The Increasingly Mysterious U.S. -vs- Russia Battle at Deir Ezzor in Syria…


There has been some non-broadcast media discussion about a battle that took place in Syria on February 7th, 2018.  According to the generally accepted overview, U.S. and coalition forces appear to have killed scores of Russian mercenaries, some reports put the number as high as 200.

Officially Russia has denied their troops were engaged in the failed attack against U.S. and coalition forces; however, actions by Russia since the battle seem to convey a more confirming message.

Bloomberg reported around 100 Russian contracted mercenary soldiers, hired by Syria’s Bashir Assad, were killed by a coalition force of U.S. and Kurdish forces in what would easily be the deadliest clash between Russians and Americans since the cold war.

More than 200 contract soldiers, mostly Russians fighting on behalf of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, died in a failed attack on a base held by U.S. and mainly Kurdish forces in the oil-rich Deir Ezzor region, two of the Russians said. The U.S. official put the death toll in the fighting at about 100, with 200 to 300 injured, but was unable to say how many were Russians. (link)

The contracted mercenaries are likely from a Russian company Wagner, similar to the U.S. company Blackwater.  Because they are not officially Russian soldiers there’s a great deal of built in plausible deniability.   As Bloomberg also noted: ““This is a big scandal and a reason for an acute international crisis,” said Vladimir Frolov, a former Russian diplomat and lawmaker who’s now an independent political analyst. “But Russia will pretend nothing happened.””

The official response from U.S. Central Command released immediately afterward: Feb. 8, 2018 – Release # 20180208-01 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

SOUTHWEST ASIA – Syrian pro-regime forces initiated an unprovoked attack against well-established Syrian Democratic Forces headquarters Feb. 7.

Coalition service members in an advise, assist, and accompany capacity were co-located with SDF partners during the attack eight kilometers east of the agreed-upon Euphrates River de-confliction line.

In defense of Coalition and partner forces, the Coalition conducted strikes against attacking forces to repel the act of aggression against partners engaged in the Global Coalition’s defeat-Daesh mission.

The Coalition remains committed to focusing on the defeat-Daesh mission in the Middle Euphrates River Valley and asserts its non-negotiable right to act in self-defense. (link)

Video encapsulating the event (prompted, just hit play):

.

The bottom line is Bashir Assad, Russia and Iran are working together in Syria to keep Assad in power.  A military force within of that nexus, mostly paid Russians, attacked a U.S. protected compound with tanks, artillery, mortars and rockets.

The U.S. responded with overwhelming air power (drones, B-52 bombers, F-15 fighter jets, Apache helicopters and AC-130 gun ships), raining down precision-guided munitions upon the enemy assault battalion (300 – 500), while disabling their communications capability, for approximately three hours.   When the dust settled around 200 Russians were dead and hundreds wounded.

That was a jaw-droppingly sneaky and aggressive action by the technically ‘unofficial’ Russians; and an even more stunning response by the official U.S. military [Trump ROE].

The aggressive pro-Assad group (“unofficially Russian military”) was officially stomped into the sand.  Therein we discover the reason for the entire episode to be kept on the down-low by the Russian government.

The Russian Government cannot be public or protest the response because technically the Russian government must pretend they had nothing to do with it.  Simultaneously, the U.S. government cannot be public or protest the Russian attack because technically they too must pretend the Russian government had nothing ‘officially’ to do with it.

However, to the intellectually honest international audience:  the Russians just attacked the Americans, and the Americans opened a can of whoop-ass on the Russians in response.

Oh dear.

And notice how the limited public disclosure response was from U.S. CentCom.?  The U.S. Central Command is located at McDill Air-Force Base in Tampa, Florida.

Did you see the latest video release from Russia?

.

The Putin nuclear video has nothing to do with Mar-a-Lago you knucklehead, the video is connected to the “Dead Russian Mercenaries story”, and a less-than-subtle jab back at U.S. CentCom.

Reference Material:

Very rare picture taken inside a can of whoop-ass.

Donald Trump “The Change Agent”…


Here’s an example why POTUS Trump can be trusted as a change agent on the most important big picture item for the U.S., the economics.  He’s had these exact same positions on trade and economics for years….  Buried inside this 2011 speech you will find the nucleus of CTH support for Donald Trump from the moment he made the announcement.

Back in April 2011 businessman Donald Trump delivered direct and salty remarks to an audience in Las Vegas. The speech was during a period when Donald Trump was contemplating a run for the presidency in 2012. Barron was four-years-old.  The speech was about U.S. economics, poor decision making by U.S. policy makers, and the perspective of stopping the bleed within the U.S. economy:

That speech was April 2011, this tweet is today, March 3rd, 2018.

Trade and tax policy excerpt with China:

From the Audience – Donald Trump (The Donald) spoke to a crowd in Las Vegas (Treasure Island 2011) in regards to his ideas an what policies he would do if he ran for president of the united states. He had an entertaining and straight forward speech which was riddled with profanity. Many of the people in the audience were approving of his ideas. Have to admit that we are also somewhat approving of some of his ideas. At this moment in time we believe that the United States needs a business man in office to get us out of this hole we keep digging deeper and deeper. Donald discussed issues like, iraq, lybia, iran, oil, and all the ideas he had in regards to solving the issues.

Same 2011 Las Vegas speech in three segments:

.

.

.

Chairman Devin Nunes Interview With Neil Cavuto…


House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes interview with Fox News Host Neil Cavuto to discuss the ongoing FISA abuse investigation.

Chairman Nunes highlights two key issues:  #1) The risk to the Democrats in having their use of a politically weaponized FBI and DOJ exposed; and #2) It is against the interests of the U.S. media to highlight the alarming investigative discoveries, because the media participated in pushing the narrative which aided the weaponization.

Let’s Try Bank Shaming


An article in the NYT suggests that banks should not allow their credit cards to be used to purchase weapons. Unfortunately, it probably wouldn’t work because it’s doesn’t address the root problem: the existence of evil people.

Take Off That Badge


Is Sheriff Scott Israel the worst person in the world? The Right Angle team has some harsh words for the country’s worst sheriff.

Secretary Wilbur Ross Talks Trade and Tariffs With Lou Dobbs…


Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross appeared on Fox Business with Lou Dobbs earlier tonight for a discussion of Steel and Aluminum tariffs and ongoing U.S. trade initiatives.

 

Unhappy Canada Vows Retaliation For Steel Tariffs – NAFTA, Steel, Tariffs and An Introduction To Liu Zhongtian…


I think we’ve figured out why President Trump is doing the Steel and Aluminum tariffs ahead of the NAFTA withdrawal.  Perhaps, the wolverine administration is using Steel and Aluminum to draw attention to the NAFTA fatal flaw.

Earlier today Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland stated:

“Should restrictions be imposed on Canadian steel and aluminum products, Canada will take responsive measures to defend its trade interests and workers,” Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland said in a statement, calling any trade restrictions“absolutely unacceptable.”  (link)

The key word in that statement from Freeland is “products”. Why? because Canada doesn’t make raw Steel.  (Top 40 List)  The Canadians, like the Mexicans, import their raw steel from China.  Canada then fabricates products from the Chinese steel.  This nuanced point is almost always lost on people who discuss trade.  This point of origination is also the fatal flaw within NAFTA.

In essence Canada is a brokerage for Chinese manufactured material, and NAFTA is the access trade-door exploited by China for entry into the U.S. market.  More on that in a moment.  First watch Justin from Canada explain his country’s position. (prompted, just hit play):

.

See, that verbal parseltongue twisting is what happens when you attempt to walk the precarious fine-line of talking points on trade.  Canada doesn’t manufacture steel, they purchase steel and manufacture ‘products’.  A considerable difference.

Now, here’s where I think President Trump is using the steel example to highlight the NAFTA flaw and awaken people to the larger hidden issues within the heavily manipulated North American Free Trade Agreement.

There’s always that vocal group of GOPe Wall Street defenders, the professional political and purchased republicans, who attempt to hide the NAFTA flaw.  So for those who are dismissive, and for the purpose of intellectual honesty, allow me to introduce the example of Chinese Billionaire Mr. Liu Zhongtian.

Mr. Liu Zhongtian is one of the Chinese billionaires who are extremely skilled at exploiting the NAFTA loophole, generating profit and hiding the reality of NAFTA from the American people.  Mr. Liu is not alone, he is simply one of many – Mr. Liu is also the Deputy Secretary of China’s communist party.

Mr. Liu has imported over one million metric tonnes of aluminum ingots into Mexico, that’s over 6% of the world supply, and he stores them there in order to avoid tariffs from the United States.

Chinese billionaire Liu Zohgtian uses Mexico’s NAFTA backdoor access to avoid any U.S. tariff.

2016 […]  The pile, worth $2 billion and measuring one million metric tons, represents six per cent of the world’s aluminum.

It was discovered two years ago after a California aluminum executive sent a pilot over San José Iturbide, a city in central Mexico, the Wall Street Journal reported in an investigative piece Friday.

Trade representative Jeff Henderson believes Chinese billionaire Liu Zhongtian, an aluminum magnate, routed merchandise through Mexico to avoid paying US tariffs.

Liu controls China Zhongwang Holdings Ltd, the world’s second largest aluminum producer in its category. His current fortune is estimated at $3.2 billion according to Forbes.

Aluminum manufacturers receive subsidies in China. This means Chinese companies could be able to sell aluminum at a lower price than American firms.

The United States protected domestic trade by enforcing tariffs, which have to be paid when aluminum is imported.

Bringing in merchandise through Mexico would enable a Chinese manufacturer such as Zhongwang to avoid paying those tariffs.  (read more)

A photograph of Mr. Liu Zhongtian’s aluminum stockpile in Mexico.

In its current form NAFTA is an exploited doorway into the coveted U.S. market.  Asian economic interests, large multinational corporations, invested in Mexico and Canada as a way to work around any direct trade deals with the U.S.

By shipping parts to Mexico and/or Canada; and by deploying satellite manufacturing and assembly facilities in Canada and/or Mexico; China, Asia and to a lesser extent EU corporations exploited a loophole.  Through a process of building, assembling or manufacturing their products in Mexico/Canada those foreign corporations can skirt U.S. trade tariffs and direct U.S. trade agreements.  The finished foreign products entered the U.S. under NAFTA rules.

Why deal with the U.S. when you can just deal with Mexico, and use NAFTA rules to ship your product directly into the U.S. market?

This exploitative approach, a backdoor to the U.S. market, was the primary reason for massive foreign investment in Canada and Mexico; it was also the primary reason why candidate Donald Trump, now President Donald Trump, wanted to shut down that loophole and renegotiate NAFTA.

This loophole was the primary reason for U.S. manufacturers to relocate operations to Mexico.  Corporations within the U.S. Auto-Sector could enhance profits by building in Mexico or Canada using parts imported from Asia/China.  The labor factor was not as big a part of the overall cost consideration as cheaper parts and imported raw materials.

If you understand the reason why U.S. companies benefited from those moves, you can begin to understand if the U.S. was going to remain inside NAFTA President Trump would have remained engaged in TPP.

As soon as President Trump withdrew from TPP the problem with the Canada and Mexico loophole grew.  All corporations from TPP nations would now have an option to exploit the same NAFTA loophole.

Why ship directly to the U.S., or manufacturer inside the U.S., when you could just assemble in Mexico and Canada and use NAFTA to bring your products to the ultimate goal, the massive U.S. market?

From the POTUS Trump position, NAFTA always came down to two options:

Option #1 – renegotiate the NAFTA trade agreement to eliminate the loopholes.  That would require Canada and Mexico to agree to very specific rules put into the agreement by the U.S. that would remove the ability of third-party nations to exploit the current trade loophole. Essentially the U.S. rules would be structured around removing any profit motive with regard to building in Canada or Mexico and shipping into the U.S.

Canada and Mexico would have to agree to those rules; the goal of the rules would be to stop third-party nations from exploiting NAFTA.  The problem in this option is the exploitation of NAFTA currently benefits Canada and Mexico.  It is against their interests to remove it.  Knowing it was against their interests President Trump never thought it was likely Canada or Mexico would ever agree.  But he was willing to explore and find out.

Option #2 – Exit NAFTA.  And subsequently deal with Canada and Mexico individually with structured trade agreements about their imports.  Canada and Mexico could do as they please, but each U.S. bi-lateral trade agreement would be written with language removing the aforementioned cost-benefit-analysis to third-party countries (same as in option #1.)

All nuanced trade-sector issues put aside, the larger issue is always how third-party nations will seek to gain access to the U.S. market through Canada and Mexico.  [It is the NAFTA exploitation loophole which has severely damaged the U.S. manufacturing base.]

This is not direct ‘protectionism’, it is simply smart and fair trade.

Unfortunately, the U.S. CoC, funded by massive multinational corporations, is spending hundreds of millions on lobbying congress to keep the NAFTA loophole open.

The U.S. has to look upstream, deep into the trade agreements made by Mexico and Canada with third-parties, because it is possible for other nations to skirt direct trade with the U.S. and move their products through Canada and Mexico into the U.S.

Do you see Canada or Mexico on the Steel Production List?

The Myth of Global Markets Explains Why The DC UniParty View POTUS Trump As a Risk To Their World Order…


If the U.S. were to exit NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), the price you pay for most foodstuff at the grocery store would drop 10% in the first quarter and likely drop 20% or more by the end of the first year. Here’s why:

Approximately a decade ago the U.S. Dept of Agriculture stopped using U.S. consumer food prices within the reported measures of inflation. The food sector joined the ranks of fuel and energy prices in no longer being measured to track inflation and backdrop Fed monetary policy. Not coincidentally this was simultaneous to U.S. consumers seeing massive inflation in the same highly consumable sector.

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.

When you understand how trade works in the modern era you will understand why the agents within the system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.

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.

The modern financial constructs of these entities have been established over the course of the past three decades. When you understand how they manipulate the economic system of individual nations you begin to understand understand why they are so fundamentally opposed to President Trump.

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 being renegotiated, likely to exit; 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.

It’s 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).

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.

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.

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 and fair trade with strong regulatory control over national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped.

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.

Perhaps now we understand better how massive multi-billion multinational corporations and 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

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross Discusses Steel Tariffs: “People Are Exaggerating Considerably”…


The professional financial class are going bananas at the steel and aluminum tariffs being implemented by the Trump administration.  As expected, most of the apoplectic drum-beating is coming from the Wall Street crowd.  This same Wall Street crowd conveniently overlooks that last year the EU imposed even HIGHER tariffs on steel and aluminum than the Trump administration is proposing now.

Laughably this group of talking heads is pitching the trade and economic position of Canada and the EU in their talking points. However, the hypocrisy is off the charts.

.

If you think the professional financial class are over-the-top now, just wait until the administration pulls out of NAFTA. These are the battles that matter. The administration is directly over the target. The multinational corporate crowd, including their corporately owned media, are pushing a fundamentally false set of talking points; their economic dishonesty reflects their desperation.

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.

Spin Machine Overdrive – New York Times Attempts To Provide Cover for McCabe Motive Outlined in Pending IG Report…


The New York Times (Matt Appuzzo & Adam Goldman) published an article yesterday citing a pending DOJ Inspector General Horowitz report that points the finger at former Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe for leaking information to the media.

Citing four people familiar with the IG inquiry, the motive for the New York Times is transparent. The “small group” of DOJ/FBI officials are trying to head-off the disturbing aspect to the IG outline and spin a false narrative.   However, our earlier research into the text messaging of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, in combination with the leak in question to former Wall Street Journal reporter Devlin Barrett, allows us to see through the narrative.

The unnamed officials within the back-story, clouded by the verbiage in both the New York Times recent article and the Washington Post follow-up, are all ‘small group’ members: FBI Asst Director Andrew McCabe, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, FBI Attorney Lisa Page, FBI Chief of Staff Jim Rybicki and FBI Public Relations Director Mike Kortan.

Prior reporting showed Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe -along with the entire small group- became aware of the Clinton emails on the Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner laptop on September 28th, 2016.  Attempting to protect Hillary Clinton, text messages showed McCabe and crew withheld that information for several weeks until October 28, 2016, when congress was notified and a public statement was made by Mike Kortan and FBI Director James Comey.

♦On January 25th, 2018, Senator Chuck Grassley released a series of text messages between Page and Strzok (full pdf here). Within the release there is a portion of messaging where Lisa Page is identified on the phone with “Devlin” (see page #5 – screen grab below):

[Peter Strzok is ‘INBOX’ and Lisa Page is “OUTBOX’]

The “Devlin” in question is former Wall Street Journal National Security reporter Devlin Barrett, currently with The Washington Post.  In the above cited text message exchange Lisa Page is on the phone with Devlin Barrett when the news of the Abedin/Weiner laptop Clinton emails was released.  “Mike’s phone is on fire” is referencing former FBI Public Affairs Director, Michael “Mike” Kortan.

♦Simultaneous to this October 2016 timeline there was internal “small group” discussion about another controversial issue; the need for Andrew McCabe to recuse himself from the financial investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.

FBI Chief of Staff James “Jim” Rybicki held the opinion that McCabe should recuse; however, taking that action may have compromised McCabe’s ability to protect Hillary Clinton.  Lisa Page was the legal counsel to McCabe during these events and discussions, and didn’t see the need for a recusal or change of prior plans.

On October 23rd, 2016, Devlin Barrett again reported on a scoop:

“Scoop: McAuliffe PAC gave $467,500 to campaign of wife of senior FBI official who oversaw Clinton email probe” (link)

(Tweet Link) and (Story Link)

This October 23rd, 2016, “scoop” aligns with the internal text messaging discussion between Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Attorney Lisa Page who were discussing James Comey’s chief-of-staff James Rybicki recommending that FBI Asst. Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe should be recused from the Hillary Clinton investigation.

From the messaging the recusal was discussed mid-through-late October 2016:

00:52am …”if it’s a matter similar to those we’ve been talking about lately”…

The sourcing for the exclusive report by Devlin Barrett contained great details about the internal discussion on the controversy of Andrew McCabe and his financial connections to Clinton/McAuliffe.  The leaks for the story were provided by Lisa Page and Peter Strzok:

“Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can’t read it,” Page texted Strzok on Oct. 24, 2016.

“Wsj? Boy that was fast,” Strzok texted back, using the initials of the famed financial newspaper. “Should I ‘find’ it and tell the team?(link)

According to the New York Times article yesterday: […] “The inspector general has concluded that Mr. McCabe authorized F.B.I. officials to provide information for that article, according to the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the report before it is published. The public affairs office had arranged a phone call to discuss the case, the people said. Mr. McCabe, as deputy director, had the authority to engage the news media.”

Again, the October 2016 “public affairs office” was Michael “Mike” Kortan. The New York Times is asserting that IG Horowitz will show the ‘small group’, McCabe, Kortan, Page and Strzok, coordinated for the leak of information to the Wall Street Journal.

Worth noting – Mike Kortan is the same FBI official who released the recent unauthorized FBI statement about the Nunes memo: “grave concerns about material omissions of fact” etc.  A few days later Kortan was advised to resign by current FBI Director Christopher Wray.

A Jeanne in the Kitchen

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!

True the Vote

A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.

Zeee Media

Share the truth at whatever cost.

thefoghornexpress

De Oppresso Liber

De Oppresso Liber

The Most Revolutionary Act

Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine

America-Wake-Up

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

TOTT News

Australia's Front Line | Since 2011

CherriesWriter - Vietnam War website

See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors

Murray Report

Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News

Scott Adams Says

De Oppresso Liber

Stella's Place

Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com

livingbyathread

Exposition and Encouragement

Disrupted Physician

The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction

Easy Money Martin

Real Estate Lending