are saddled with nothing but corruption and fake news. Even in school, Wikipedia is not allowed to be cited as a source for so many pages are being politically manipulated. If the info on Wikipedia is politically slanted, it is for a very good reason – political propaganda.
We are spiraling toward authoritarianism at a dangerous pace. This is a PRIVATE WAVE so the government has been losing power. They know that and from 2016 onward, we are being confronted by an ever-increasing attempt to impose authoritarianism. This is just not going to end well by the time we reach 2032 – if we can make it that far.
QUESTION: Would you please explain exactly what government debt is and who receives the interest payment that governments make on borrowings? I thought that Governments borrowed from their respective central banks and paid the central bank interest on the debt. I never understood why a government would have to pay any interest. My brother tells me that all government debt is made up of bonds and the interest payment goes to the bondholder
Thank you
MMcDH
ANSWER: The interest paid on debt is to the bondholders, which includes foreign governments, Social Security, and private investors/institutions. The holdings of the debt change. Under Quantitative Easing, the bonds held by the central banks mean they receive the interest payments.
The French back in the 1960s had such a system where the central bank created the money and lent it to the government. That is a far better system because then the government does not compete with the private sector to borrow money thereby reducing economic growth.
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
The bisexual congressional representative who enjoyed multi-partner naked office exploits with her bong-smoking staff has decided to resign from office.
Rep. Katie Hill
Centinel2012 