AP Calls Georgia Governor Race for Republican Brian Kemp After Democrat Delivers Speech Complaining…


Democrat candidate Stacey Abrams ‘conceded-not-conceded’ the Georgia governor’s race in Georgia after more than a week of vote counting and party anxiety about her inability to generate the needed post-election day ballots to overcome the voter deficit.  Republican Brian Kemp is now the Georgia Governor-elect.

In her nationally televised concession-not-concession remarks, Abrams make it clear that campaign assistance from President Obama and Oprah Winfrey should have entitled her victory.  Alas, now she threatens to sue the State of Georgia for not supporting her.

ATLANTA (AP) — Democrat Stacey Abrams ended her challenge to Republican Brian Kemp in the Georgia governor’s race on Friday, but pledged to fight the former secretary of state’s “gross mismanagement” of the elections with a federal lawsuit.

Speaking defiantly to a news conference, Abrams said her actions did not constitute a concession, but she acknowledged that she had no further recourse under the law and that Kemp would be certified the winner.

“Let’s be clear: This is not a speech of concession,” she said. “Because concession means to acknowledge an action is right, true or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith I cannot concede that.”

Officials from Abrams’ campaign had told The Associated Press on Thursday that the candidate was considering the unprecedented move of invoking a state law that would let her challenge the results based on “misconduct, fraud or irregularities … sufficient to change or place in doubt the results.”  (read more)

The Modern Myth of “Global Markets”…


Reposted by request – There are massive multinational interests inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.

When we understand how trade works in the modern era we also understand why the multinational control agents within the current system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.  In essence, this is a structural economic battle that is being waged politically.

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

It doesn’t.

Every element of global economic trade is controlled and exploited by massive institutions, multinational banks and multinational corporations. Institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Bank control trillions of dollars in economic activity. Underneath that economic activity there are people who hold the reigns of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of America-First national economics; for brevity these are called ‘globalists’.

The modern financial constructs of these entities have been established over the course of the past three decades. When we understand how they manipulate the economic system of individual nations we begin to understand why they are so fundamentally opposed to President Trump and their execution of a business plan to influence U.S. politics.

In the Western World, separate from communist control perspectives (ie. China), “Global markets” are a modern myth; nothing more than a talking point meant to keep people satiated with sound bites they might find familiar.

Global markets have been destroyed over the past three decades by multinational corporations who control the products formerly contained within global markets.

The same is true for “Commodities Markets”. The multinational trade and economic system, run by corporations and multinational banks, now controls the product outputs of independent nations. The free market economic system has been usurped by entities who create what is best described as ‘controlled markets’.

U.S. President Trump smartly understands what has taken place. Additionally he uses economic leverage as part of a broader national security policy; and to understand who opposes President Trump specifically because of the economic leverage he creates, it becomes important to understand the objectives of the global and financial elite who run and operate the institutions. The Big Club.

Understanding how trillions of trade dollars influence geopolitical policy we begin to understand the three-decade global financial construct they seek to protect.

That is, global financial exploitation of national markets.

FOUR BASIC ELEMENTS:

♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national outputs and industries of developed industrial western nations.

♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.

♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).

♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.

Against the backdrop of President Trump confronting China; and against the backdrop of NAFTA renegotiated; and against the necessary need to support the key U.S. steel industry; revisiting the economic influences within the modern import/export dynamic will help conceptualize the issues at the heart of the matter.

There are a myriad of interests within each trade sector that make specific explanation very challenging; however, here’s the basic outline.

For three decades economic “globalism” has advanced, quickly. Everyone accepts this statement, yet few actually stop to ask who and what are behind this – and why?

Influential people with vested financial interests in the process have sold a narrative that global manufacturing, global sourcing, and global production was the inherent way of the future. The same voices claimed the American economy was consigned to become a “service-driven economy.”

What was always missed in these discussions is that advocates selling this global-economy message have a vested financial and ideological interest in convincing the information consumer it is all just a natural outcome of economic progress.

It’s not.

The process is not natural at all.  It is a process that is entirely controlled, promoted and utilized by large conglomerates, lobbyists, purchased politicians and massive financial corporations.

Again, I’ll try to retain the larger altitude perspective without falling into the traps of the esoteric weeds. I freely admit this is tough to explain and I may not be successful.

Bulletpoint #1: ♦ Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.

This is perhaps the most challenging to understand. In essence, thanks specifically to the way the World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, national companies expanded their influence into multiple nations, across a myriad of industries and economic sectors (energy, agriculture, raw earth minerals, etc.). This is the basic underpinning of national companies becoming multinational corporations.

Think of these multinational corporations as global entities now powerful enough to reach into multiple nations -simultaneously- and purchase controlling interests in a single economic commodity.

A historic reference point might be the original multinational enterprise, energy via oil production. (Exxon, Mobil, BP, etc.)

However, in the modern global world, it’s not just oil; the resource and product procurement extends to virtually every possible commodity and industry. From the very visible (wheat/corn) to the obscure (small minerals, and even flowers).

Bulletpoint #2 ♦ The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.

During the past several decades national companies merged. The largest lemon producer company in Brazil, merges with the largest lemon company in Mexico, merges with the largest lemon company in Argentina, merges with the largest lemon company in the U.S., etc. etc. National companies, formerly of one nation, become “continental” companies with control over an entire continent of nations.

…. or it could be over several continents or even the entire world market of Lemon/Widget production. These are now multinational corporations. They hold interests in specific segments (this example lemons) across a broad variety of individual nations.

National laws on Monopoly building are not the same in all nations. Most are not as structured as the U.S.A or other more developed nations (with more laws). During the acquisition phase, when encountering a highly developed nation with monopoly laws, the process of an umbrella corporation might be needed to purchase the targeted interests within a specific nation. The example of Monsanto applies here.

Bulletpoint #3 ♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).

In underdeveloped countries the process of buying political outcome is called bribery. Within the United States we call it lobbying.

With control of the majority of actual lemons the multinational corporation now holds a different set of financial values than a local farmer or national market. This is why commodities exchanges are essentially dead. In the aggregate the mercantile exchange is no longer a free or supply-based market; it is now a controlled market exploited by mega-sized multinational corporations.

Instead of the traditional ‘supply/demand’ equation determining prices, the corporations look to see what nations can afford what prices. The supply of the controlled product is then distributed to the country according to their ability to afford the price. This is essentially the bastardized and politicized function of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is also how the corporations controlling WTO policy maximize profits.

Back to the lemons. A corporation might hold the rights to the majority of the lemon production in Brazil, Argentina and California/Florida. The price the U.S. consumer pays for the lemons is directed by the amount of inventory (distribution) the controlling corporation allows in the U.S.

If the U.S. lemon harvest is abundant, the controlling interests will export the product to keep the U.S. consumer spending at peak or optimal price. A U.S. customer might pay $2 for a lemon, a Mexican customer might pay .50¢, and a Canadian $1.25.

The bottom line issue is the national supply (in this example ‘harvest/yield’) is not driving the national price because the supply is now controlled by massive multinational corporations.

The mistake people often make is calling this a “global commodity” process. In the modern era this “global commodity” phrase is particularly nonsense.

A true global commodity is a process of individual nations harvesting/creating a similar product and bringing that product to a global market. Individual nations each independently engaged in creating a similar product.

The production efficiency, the quality and capability of each nation, to produce the  product is independent and proprietary to the businesses within the nation.  In the natural course of national production, not all products are therefore identical; there are variances.

Under modern globalism this process no longer takes place. It’s a complete fraud. Massive multinational corporations control the majority of production inside each nation and therefore control the global product market and price. It is a controlled system.

The outputs are now almost identical regardless of the producing nation.  The processes used for a specific manufacturing sector output in the U.S. are now the same processes used for production in Mexico, or South Korea, or China etc.  Any technological efficiency gains are quickly purchased by the multinational and distributed internationally.

[Edwards Demming was a U.S. industrial expert who went to Japan following WWII and taught them the best processes for industrial manufacturing.  Japan embraced the teaching and instituted an improvement process called “Kaizen“.]

Back to lemons – EXAMPLE: Part of the lobbying in the food industry is to advocate for the expansion of U.S. taxpayer benefits to underwrite the costs of the domestic food products they control. By lobbying DC these multinational corporations get congress and policy-makers to expand the basis of who can use EBT and SNAP benefits (state reimbursement rates).

Expanding the federal subsidy for food purchases is part of the corporate profit dynamic.

With increased taxpayer subsidies, the food price controllers can charge more domestically and export more of the product internationally. Taxes, via subsidies, go into their profit margins. The corporations then use a portion of those enhanced profits in contributions to the politicians. It’s a circle of money.

In highly developed nations this multinational corporate process requires the corporation to purchase the domestic political process (as above) with individual nations allowing the exploitation in varying degrees. As such, the corporate lobbyists pay hundreds of millions to politicians for changes in policies and regulations; one sector, one product, or one industry at a time. These are specialized lobbyists.

EXAMPLE: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)

CFIUS is an inter-agency committee authorized to review transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person (“covered transactions”), in order to determine the effect of such transactions on the national security of the United States.

CFIUS operates pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) (section 721) and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.

The CFIUS process has been the subject of significant reforms over the past several years. These include numerous improvements in internal CFIUS procedures, enactment of FINSA in July 2007, amendment of Executive Order 11858 in January 2008, revision of the CFIUS regulations in November 2008, and publication of guidance on CFIUS’s national security considerations in December 2008 (more)

Bulletpoint #4With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.

The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth. This is the basic premise, the cornerstone, behind the catch-phrase ‘globalism’.

It is never discussed.

To control the market price some contracted product may even be secured and shipped with the intent to allow it to sit idle (or rot). It’s all about controlling the price and maximizing the profit equation. To gain the same $1 profit a widget multinational might have to sell 20 widgets in El-Salvador (.25¢ each), or two widgets in the U.S. ($2.50/each).

Think of the process like the historic reference of OPEC (Oil Producing Economic Countries). Only in the modern era massive corporations are playing the role of OPEC and it’s not oil being controlled, thanks to the WTO it’s almost everything.

Again, this is highlighted in the example of taxpayers subsidizing the food sector (EBT, SNAP etc.), the corporations can charge U.S. consumers more. Ex. more beef is exported, red meat prices remain high at the grocery store, but subsidized U.S. consumers can better afford the high prices.

Of course, if you are not receiving food payment assistance (middle-class) you can’t eat the steaks because you can’t afford them. (Not accidentally, it’s the same scheme in the ObamaCare healthcare system)

Agriculturally, multinational corporate Monsanto says: ‘all your harvests are belong to us‘. Contract with us, or you lose because we can control the market price of your end product. Downside is that once you sign that contract, you agree to terms that are entirely created by the financial interests of the larger corporation; not your farm.

The multinational agriculture lobby is massive. We willingly feed the world as part of the system; but you as a grocery customer pay more per unit at the grocery store because domestic supply no longer determines domestic price.

Within the agriculture community the (feed-the-world) production export factor also drives the need for labor. Labor is a cost. The multinational corps have a vested interest in low labor costs. Ergo, open border policies. (ie. willingly purchased republicans not supporting border wall etc.).

This corrupt economic manipulation/exploitation applies over multiple sectors, and even in the sub-sector of an industry like steel. China/India purchases the raw material, coking coal, then sells the finished good (rolled steel) back to the global market at a discount. Or it could be rubber, or concrete, or plastic, or frozen chicken parts etc.

The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upsets the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focus exclusively on bilateral trade deals, with specific trade agreements targeted toward individual nations (not national corporations).

‘America-First’ is also specific policy at a granular product level looking out for the national interests of the United States, U.S. workers, U.S. companies and U.S. consumers.

Under President Trump’s Trade positions, balanced, fair and reciprocal trade with firm regulatory control over proprietary national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is significantly stalled.

This puts many current multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding contracted interest of an asset they can no longer exploit (exfiltrate).

For durable goods: If the corporation wants the benefit of access to the U.S. market, President Trump applies price pressure (tariffs) which changes the ‘total cost of goods‘ dynamic and leverages the company interest to produce inside the United States.

Perhaps now we understand better how and why massive multi-billion multinational corporations and Wall Street institutions are aligned against President Trump.

 

RELATED:

♦The Modern Third Dimension in American Economics – HERE

♦The “Fed” Can’t Figure out the New Economics – HERE

♦Proof “America-First” has disconnected Main Street from Wall Street – HERE

♦Treasury Secretary Mnuchin begins creating a Parallel Banking System – HERE

♦How Trump Economic Policy is Interacting With The Stock Market – HERE

♦How Multinationals have Exported U.S. Wealth – HERE

President Trump Answers Reporter Questions During Oval Office Bill Signing…


After signing the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act in the Oval Office, President Trump takes questions from reporters on issues of the day.

The first question surrounds a judge intervening to restore the press pass of Constant Narcissism News (CNN) correspondent Jim Acosta.  President Trump notes the White House is making up rules for media decorum.  If only someone had thought of that earlier… like, say, um, two years ago. Go figure:

President Donald J Trump -vs- The Big Club…


Some call it ‘Globalism vs Nationalism’, at other times it is best described as “Wall Street -vs- Main Street”; however, the overarching bigger picture is a battle over economics and the financial power structures that oppose President Trump.

CTH has often said ‘everything is about the economics’, because it is. Ask the ‘why’ question five times to any issue and you will find the root issue is money.  Power, greed and control, it is all about the money and the economics.

Opposition to President Trump’s singularly unique and transformational reset of the U.S. economic system boils down to a battle against the ‘Big Club’.

Every political confrontation is a move within this dynamic. The structural battle is not based on party affiliation, it is based on control and ownership of economics.  This confrontation represents the biggest challenge; a brief example:

Hundreds of millions were spent on the 2018 election by owners within the ‘Big Club’; at a surface level those expenditures are discussed by punditry thus: “we were outspent” (insert Kevin McCarthy and/or Ronnda McDaniel here). But if you have followed the challenge more closely, over the course of years/decades, you have a more substantive understanding of the dynamic.

Billionaires on one side of the UniParty spend hundreds-of-millions in opposition to the MAGA agenda. That agenda, that economic agenda, is the existential threat to the Big Club’s grip on power.

Here’s the critical aspect: When it comes to the economics, there are no big spending billionaires on the nationalist side of the equation.  The interests of Wall Street Democrats and Wall Street Republicans are based on globalism; Wall Street not Main Street.

In the 2018 midterm election special interest groups representing the multinational (Wall St) financial interests of The Big Club spent massive amounts of money, through various PAC’s and funding mechanisms.  The objective was to undermine and reduce the ability of their adversary, President Trump.

In this fight there are no nationalist MAGA-donors to counterbalance that spending initiative other than you, the people.

Each of the lost congressional districts were targeted by the multinational Big Club.  Until the MAGA base gets a firm understanding of how this works opposition will continue to succeed. There is no MAGA-PAC or financial alliance system, funded by Wall Street billionaires who support the principles of economic nationalism, to counteract this dynamic.  It just doesn’t exist.

In the ‘globalist’ multinational, Wall Street dynamic, the Big Club DNC donor base and the Big Club RNC donor base have mutual self interests.  Within this interest, President Trump is their unified opposition.

The only defeating mechanism that can structurally override this dynamic is an independent Billionaire and a massive amount of tax-paying small donors, ordinary middle-Americans, who can supplement the financial arsenal.   Think back to 2015/2016, and you will see the single-successful-reference for this reality at work.

Everything is about the economics.

The Big Club opposition to President Trump is based on financial best-interest.  That opposition is not bound to a political party ideology.  It is an ideology based on economics.  In essence, this is a structural economic battle that is being waged politically.

Another intensely visible example of his dynamic is the Big Club donor-base within the GOP supporting Kevin McCarthy, and ADDING Rep. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) who was chosen yesterday to serve as House Republican conference chair, the #3 GOP spot in the House.

In the economic battle the successful defeat and diminishment of a House republican political body is more about creating a vulnerability, and creating a bigger opportunity to remove the existential threat President Trump’s economic policies represent.

Decades of financial policy were intentionally structured to the benefit of the BIG CLUB and the multinational Wall Street alliance represented by U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue.  This is not a Republican -vs- Democrat issue; this is a larger confrontation between those who hold financial power and a singular person, President Donald Trump, who is determined to remove that grip.

In headlines today:  Big Club board member Alan Greenspan declares that President Trump’s tariff policies are “insane” [link].  This expression by Greenspan is directly representative everything noted above.

However, conversely, the outcome of those MAGA tariff policies are EXACTLY what we said they would be.  The BLS released information yesterday quantifying inflation across all sectors (emphasis mine).

Food – The food index declined 0.1 percent in October as the index for food at home fell 0.2 percent and the index for food away from home rose 0.1 percent. Three of the six major grocery store food group indexes declined in October. The fruits and vegetables index fell 0.7 percent in October, its third consecutive decline.

The index for fresh fruits fell 1.8 percent, while the fresh vegetables index increased 0.3 percent. The index for cereals and bakery products fell 0.6 percent, and the index for dairy and related products declined 0.4 percent. (link)

Notice how the prices for food are dropping as the MAGAnomic trade policies of President Trump are being carried out.

Notice how the timing of the decline is directly related to the tariff actions, and the counter-actions, by the targeted countries.

President Trump is fracturing the multinational corporate ‘controlled market’, and his trade policies are beginning to reconstitute supply and demand pricing in a nationalist market.

This inflation data, specifically within the fastest sector to show indicators (most perishable = fastest turnover) highlights what we have been explaining for years:

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

It doesn’t.

Every element of global economic trade is controlled and exploited by massive institutions, multinational banks and multinational corporations. Institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Bank control trillions of dollars in economic activity. Underneath that economic activity there are people who hold the reigns of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of national economics. (cont.)

The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth.

It is never discussed.

To control the market price some contracted product may even be secured and shipped with the intent to allow it to sit idle (or rot). It’s all about controlling the price and maximizing the profit equation. To gain the same $1 profit a widget multinational might have to sell 20 widgets in El-Salvador (.25¢ each), or two widgets in the U.S. ($2.50/each).

Think of the process like the historic reference of OPEC (Oil Producing Economic Countries). Only in the modern era massive corporations are playing the role of OPEC and it’s not oil being controlled, it’s almost everything, including food.

Yes, President Trump, the man and his policy team, is an existential threat to the elitist hierarchy of things well beyond the borders of the DC Swamp. In the era of explaining the complex it’s a planetary economic reset almost too massive and consequential to encapsulate in words.

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

…AND, as a result of Trump’s success, the Fed is now having to modify its baseline assumptions to re-evaluate the shifting new economy.  Keep watching…

TheLastRefuge @TheLastRefuge2

Reuters Top News

@Reuters
Fed plans review of how it pursues inflation, employment goals https://reut.rs/2DGYHlM 

Senator Lindsey Graham Discusses His Meeting With AAG Matt Whitaker…


Senator Lindsey Graham (U-DC) met with Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker earlier today and pauses to discuss with interested media.  Graham confirms Whitaker is intent on allowing the Mueller investigation to come to its natural conclusion.

Additionally, Graham discusses a potential for he and Whitaker to work together next year on issues vitally important to the institution.  [ie. do not expect any ‘spygate’ stuff being discussed at any time over the next several weeks.]

.

Additionally today, the Office of Inspector General, Michael Horowitz outlined departmental priorities for the DOJ in 2019. [READ HERE] Which leans heavily toward the possibility the next DOJ-IG report will be a white-wash over the FISA abuse. Notably absent from the challenge priorities is any direct interest in eliminating corruption.

(Source Link)

I’ll ask again: How can the DOJ-IG write a report outlining political FISA abuse when the same DOJ-IG just completed a report claiming there was/is no political bias within the institution?

Think about it

ink about it.

Rep. Jim Jordan

Florida Orders First Ever State-Wide Hand Ballot Recount…


Following a five-day machine recount of the more than 8.3 million votes cast in the Nov. 6 elections, Secretary of State Ken Detzner now orders a hand recount for two of the three recount races: U.S. Senate and State AG Commissioner.

The Ron DeSantis v Andrew Gillum ballot count ended outside the margin for a hand recount; and Republican DeSantis is now the Governor-elect.

FLORIDA – An unprecedented statewide hand recount is now under way in the Sunshine State, further extending a high-stakes, partisan battle over every last vote in Florida’s crucial U.S. Senate race.

Following a five-day machine recount of the more than 8.3 million votes cast in the Nov. 6 elections, Secretary of State Ken Detzner ordered hand recounts Thursday afternoon in the race between U.S. Sen Bill Nelson and Gov. Rick Scott, and also the race for agriculture commissioner between Nicole “Nikki” Fried and Matt Caldwell.

The order gives canvassing boards in the state’s 67 counties three days to pore over thousands of ballots that were rejected by machines because of “overvotes” — a voter appears to have chosen more than one candidate in a race — or “undervotes,” in which a voter appears to have skipped a race altogether. With the help of state guidelines, the canvassing boards, which are allowed to enlist the help of volunteers, will try to determine how these voters intended to vote.

It’s not entirely clear how many such overvotes and undervotes exist in the U. S. Senate race. A Times/Herald analysis of state and county data shows the number could be between 35,000 and 118,000 But the determination on how those ballots were cast — and the ability of the state’s elections supervisors to get through all the ballots — could go a long way toward deciding whether Nelson is reelected or Scott ascends from governor to U.S. Senator. (read more)

 

President Trump and First Lady Melania Visit Marine Barracks Washington…


Today, the 45th President of the United States Donald J. Trump and the First Lady, Mrs. Melania Trump, visited Marines at Marine Barracks Washington. The Commander in Chief and First Lady personally thanked Marines for their actions in supporting Washington D.C. first responders during the recent fire at the Arthur Capper Senior Center.

Additionally, the visit served as an opportunity to personally thank the Marines for their continued service to the nation, and provide desserts in honor of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday.

Donald J. Trump

DOJ Office of Legal Counsel: Matthew Whitaker Can Legally Serve as Acting Attorney General…


In a move that supports President Trump, the U.S. Justice Department, Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), has released a lengthy memo [pdf available here] outlining the legal support for the interim appointment of Matthew Whitaker as Acting Attorney General.

(Via Wall Street Journal) […] The Justice Department’s opinion is aimed at critics who say Mr. Whitaker’s installation is an invalid run around the Constitution’s requirement that the Senate provide “advice and consent” for senior executive-branch nominations. It comes a day after the state of Maryland asked a federal judge to block Mr. Whitaker from serving, arguing that job should fall to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

A judge Wednesday set a hearing on that argument for Dec. 19.

The Justice Department’s opinion is likely to further the debate that has surrounded Mr. Whitaker since President Trump named him to replace Jeff Sessions, whom the president ousted last week. Even before Mr. Sessions’ resignation, the department’s Office of Legal Counsel had advised the White House that Mr. Trump could lawfully name Mr. Whitaker as his successor, a senior department official said Wednesday.

“It is no doubt true that presidents often choose acting principal officers from among Senate-confirmed officers. But the Constitution doesn’t mandate that choice,” the head of the office, Steven A. Engel, wrote in Wednesday’s opinion, addressed to White House layer Emmet Flood. “Consistent with our prior opinion and with centuries of historical practice and precedents, we advised that the president’s designation of Mr. Whitaker as acting attorney general on a temporary basis” didn’t warrant Senate confirmation. (link to WSJ)

The larger, seemingly overlooked question, is why?  Why did President Trump choose to follow the advice of his White House lawyers, and appoint Matthew Whitaker as Acting Attorney General, instead of allowing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to elevate to the position of AG in the interim period?

There is speculation Matthew Whitaker is the preferred acting AG because he is more likely to support a pre-planned objective cleaning out a set of corrupt internal officials within the DOJ and FBI; this would be the “cleaner” supposition.

Hopefully this is the case; there are reasonable signs of evidence pointing in this direction. However, given the history of how Machievellian the administrative state has been in defending corrupt institutions – it would be naive to think the career embeds within the DOJ and FBI, and their external alliance (Lawfare), don’t have a counter-punch in their scheming arsenal.

We live in an era of consequential, and unfortunately unnerving, times.  Those within the previous administration who shredded the constitution in favor of weaponized power for political purposes, are emboldened amid a landscape where the majority media support their usurpation.

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.”

“For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”

~ Marcus Tullius Cicero

President Trump Announces First Step Act – Requests Congressional Support…


President Donald J. Trump delivers remarks earlier today in a White House event calling on Congress to take action and support the bipartisan prison reform legislation, the FIRST STEP Act.

.

[Transcript] Roosevelt Room – 4:38 P.M. EST – THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Thank you very much for being here. Appreciate it. And thank you very much, everybody. I’m grateful to be here today with members of the House and Senate who have poured their time — and they really have — their heart, and energy into the crucial issue of prison reform.

A very respected man — Chairman Chuck Grassley — and my friend. Where’s Chuck? Chuck? Thank you, Chuck, very much. You’ve worked hard on this. And Bob Goodlatte. I saw Bob here. Thank you, Bob. Great job. Senators Lindsey Graham, Mike Lee, Tim Scott, Rand Paul, and Doug Collins — fantastic people who’ve worked so hard and we appreciate very much what you’ve done. We really do. Thank you all very much.

Working together with my administration over the last two years, these members have reached a bipartisan agreement. Did I heard the word “bipartisan”? Did I hear — did I hear that word? (Laughter and applause.) That’s a nice word. Bipartisan agreement on prison reform legislation known as the FIRST STEP. And that’s what it is; it’s the first step. But it’s a very big first step.

Today, I’m thrilled to announce my support for this bipartisan bill that will make our communities safer and give former inmates a second chance at life after they have served their time. So important.

And I have to tell you, I was called, when I announced and when we all announced together this news conference, by some of the toughest, strongest law enforcement people — including politicians, by the way — who are so in favor of it. And I was actually surprised by some. Like, as an example, Mike Lee — (laughter) — and Rand Paul, and others. No, it’s got tremendous support at every level. It’s really great.

And we’re all better off when former inmates can receive and reenter society as law-abiding, productive citizens. And thanks to our booming economy, they now have a chance at more opportunities than they’ve ever had before. It is true. Our economy is so strong, that when people are getting out of jail, they’re actually able to find jobs.

And I have three instances of companies that hired people coming out of prison, and they are so thrilled by the performance of these people. And now they’re doing it more and more and more. And a lot of people are seeing this. It’s great.

They wouldn’t have had the opportunity, frankly, except for the fact that the economy is so strong. And our job market is the lowest and best it’s been in over 50 years, and seems to be getting even better.

Our pledge to hire American includes those leaving prison and looking for a very fresh start — new job, new life. The legislation I’m supporting today contains many significant reforms, including the following:

First, it will provide new incentives for low-risk inmates to learn the skills they need to find employment, avoid old habits, and follow the law when they are released from prison. These incentives will encourage them to participate in vocational training, educational coursework, and faith-based programs — and I want to thank Paula White, very much, because I know you very much wanted that — thank you, Paula — that reduce their chances of recidivism, and, in other words, reduce their chances of going back to prison substantially.

Second, this legislation will allow federal inmates to be placed closer to their home communities in order to help facilitate family visitation — so important — because we know that maintaining family and community ties is key to successful reentry into our society.

Third, the bill includes reasonable sentencing reforms while keeping dangerous and violent criminals off our streets. In many respects, we’re getting very much tougher on the truly bad criminals — of which, unfortunately, there are many. But we’re treating people differently for different crimes. Some people got caught up in situations that were very bad.

I give an example of Mrs. Alice Johnson, who served 21 years. And she had, I think, another 25 or so to go. So she would have been in there for close to 50 years for something that other people go in and they get slapped on the wrist — which is also wrong, by the way. Which is also wrong. But I’ll never forget the scene of her coming out of prison after 21 years and greeting her family and everybody was crying. Her sons, her grandsons — everybody was crying and hugging and holding each other. It was a beautiful thing to see. It was a very much tough situation.

Among other changes, it rolls back some of the provisions of the Clinton crime law that disproportionately harmed the African American community. And you all saw that and you all know that; everybody in this room knows that. It was very disproportionate and very unfair.

Throughout this process, my administration has worked closely with law enforcement. Their backing has ensured that this legislation remains tough on crime — it’s got to remain very tough on crime — and supports the tremendous work of our police and the tremendous job that law enforcement does throughout our country, our communities. They do an incredible job. We have great respect for law enforcement.

We’re honored that seven of the major police organizations, including the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Police Chiefs, have fully endorsed this bill.

We could not have gotten here without the support and feedback of law enforcement, and its leaders are here today — two of them — especially Chuck Canterbury of FOP and Chief Paul Cell of IACP. Thank you very much. (Applause.) Thank you very much. I appreciate that very much. And these are two tough cookies. (Laughter.) They want what’s right. They want what’s right.

And interesting — if you look at Texas, if you look at Georgia, if you look at Mississippi and Kentucky and some other states that are known as being very tough — these are big supporters of what we’re doing. And some of it has been modeled after what they’ve done. They’ve done a tremendous job.

My administration will always support the incredible men and women of law enforcement, and we will continue to pursue policies that help the heroes who keep us safe. They are truly heroes.

We also thank the more than 2,000 leaders in the faith community who have signed a letter of support. We have tremendous support within the faith community. Unbelievable support.

Americans from across the political spectrum can unite around prison reform legislation that will reduce crime while giving our fellow citizens a chance at redemption. So if something happens and they make a mistake, they get a second chance at life.

Today’s announcement shows that true bipartisanship is possible. And maybe it’ll be thriving, if we’re going to get something done. When Republicans and Democrats talk, debate, and seek common ground, we can achieve breakthroughs that move our country forward and deliver for our citizens. And that’s what we’re doing today. And I have great respect for the people standing alongside of me.

I urge lawmakers in both the House and Senate to work hard and to act quickly and send a final bill to my desk. And I look very much forward to signing it. This is a big breakthrough for a lot of people. They’ve been talking about this for many, many years.

I want to thank Jared Kushner for working so hard on the bill. Thank you, Jared. (Applause.) He worked very hard. He really did. He worked very hard. He feels very deeply about it.

And it’s my honor to be involved and it’ll be an even greater honor to sign.

So good luck, Chuck and Mike and Rand and everybody — Lindsey, everybody back here. Go out and see if you can get that done. And if you can, I’m waiting. I’ll be waiting with a pen. And we will have done something — (laughter) — we will have done something that hasn’t been done in many, many years. And it’s the right thing to do. It’s the right thing to do.

Thank you all very much. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

END – 4:48 P.M. EST

Republican Kevin McCarthy Voted to Lead Minority…


The GOPe big club know how to control political outcomes.  During internal party elections today current republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who failed to keep a republican majority, was approved by a vote of 159-43 to become the new 2019 minority leader.  It is likely McCarthy will be successful in retaining the GOPe minority.

California Republican Kevin McCarthy was challenged by Ohio Republican Jim Jordan, but overwhelmingly McCarthy was seen by House republicans as the more moderate, less controversial, representative.  The House is now positioned to play the preferred role of loyal opposition when the flags change color amid the spire of the UniParty House.

There’s an irony in McCarthy elevating to the Minority Leadership role within the same election cycle that sees Dave Brat defeated in Virginia and Paul Ryan retiring from congress.  Brat defeated Eric Cantor, the former GOPe Majority Leader; stunning the GOPe leadership (Boehner, Ryan, Cantor and McCarthy) and derailing Wall Street’s 2014 open-border GOPe immigration agenda. [Cantor-primaried ’14; Boehner-retired ’16; Ryan-retired ’18; and now the lone McCarthy takes control.]

Biggest Winners:  Tom Donohue, Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Brothers.

.