Susanna Reid Debates Steve Bannon over Trump’s Brexit Criticism | Good Morning Britain


Steve Bannon joins Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid as USA President Donald Trump visits the UK. They debate Trump’s criticism of Brexit, how a US-UK trade deal might work and cover Trump’s controversial Muslim travel ban. Subscribe now for more! http://bit.ly/1NbomQa Broadcast on 13/07/18 Like, follow and subscribe to Good Morning Britain! The Good Morning Britain YouTube channel delivers you the news that you’re waking up to in the morning. From exclusive interviews with some of the biggest names in politics and showbiz to heartwarming human interest stories and unmissable watch again moments. Join Susanna Reid, Piers Morgan, Ben Shephard, Kate Garraway, Charlotte Hawkins and Sean Fletcher every weekday on ITV from 6am.

 

 

The Surrender of Liberty in the Name of Security


QUESTION: It seems that as we get closer to a change-over of economic systems that as a society we are more willing to give up our rights to the State. Is that part of a pattern during these types of events? Was it seen as Britain, Rome, and other countries lost power after their peaks?
DS

ANSWER: Unfortunately, the trend first materializes when people need the government to protect them usually from an external force. The British used this tactic against both the French and the American colonists. That prompted Ben Franklin to comment on this trend.

After the 3rd Century Monetary Crisis bottomed in the Roman Empire in 268 AD, there was a surge to build a wall around Rome by Emperor Aurelian following the same pattern. Aurelian saw the corruption that led to the debasement of the currency because those minting the coins were robbing the treasury. Aurelian moved to DRAIN THE SWAMP in Rome. When Aurelian returned to Rome in 271 AD after fighting off barbarians, he had to pacify a terrified city. He immediately halted the rioting and restored order to the capital. The controller of the mint in Rome began a rebellion over the monetary reforms laid out by Aurelian. He ordered that all the debased currency be purchased back and replaced with a new currency of higher content in silver. The rebellion was led by Felicissimus.

It appears that those who had been running the mint were embezzling the intended silver and issuing the debased coinage at least in part on their own authority. Obviously, any reform to the monetary system that called for an increase in silver content would have been unprofitable for those running the mint for personal gain. In the rebellion, as many as 7,000 soldiers died when Aurelian was forced to trap and execute them and their allies, some of the senatorial rank, in a terrible battle on the Caelian Hills.

Aurelian then constructed a wall around Rome — the first of its kind. Clearly, there was both a DRAINING OF THE SWAMP and a sense of security that people surrendered in the name of safety. The final phase comes when the suppression of liberty continues to become oppressive and therefore the people eventually wake up and see that the government is using this as a tactic to sustain or grab more power usually in self-defense.

Why Japan Lost So Big Post-1989


QUESTION: Hi Marty, I come from a golfing family and remember very well the shock when a Japanese investment group bought the Pebble Beach Golf Links, in 1990, for $850 million. The previous October Japanese investors bought the Rockefeller Center, triggering a flurry of Japanese purchases of signature U.S. properties such as Pebble Beach.

Was all this investment caused by The Plaza Accord in 1985, which devalued the USD by 40 percent? Which, as you’ve pointed out, also devalued American assets held by Japanese, igniting a sell-off of American investments and the 1987 crash. With cash repatriated back to Japan, the capital inflows into Japan ran the Nikkei up to its peak, in 1989. Within this late-80s early-90s timeframe, this is when the Japanese made their global malinvestments such as Pebble Beach, which they sold just two years later, in 1992, for $500 million, taking a 42 percent loss. Do I have the correlations and causations correct?

Thanks,

TGM

ANSWER: Yes. The Japanese bought US assets at the peak of their markets in 1989. As you can see, the dollar against the yen kept falling into April 1995. Not only did the Japanese lose money on US assets, but they also lost, even more, when they sold them and converted it back to yen on the decline in the dollar.

Currency is EVERYTHING. It dramatically alters the capital flows and can destroy economies because people remain clueless about how foreign exchange markets even function. That should be no surprise since they still teach all the economic theories of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate era including Keynesianism.

That is why everyone in the field is self-taught. You cannot get a degree in hedge fund management. Christine Lagarde of the IMF and soon to be head of the European Central Bank is a lawyer with no experience in funds management. People run for president spouting economic promises without the slightest background even in economics. What they teach in school has become ever more irrelevant in the real world. Other than a doctor or lawyer, it is hard to find someone who is working in the field in which they obtained a degree

Gold in Currencies


QUESTION: Hello Marty,
I have a question about Gold & Silver in other currencies – namely GBP.
Accepting your rational, with evidence I must say, that precious metals are a reflection of the confidence people have in their countries currency, you can see from the price of gold & silver in GBP and EURO that leading up to the Brexit referendum until now confirms this. When you look at the ECM for this period – 2015.75 up to 2020.05 – you can see that there are three main waves to it. One wave down from 2015.75 to 2016.825, then three shorter wave from 2016.825 to 2018.89 – single consolidation wave?, then a third wave down from 2018.89 to 2020.05. Gold & Silver rallied, consolidated, then rallied again within this ECM period. Does Gold & Silver have their own internal cycle? Will your upcoming report include content on Gold & Silver in other currencies? The trade in Gold:GBP since the ECM turning point of 2015.75 has been very lucrative

– thanks for your service and opening up Socrates for us.
Regards,
AJ
England.

ANSWER: When you plot gold in dollars and pounds, you can see the steepness in the pound. This has been the strength in gold in dollars. It has been the hedge, not against fears of inflation in the USA, but it has risen in the face of the fear of a recession OPPOSITE of its previous relationships. This is all because we are approaching a Monetary Crisis Cycle.

Forecasting gold in dollars is pointless for that will be irrelevant to those in different countries. So yes, our report will be in terms of all the major currencies so people can make the appropriate decision in their own currency.

Why Did United States Enjoy Dramatic Improvements in Living During the Last Century?


Published on Aug 26, 2019

Recorded on April 18, 2019 Peter Robinson opens the session by discussing the major improvements that happened over the last one hundred years in the United States, between 1919 and 2019. For example, the GDP per person rose by 760 percent, life expectancy improved from 55 to 79 years, and various other automotive, technological, medical, and quality-of-life advances were achieved. Robinson then starts the discussion with former secretary of state George Shultz, who encourages a broader vision as we look for the reasons for prosperity. Shultz discusses some of the major events that occurred during the 20th century, e.g., the Great Depression, currency manipulation, World War II, and the Holocaust, whose negative impacts framed the mindset of Americans to question the institutions underlying society. Robinson then asks John Cogan about these institutions—private property, the rule of law, free markets—and the importance of these for prosperity. Cogan explains those institutions are necessary for sustained prosperity, which demands conditions that are stable in order to fuel economic growth. Robinson asks Terry Anderson about the importance of property rights. Terry says that property rights are the key to providing people with incentives to care for and maintain the property they own. Anderson notes that nobody washes rental cars, because they don’t own them. Robinson asks Lee Ohanian about the role of immigration in prosperity. Ohanian says that the United States has been fortunate in attracting the best talents from all over the world, which has played a major role in sustaining prosperity. Ohanian notes that having an inflow of immigrants like Sergey Brin from Soviet Union, Elon Musk from South Africa, and others has helped the United States stay on the cutting edge of innovation with new and fresh ideas. For further information: https://www.hoover.org/publications/u…

Socialism Does NOT Work | Daniel Hannan | Oxford Union


Published on Dec 18, 2013
Daniel Hannan gives his argument that Socialism does not work. SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► http://is.gd/OxfordUnion Daniel Hannan opens with a quote from a from a previous socialist known as Adolf Hitler. The socialist voters elevated cohersion over freedom. The human nature of dog eat dog and ambition to do well was harnessed by capitalism to a socially useful end. He highlights that there are no socialist countries in the wolrd today (e.g. Cuba, Zimbabwe etc) that have persormed better than capitalist one. He concludes his rousing speech with by saying socialism does not work and the house must vote for freedom.

President Trump Delivers Impromptu Remarks Departing White House….


Chopper pressers are the best pressers. As the president departed the White House for Camp David, President Trump stops to deliver remarks on ongoing events to the assembled press pool.  [Video Below – Transcript will Follow]

.

Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Advisor, Peter Brown, will accompany the President to Camp David this weekend to provide regular updates on Hurricane Dorian. Also traveling with the President were Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Senior Advisor for Digital Strategy Dan Scavino and Press Secretary/Communications Director Stephanie Grisham

EU President Donald Tusk: Domestic Politics Could Drive Britain Out of EU….


I must admit at first I was going to present this as a “Friday Funny“, because the statement is a nomination for this year’s Captain Obvious Award.

“Domestic politics could drive Britain out of the EU”…  Gee, ya think?

Well, duh.  Of course it’s those pesky British domestics, those vulgarian masses, that are driving Britain out of the EU.  It is stunning to see a person say that out loud as if there was some other mysterious force that could have created the Brexit referendum.

However, beyond the stupid humor of the comment, and believe me it had me in stitches for more than a few moments, Tusk’s outlook actually opens a window into the knuckleheaded collective mindset that exists within the EU:

“The main political problem with Brexit is the situation inside Britain … the emotions related to this show that we are all victims of Britain’s internal politics.” (link)

Perhaps it’s just because we are inherently American, that this outlook, this collective elitism as highlighted by Donald Tusk, just seems to personify everything wrong with their entire assembly.   The Tusks of the EU just cannot fathom a system of government where the people actually get to determine their own future.  It’s remarkable to watch and hear.

EU President Donald Tusk was never elected by people, he was appointed by a technocratic system filled with central-planning bureaucrats.   At the most basic of cognitive capabilities, the Tusks writ large cannot understand individual liberty, individual freedom, self-determination, etc.

Not only can they not comprehend it, the very fiber of their DNA has no connection to the concept of individualism.   The elitism within the modern EU is ridiculous.

 

President Trump Reacts to IG Report on James Comey Conduct as FBI Director….


The IG report on the behavior of FBI Director James Comey clearly validated President Trump’s 2017 decision to fire him.   Mr. Comey is described as a highly self-interested person within the department who saw himself above all rules applied to others.

Today, President Trump tweeted about the IG findings:

From the CTH review of the report content, there is absolutely no doubt James Comey used his memos akin to FD-302 investigative reports from an FBI agent. Meaning, from beginning-to-end James Comey considered himself an investigative agent against the President-elect and then President Trump.

Note: From Comey making a record of his encounter with the target, President-elect Trump, should be: “treated like FISA derived information in a counterintelligence investigation.

This outlook highlights James Comey’s disposition.  During this January 6th operation, Comey was an active FBI agent gathering evidence for later use. The collected intelligence would be shared with the FBI team via memo #1.

Remember the Lisa Page Texts from the same date?

The FBI likely redacted almost all of that text because it outlines the distribution of the evidence Comey was collecting. Comey’s memos were essentially FD-302 reports, and the officials within the DOJ and FBI didn’t want that exposed. The Lisa Page text was heavily redacted because it would have shown the January 6th encounter was an operation against Trump.

Every encounter, and every aspect of every action within that encounter, was conducted in what Comey perceived as an official investigative capacity.

President Trump was the target of Comey’s operations and he wrote his memos as investigative notes therein. Example: Comey ran the January 6th, 2017, operation:

So the “small group”: Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Baker, Priestap, Rybicki, et al, were running a counterintelligence operation against the incoming administration.

There are parts of the IG report highlighting a stunning amount of self-interest.

Example: Who made the decision(s) about what “was” or what “was not” classified? Or, put another way: who was making the internal decisions about Comey’s exposure to legal risk for sharing his investigative notes (memos) outside the department?

The answer is the same “small group” who were carrying out the operation:

James Baker, Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, James Rybicki and Lisa Page were determining what parts of James Comey’s investigative notes needed to be classified.

The corrupt FBI was in position to police itself. This is not a conflict of interest, it is better described as a profound conflict of self-interest.

The information the ‘small group‘ wanted to use to frame the target would be visible, not classified; however, any material that would outline the construct of their corruption in targeting the target would be hidden, classified. You can’t make this stuff up folks.

The “small group” WAS the sources and methods they were protecting.  They were protecting themselves.

Everything needed to understand that level of corruption is outlined in the way the IG report discusses the handling of James Comey’s investigative notes (ie. memos). AND the fact that James Comey kept them hidden, yes hidden. Read this stuff:

First, “no hard copies of any of the memos were found in Comey’s FBI office.”:

So, if the memos were not held in Director James Comey’s official FBI office, the next logical question is where were they?

Well, when Special Agents went to James Comey’s house, he still kept them hidden and never informed the agents:

It is worth noting James Rybicki went to Comey’s house along with three supervisory special agents to pick up FBI property.  Prior to this event Comey had already given Rybicki the memos as evidence in the case against Trump.  However, neither Comey not Rybicki told the SSA’s about the physical copies of the memos at the residence.

If Mr. Altruism, James Comey, was simply fulfilling the duty of a concerned and dedicated FBI Director, why not tell the FBI agents -picking up FBI records- that he had copies of FBI investigative notes in his “personal safe” while they were there?

What honorable justification exists for keeping them hidden from valid investigators?

Obviously we are not the only ones able to see the sketchy nature of this construct. In fact, an internal FBI whistleblower came forward soon after that search of Comey’s home to request official “whistleblower status protection” from the IG.

Think logically…. What would prompt someone inside the FBI; who at some point gained access to the Comey memos; to request ‘whistleblower protected status’?

Doesn’t the “whistleblower request” itself indicate the requesting FBI official saw something nefarious in the way this was all going down?

Who was that ‘whistleblower’?

Well, it has to be someone who actually gained possession of those memos right?…. this is not a big group. Second, we only need to read a few more pages of the IG report to see who it was:

The “whistleblower” was almost certainly the Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) described in page 38 as above.

The memos were “stored” in a “reception area“, and in locked drawers in James Rybicki’s office. [“Drawer safes” are silly FBI legal terms for fancy locked drawers] Also note…

Reception area“? “May 15th“?

Well, (#1) apparently no-one wanted to admit their knowledge of the hot potato of investigative evidence (Comey memos).  That admission would outline them as participatory members in carrying out the targeting of then President Trump.

Those investigative notes (memos) were not in “the office of the FBI Director” on May 10th, when the SSAs were there searching the last time,… for some mysterious reason.. they, uh,… well, they were discovered… in the “reception area“… yeah, yeah, that’s the ticket! Right under the four month old copy of People Magazine, n’ stuff.

….ARE YOU FRIGGIN’ KIDDING ME WITH THIS?

…AND (#2) the very next morning, using the copies of the memos that were left hidden in Comey’s residence, GUESS what happened?…

Now we see why the FBI Supervisory Special Agent in charge in charge of inventorying Comey records asked the IG for official “whistleblower status.”

The SSA agent was surrounded warning signs of corruption in the FBI executive suites.  On May 10th, they were kept hidden.  On May 12th they were kept hidden.  On May 15th Rybicki finally told the SSA where they were; and on May 16th Comey told his friend Daniel Richman to leak the content to the New York Times.

Of course the SSA in charge of inventorying Comey’s records gave the Inspector General the seven memos, asked for whistleblower protection, and likely explained to the IG the way they were handled and produced by FBI officials was extremely concerning.

Advertisements