Earlier this evening President Donald Trump spoke at the NRCC dinner in Washington DC. CTH would be remiss if we did not draw attention to @40:10:
…”We’re doing very, very well; and I think you’re going to have something very, very, special take place in a short period of time”…
Earlier today President Trump hosted leadership from the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and national law enforcement officials to discuss the ongoing issues with Sanctuary Cities and immigration.
.
WHITE HOUSE – SANCTUARY CITIES ARE UNDERMINING LAW ENFORCEMENT: Sanctuary jurisdictions obstruct Federal immigration enforcement efforts and put law enforcement at greater risk.
A “sanctuary city” generally refers to a State or local jurisdiction that refuses to cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement, often by rejecting “detainer” requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and refusing to share information relating to potentially removable aliens.
Detainers themselves establish probable cause of an alien’s removability and it would be absurd to require ICE to obtain a judicial warrant every time it detained an illegal alien.
Indeed, Congress authorized immigration officers, rather than Federal judges, to issue administrative warrants to arrest aliens based on probable cause to believe they are in violation of the immigration laws.
♦If this was necessary under the Fourth Amendment, immigration enforcement would grind to a halt.
This can lead to ICE having to enter dangerous environments to arrest criminal aliens.
Some sanctuary city officials have gone as far as warning illegal aliens about upcoming immigration enforcement actions, allowing criminal aliens to prepare themselves and putting law enforcement, the public, and the aliens at even greater risk.
♦ENDANGERING COMMUNITIES: Reckless sanctuary policies endanger the safety of our communities and obstruct immigration enforcement actions which can prevent further crime.
Too many criminal illegal aliens have been released into American communities and gone on to commit crimes which could have been prevented had ICE been able to take the individuals into custody.
A criminal illegal alien was arrested in Cook County, Illinois in 2011 for driving on a suspended license from a prior conviction for driving under the influence (DUI).
♦IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT: President Trump’s Administration has and will continue to pursue strong immigration enforcement based on the rule of law.
President Trump’s Administration has taken action to ensure our Nation’s immigration laws are faithfully enforced.
The Department of Justice has filed a legal action regarding three California laws that intentionally obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration law, regulate private entities that seek to cooperate with Federal authorities, and impede consultation and communication between Federal and State law enforcement officials.
During fiscal year (FY) 2017, ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) made more than 140,000 administrative arrests and effected more than 225,000 removals.
However, more resources are needed to ensure law enforcement is able to do its job and enforce our immigration laws.
President Trump meets with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (MbS) today at the White House. This is their first meeting since the “Great Realignment” began {Go Deep} and there is much to discuss:
.
[Transcript] 12:07 P.M. EDT – PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you very much, everybody. It’s a great honor to have the Crown Prince with us.
Saudi Arabia has been a very great friend and a big purchaser of equipment and lots of other things. And one of the biggest investments in the United States is their — I guess it’s your big investment — is buying stock in companies and various other things in the United States and creating jobs.
We’ve become very good friends over a fairly short period of time. I was in Saudi Arabia in May. And we are bringing back hundreds of billions of dollars into the United States. And we understand that, and they understand that.
Some of the things that — have been approved and are currently under construction and will be delivered to Saudi Arabia very soon, and that’s for their protection. But if you look, in terms of dollars, $3 billion, $533 million, $525 million — that’s peanuts for you. (Laughter.) You should have increased it. $880 million, $645 million, $6 billion — that’s for frigates; $889 million, $63 million — and that’s for various artillery.
Some of the things that we’re now working on and that have been ordered and will shortly be started in construction and delivered: the THAAD system — $13 billion; the C-130 airplanes, the Hercules, great plane — $3.8 billion; the Bradley Vehicles — that’s the tanks — $1.2 billion; and the P-8 Poseidons — $1.4 billion. And what it does is it really means many, many jobs. We’re talking about over 40,000 jobs in the United States.
So we make the best equipment in the world. There’s nobody even close. And Saudi Arabia is buying a lot of this equipment, and a lot of people are at work making the equipment, not only for us — because we, as you know, we’re getting a $700 billion military proposal. And that’s even a lot for you guys. But we’re getting a $700 billion military plan this year, and 716 will be next year — $716 billion.
So we really have a great friendship, a great relationship. I would really have to say the relationship was, to put it mildly, very, very strained during the Obama administration. And the relationship, now, is probably as good as it’s really ever been, and I think will probably only get better. Tremendous investments made in our country. And that means jobs for our workers, jobs for our people.
Also, defense. We’re talking about defense, and we’re working very hard with Saudi Arabia. And they’re also footing a big part of the bill for defense — the whole Middle East. And we know what’s happened in the Middle East. And it has not been a pretty picture for the United States or for anybody.
And a lot of things are changing, and they’re changing very rapidly. As you know, ISIS is now — we’ve recaptured almost 100 percent of the territory, as you probably have heard before anybody. But we’ve captured close to 100 percent of the territory held by ISIS. We’ve moved very rapidly, very quickly. And that’s, really, coming to an end in that part of the world — it’s coming to an end. And we’ll be able to get out of certain areas that we’ve wanted to get out of for a long period of time. And other countries can handle it. At this point, they’ll be able to handle it.
So it’s a great honor to have you and your representatives here. Crown Prince, thank you very much. Thank you for being here.
CROWN PRINCE BIN SALMAN: Thank you, Mr. President. Actually, the relations between Saudi Arabia and United States of America, it’s old relation. We are the oldest ally for the United States of America in the Middle East.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Right.
CROWN PRINCE BIN SALMAN: More than 80 years of alliance and big interest — politically, economically, and security, in different area — a lot of area. And the foundation for relation, it’s really huge and really deep.
And a different issue — we know that today, the relation, it’s the cause of more than 4 million jobs in the United of States of America, directly and non-directly. Also, it’s a cause for a lot of jobs in Saudi Arabia directly and non-directly.
And, as you know, Mr. President, from day one you’ve reached this office, we’ve planned to tackle 200 billion U.S. dollars for opportunities in the next four years, but it end up with 400 billion U.S. dollar for opportunities.
We’ve talked to you, Mr. President, about the military deals, the implementation, and it is more than 50 percent. And, also, the implementation overall in the 400 billion U.S. dollar of opportunity, more than 55 percent.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Right.
CROWN PRINCE BIN SALMAN: We planned this for next 10 years, but it happens in one year, we implement 55 percent, though. So this is signal that there is a lot of things could be tackled in the close future, and more opportunities. And that why we are here today, to be sure that we’ve tackled all the opportunities and achieve it, and also get rid of all the threats facing our both countries and the whole world.
So I am very glad to be here today.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well that’s right. And you know, one thing that you have been really focused on is the terrorism threat and the funding of terrorism. And whether it’s Saudi Arabia or other countries, as we know, there will be no funding. It is — we have a zero tolerance for the funding of terrorists, and we’re working very hard. And I will say that Saudi Arabia has been working very hard on that, as are certain other countries in the Middle East.
When I was there in May, I think it was one of the most incredible two-day meetings that I’ve ever seen — that anybody has ever seen. It was an amazing two-day period. We had 56 countries. We had — everybody was there at the head of every country. Virtually — I guess, in every case, it was the head of the country. And we talked about terrorism and the funding of terrorism. And it will not be allowed. It will not be allowed. That would be the one thing that would end the relationship with any country. So I think there’s a very big focus on that — the funding of terrorism — meaning, it’s over.
And the other thing that I really am very happy about is that we talked about 400 billion dollars’ worth of investment, of which we’ve already invested and seen invested $200 billion to our companies, to various other places, and people that make things. So a lot of places throughout the United States are benefitting by this massive investment made by Saudi Arabia to buy product from the United States.
And again, we make the best military product in the world, whether it’s missiles or planes or anything else. There’s nobody that even comes close. So I just want to thank you and I want to congratulate you on everything. Thank you very much.
CROWN PRINCE BIN SALMAN: Thank you, Mr. President.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you very much, everybody.
Q Can you comment on the bombings in Austin, Mr. President?
PRESIDENT TRUMP: The bombings in Austin are terrible. The local, state, and federal are working hand-in-hand to get to the bottom of it. This is obviously a very, very sick individual, or maybe individuals. These are sick people, and we will get to the bottom of it. We will be very strong. We have all sorts of federal agencies over there right now. We’re searching.
What’s going on in Austin — a great place, tremendous place — is absolutely disgraceful. So we have a lot of power over there. We’re looking; it’s not easy to find. But these are sick people and we have to find them as soon as possible. We have to find them, really, immediately.
I will say, working with Texas, working with the local governments has been great. But we have to produce, we have to find this very sick person or people.
Thank you all very much.
Q How was your call with President Putin?
PRESIDENT TRUMP: I had a call with President Putin and congratulated him on the victory — his electoral victory.
The call had to do, also, with the fact that we will probably get together in the not-too-distant future so that we can discuss arms, we can discuss the arms race. As you know, he made a statement that being in an arms race is not a great thing. That was right after the election — one of the first statements he made.
And we are spending $700 billion this year on our military, and a lot of it is that we are going to remain stronger than any other nation in the world by far.
We had a very good call, and I suspect that we’ll probably be meeting in the not-too-distant future to discuss the arms race, which is getting out of control, but we will never allow anybody to have anything even close to what we have. And also to discuss Ukraine and Syria and North Korea and various other things.
So I think, probably, we’ll be seeing President Putin in the not-too-distant future.
Q How are you going to counter Iran? This is a Saudi —
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, we’re going to see what happens. The Iran deal is coming up. It’s probably another month or so, and you’re going to see what I do. But Iran has not been treating that part of the world, or the world itself, appropriately. A lot of bad things are happening in Iran. The deal is coming up in one month, and you will see what happens. Okay?
Q Your Royal Highness, should the President pull out of the Iran deal?
CROWN PRINCE BIN SALMAN: Well, we’ll talk about that today.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: (Laughs.) Okay? Thank you very much, everybody.
END – 12:18 P.M. EDT (LINK)
Against the backdrop of ‘Phase 2’ trade policy initiatives based on reciprocity, U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross talks to CNBC about tariffs, carve-outs and protecting national security ahead of his meeting with the European commissioner for trade.
The hypocritical European Union has expansive protectionist tariffs against U.S. products and has threatened retaliation if the U.S. enforces the Trump administration about trade reciprocity.
Additionally, the Trump administration (Ross, Lighthizer, Navarro and Mnuchin) are focusing on China’s trade theft of intellectual property. According to Reuters reporting there is a possibility of $60 billion in trade tariffs being enforced against China for their IP violations and practices.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Trump administration is expected to unveil up to $60 billion in new tariffs on Chinese imports by Friday, targeting technology, telecommunications and intellectual property, two officials briefed on the matter said Monday. (more)
However, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang puts the panda mask on by saying: “We don’t want to see a trade war” with U.S., and hopes to negotiate disputes. The U.S. market is the customer for the manufactured products by China and Beijing understands the U.S. team holds the leverage.
The White House releases the following President Trump video along with a message to submit your own tax relief success story to them. Smart plan:
Former FBI Deputy Director Chris Swecker appeared for an interview with Harris Faulker to discuss the issues surrounding the IG and OPR recommendation that Asst. Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe needs to be fired.
Mr. Swecker notes his opinion the Inspector General report will likely be explosive: “I think you’re going to see some pure TNT come out of this IG report.” Video Below:
Former @FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker; “I think you’re going to see some pure TNT come out in this IG report.” #OutnumberedOTpic.twitter.com/7XGVfvQ5uG
— Fox News (@FoxNews) March 16, 2018
Additionally, and somewhat related, it was pointed out earlier today there is a very valid reason for AG Jeff Sessions not to appoint a Special Counsel. A review of the ideology –as noted within the Office of Special Counsel communications unit– shows a clear bias against the current administration. A bias that is NOT evident within the public communication prior to the Trump administration. The OSC has strongly expressed political views.
It is beyond likely the federal agency known as The Office of Special Counsel is every bit as politicized as the DOJ and FBI officials they would be tasked with investigating. Take a look for yourself. Therefore what AG Jeff Sessions previously explained as the process he has undertaken -bringing in an ‘outside of DC‘ prosecutor- begins to make more sense, albeit frustratingly methodical.
AG Jeff Sessions revealed March 8th, in an interview with Shannon Bream, that he previously appointed a DOJ official to investigate the issues delivered by Chairman Bob Goodlatte (House Judiciary), prior to receiving the request for a Special Counsel from Chairman Goodlatte and Trey Gowdy. WATCH:
.
Transcript @00:15 (emphasis mine) “Well, I have great respect for Mr. Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatte, and we are going to consider seriously their recommendations. I have appointed a person outside of Washington, many years in the Department of Justice to look at all the allegations that the House Judiciary Committee members sent to us; and we’re conducting that investigation.
Also I am well aware we have a responsibility to insure the integrity of the FISA process, we’re not afraid to look at that. The inspector general, some think that our inspector general is not very strong; but he has almost 500
employers, employees, most of which are lawyers and prosecutors; and they are looking at the FISA process. We must make sure that it’s done properly, and we’re going to do that. And I’ll consider their request.”
Well, there you have it. There is already an appointed person, likely a prosecutor, from “outside of Washington”, in place prior to the recent request for a Special Counsel by Goodlatte and Gowdy. That was exactly what an objective analysis of the events previously outlined – and we previously noted.
Attorney Jeff Sessions is noting the existence of an outside prosecutor who has been in place for quite a while, exactly as we thought.
William Alfred “Bill” Whittle (born April 7, 1959) is an American conservative blogger, political commentator, director, screenwriter, editor, pilot, and author.
It is going to take a heck of a lot of deep-weed education to cut through the economic gaslighting of the multinational corporations, Wall Street and their purchased institutional media. However, I give the White House team (Secretary Ross, Secretary Mnuchin, Ambassador Lighthizer and Adviser Peter Navarro) a measure of strong credit for beginning:
WHITE HOUSE: Measurement of trade flows is usually an uncontroversial topic relegated to macroeconomic classrooms and government technocrats. Recent debates about trade policy have brought the topic out of the shadows, and we hope to clarify how economists measure trade.
Every day there are international transactions for tens of thousands of different products. Physical goods, interchangeably called merchandise, are what usually comes to mind first. However, an increasing share of international trade is in services that are not physically transported between countries—think about financial insurance, licensing of trademarks, or services like consulting.
To make the world a bit more complicated, goods and services are increasingly bundled together, such as when a manufacturer sells a piece of machinery along with an international maintenance contract. The machinery is a good, but the maintenance agreement is a service.
From a macroeconomic perspective, economists typically use the balance of payments (BOP) basis. The BOP captures flows of what we would normally think of as imports and exports of goods, but also includes a series of adjustments. This process better aligns trade data with national income accounts such as GDP. The BOP has the added advantage of being applicable to service transactions as well.
The International Monetary Fund defines BOP as “a statistical statement that systematically summarizes, for a specific time period, the economic transactions of an economy with the rest of the world.” BOP transactions are valued using BPM6 methodology that emphasizes using balance sheet analysis to understand international economic developments and to improve comparability with other countries.
In order to construct the BOP, start with the customs value of imports and exports. A frequently used U.S. government data source reports monthly “customs basis” for transactions. There are different methods of customs valuation.
The transaction value method is the price actually paid by the buyer for the imported goods and includes all payments made as a condition of sale. But the transaction may or may not occur at the border—some international shipments change ownership when loaded, others when unloaded, some even at a specified point in transit.
Recognizing this array of contracts, alternative methods that evaluate imports based on identical or similar goods, deductive value, or computed value are used in various situations. Government statistics are specific about where the customs value is reported, with common specifications including “free on board” (f.o.b.), “free alongside ship” (f.a.s.), or “customs, insurance, and freight” (c.i.f) to designate how much of shipping costs are included in the transaction value.
Starting from the customs value, a series of adjustments are made to arrive at BOP. These adjustments are typically fairly small, but they can be significant in aggregate. The current U.S. adjustments are:
In 2017, the aggregate difference between customs goods imports and BOP goods imports was $19.0 billion on a customs basis of $2.34 trillion. For goods exports, the correction was similar—a difference of $4.0 billion on a customs basis of $1.55 trillion.
Subtracting imports from exports gives the trade balance. Trade balances can be calculated for goods, for services, for goods and services, for one country, for a group of countries, or for the whole world.
The most inclusive measure of trade covers both goods and services. Some economists worry about the measurement of trade in services, which may be subject to inconsistencies, and so prefer to focus on trade in goods alone. After all, goods are tangible things that are easier to count.
Others prefer to focus on goods alone because on average all goods-producing industries have higher wages than all service-producing industries; in Q3 of 2017 average total compensation per hour worked in goods-producing industries was about 20 percent higher at $39.97 while the same measure for service-producing industries was $32.21.
Although BOP accounting is similar across nations, each country can interpret BOP methods slightly differently, which leads to differences in reported values of surpluses and deficits. These details are typically spelled out in exhaustive detail in government documents that could be prescribed as a cure for insomnia. For an example, see the Bureau of Economic Analysis document here.
To illustrate some of the concepts presented in this post, consider U.S. bilateral trade balances with Canada. In 2017, the U.S. goods and services balance was a surplus of $2.77 billion. The goods alone balance on a BOP basis was a U.S. deficit of $23.16 billion, but on a customs basis it was a deficit of $17.58 billion. Note that the difference between the BOP goods and services balance and the BOP goods alone balance implies a trade surplus in services of $25.93 billion.
In contrast, Canadian statistics report a goods and services trade surplus with the United States of $26.76 billion, using the Canadian BOP methodology. The goods alone balance is $40.50 billion on a BOP basis.
One important difference in BOP methodology between the Canadian and U.S. approaches is the treatment of re-exported goods. USTR raised a related issue, on the role of re-exports in Census-based bilateral trade balances, in its 2018 Annual Report. (link)
U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue is warning President Trump not to take any trade action against China or he will unleash his purchased control agents within congress and financial media to destroy his presidency.
Donohue takes-in hundreds of millions in payments from multinational corporations who hold a vested interest in keeping the U.S. manufacturing economy subservient to China. The U.S. CoC then turns those corporate funds into lobbyist payments to DC politicians for legislative action that benefits their Chinese trade deals. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the #1 lobbyist in DC; there are trillions at stake.
Wall Street’s famous CONservative mouthpieces then take their cues from Donohue and decry any Trump trade policy that might impact their multinational benefactors. They hide behind catch phrases like “free trade”, or “free markets”. However, what they are really hiding is the truth, there is no free market – it is a controlled market. It’s a circle of trade and economic propaganda driven by the most well known guests that appear on Fox News. Ben Shapiro is one such example; there are hundreds more.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The head of the most influential U.S. business lobbying group warned the Trump administration that unilateral tariffs on Chinese goods could lead to a destructive trade war that will hurt American consumers and U.S. economic growth.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said in a statement on Thursday that such tariffs, associated with a probe of China’s intellectual property practices, would be “damaging taxes on American consumers.”
His comments came after White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that Trump would in coming weeks get options to address China’s “theft and forced transfer” of American intellectual property as part of the investigation under Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974.
Reuters reported on Tuesday that Trump was considering tariffs on up to $60 billion worth of Chinese information technology, telecommunications and consumer products, along with U.S. investment restrictions for Chinese companies.
Donohue said the Trump administration was right to focus on the negative economic impact of China’s industrial policies and unfair trade practices, but said tariffs were the wrong approach to dealing with these.
“Tariffs of $30 billion a year would wipe out over a third of the savings American families received from the doubling of the standard deduction in tax reform,” Donohue said. “If the tariffs reach $60 billion, which has been rumored, the impact would be even more devastating.”
He urged the administration not to proceed with such a plan.
“Tariffs could lead to a destructive trade war with serious consequences for U.S. economic growth and job creation,” hurting consumers, businesses, farmers and ranchers.
In Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Donohue’s comments were correct, adding that recently more and more American intellectuals had made their rational voices heard. (read more)
We have consistently stated the #1 reason for opposition to President Trump is financial (ie. economic); “There are Trillions at stake“.
Everyone admits the past 40+ years of U.S. trade deals have resulted in the massive export of U.S. wealth via jobs and manufacturing gains within other nations. The financial beneficiaries of those prior trade positions were: Wall Street, multinational corporations and multinational banks.
The losers of all prior trade priorities was the U.S. middle-class. This point is inarguable, just look around. Stop the nonsense and quit listening to those who control the markets.
So ask yourself, friends and family this very important question:
If prior U.S. trade policies resulted in the export and redistribution of U.S. wealth… What happens when you reverse the process?
In the answer to that question you discover the opposition to U.S. President Trump.
For those who follow closely the strongest argument against the U.S. trade and economic policies of the past 30 years has been the outcome. We don’t need to guess what the pro’s and con’s of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce position is, we are living them. We don’t need to guess what the Wall Street economy delivers, we are living through them.
For the past 30 years the U.S. has lost jobs, wages have been depressed, and the middle-class has suffered through the implementation of economic trade policy that destroyed the U.S. manufacturing base. None of this is in question – the results stare us in the face – yet the Wall Street and multinational corporate club(s) [U.S. CoC chief among them] now demand a continuance of the same.
The economic and trade policies of the Trump administration are adverse to those interests. As we have shared for several years, candidate Trump, now President Trump is an existential threat to the multinational program.
All opposition to President Trump is about the underlying financial and economic policy of America-First. There are trillions at stake.
Those who have read here will note the media are generally oblivious to America-First economic policies; this includes the financial media.
As an example is the misleading information about how Steel/Aluminum tariffs would work. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross stated clearly exactly how the Steel and Aluminum policy would be carried out; yet for the financial media they claim the action would be something entirely different. The level of intellectual dishonesty is off-the-charts.
The truth is: •Point #1 – the media don’t want to know any alternative; they are committed to retaining all prior policy. •Point #2 – there’s almost no-one within the professional economic punditry class who have ever given thought to what happens during the space between two fundamentally different economic policies as executed.
What happens in the space between taking the U.S. economy off the path of ‘service-driven-globalism’, and reasserting the economy back to a balanced ‘production-based national economy’? None of the key participants within the larger discussion have ever contemplated this dynamic.
CTH is one of the few, perhaps the only source, who has gamed-out MAGAnomics.
Allow me to re-emphasize:
All opposition to President Trump stems from the underlying financial and economic policy. All opposition is about money!
When you ask the “why” question five times you end up discovering the financial motive for all opposition. It doesn’t matter who the group is; the opposition is ultimately about money. There are trillions at stake.
When Main Street economic principles are applied Wall Street will initially lose. There’s no way for this not to happen. Most of Wall Street is built on the Multinational platform of economic globalism. Weaken the grip of the multinational corporations and financial interests on the U.S. economy and Wall Street will drop… this is not difficult to predict. This is also necessary.
U.S. stocks, centered around U.S. domestic companies, will go up. U.S. stocks, centered around multinational companies, will go down.
As Secretary Wilbur Ross, U.S.T.R. Robert Lighthizer and U.S. President Trump have previously affirmed, they are going to restore the U.S. manufacturing and production economy -OR- lose office trying.
The U.S. Steel and Aluminum tariffs are just one component of the larger economic issue. Bringing back U.S. production on those sectors is vital to the infrastructure of a manufacturing and production economy.
Additional steps will come from exits of NAFTA and renegotiated trade deals with ASEAN nations, China and Europe. We either have a stable broad-base economy, or we follow the former path and eventually lose the country.
On the specifics of inflation, we have discussed this issue at great length. As stated three years ago, inflation will happen within this cycle –especially in the space between the policy as constructed– however, it will not affect the larger economic restoration because the growth of U.S. wages will exceed the rising prices of durable goods…. AND simultaneously energy prices and high-consumable goods’ prices (food, fuel) will drop. [Exit NAFTA and U.S. food prices will drop 25% within a year]
In this transitional phase (the space between) wage growth will remain ahead of aggregate inflation. No former economic models have any way to measure or gauge this dynamic. We have never been between two entirely different sets of economic policy before. No amount of immediate fed monetary policy will effect what happens on Main Street in this “space between” the two economies.
For those following the increasingly curious case against General Mike Flynn, events take another unusual turn today. Congressional investigators have shared a set of unredacted text messages between FBI Agent Peter Strzok and his cohort DOJ Attorney Lisa Page which reveal a personal friendship between Agent Strzok and Flynn’s initial presiding judge Rudolph Contreras.
On November 30th, 2017, Mike Flynn signed a guilty plea; ostensibly admitting lying to investigators. The plea was accepted by Judge Rudolph Contreras; who is also a FISA court judge. Six days later, December 7th, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation.
The case was reassigned to DC District Judge Emmet Sullivan. The Contreras recusal always seemed sketchy. The key question was: if the conflict existed on December 7th, wouldn’t that same conflict have existed on November 30th, 2017?
Today questions about the conflict seem to have been answered. Text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page reveal the FBI agent and Judge Contreras were close personal friends. –SEE HERE–
Apparently DOJ lawyer Lisa Page was unaware that “Rudy” was a FISA court judge until July 25th, 2016, when she posited a question to her small group co-conspirator FBI agent Peter Strzok.
PAGE: Rudy is on the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]! Did you know that?” “Just appointed two months ago”
STRZOK: “I did. We talked about it before and after. I need to get together with him.
Contreras was appointed to the FISA Court court in May 2016. The FISA court approved a Title-1 Surveillance Warrant against Trump campaign aide Carter Page on October 26th, 2016, essentially placing the entire Trump campaign under FBI surveillance. That surveillance was then used against incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
The FBI agent questioning Michael Flynn in January 2017 was Peter Strzok. The judge presiding over the sketchy Flynn plea, an outcome of that interview, was Strzok’s friend Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Contreras. Therein lies the conflict.
However, that said, it must be emphasized that -despite the existing conflict- Contreras did not recuse himself from the initial Flynn pleading. Contreras allowed himself to sit on the case on November 30th, when the plea was made. It wasn’t until six days later, December 7th, 2017, that Contreras “was recused” from the Flynn case.
So what happened between November 30th and December 7th, 2017?
It became public knowledge that personal communication between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page was captured by IG investigators. That’s what happened.
Think about it.
Think about when everything began to break out from the headlines about the IG investigation, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie Ohr, and the corrupt small group activity within the FBI and DOJ team effort. It would be intellectually dishonest not to note all of the FBI conspiracy revelations happened immediately after Mike Flynn signed the guilty plea.
When we say “immediately after”, we mean the very next day…. on a weekend. (Saturday and Sunday)
Within a matter of days between December 1st and December 7th, 2017, the reports of gross malfeasance within the DOJ and FBI went from a snowball to an avalanche. Peter Strzok (demoted), Lisa Page (removed), Bruce Ohr (demoted 2x), Nellie Ohr working for Fusion GPS; troubling communication with FBI chief-legal-counsel James Baker(demoted); evidence of FBI Deputy Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe’s involvement in a small group conspiracy (removed); FBI Communications head Michael “Mike” Kortan was outed (he quit); McCabe’s Chief of Staff James Rybicki was outed (he quit); etc. The list goes on.
Judge Rudolph Contreras, now exposed as a fellow ideological traveler and personal friend of the principal agent amid the scheme only raises more questions. Rudolph Contreras also has a strong ideological relationship with former Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama’s notoriously political DOJ wingman:
2012 […] From 2006 until his appointment, Contreras was chief of the civil division in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington. He’s the third person to hold that job before being appointed to the D.C. court, joining Chief Judge Royce Lamberth and Judge John Bates.
Contreras began his career at Jones Day law firm after earning his J.D. in 1991. Gregory Shumaker, partner-in-charge of Jones Day’s Washington office, spoke yesterday about first meeting Contreras when Shumaker was running the firm’s summer associate program. He said Contreras had a gift for connecting with people, a skill that would serve him well on the bench.
In 1994, Contreras was hired by Eric Holder Jr., then the U.S. attorney for D.C., to join that office. Mark Nagle, vice president and general counsel for Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. and Contreras’ predecessor as civil division chief, spoke about Contreras’ many victories, including his time leading the city’s Medicaid fraud unit. (read more)
There’s more than a general likelihood Judge Contreras was granting, FBI investigative and DOJ prosecutorial, leeway for the ideological endeavors of the DOJ/FBI “small group” given his personal and professional relationships.
But the entire fact-pattern still doesn’t answer a nagging 30,000 foot question: Did someone intercede and recuse Judge Rudolph Contreras from the Flynn case? -OR- Did Judge Contreras recuse himself *after* he realized his relationship with Strzok was exposed? The former seems likely, the latter less so.
Judge Collyer was the FISA judge who wrote the eye-opening 99-page opinion of the FISA abuses reported by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, DOJ National Security Division head John P Carlin, and FBI Director James Comey.
Presiding FISA Court Judge Rosemary Collyer might have been the same Presiding FISA Judge who -holding concerns over ongoing FISC revelations in late 2017- recused Rudolph Contreras from further contact with the Flynn case. The other option for a forced recusal would the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts.
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!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
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
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 