Custodial Risk in New York City


QUESTION:

Hello Marty,

Your commentary and Socrates’ predictive capacity is ground-breaking. I have been following you for years. Thank you for your time and efforts.
I find it fascinating that the foretold decline of the West (by Socrates) coincides with the fourth-turning demographic study described by Strauss & Howe. Watching it unfold is causing some careful consideration and sleeplessness!

Few questions regarding the future disruption:

1) Could the pledging of negative-yielding bonds as collateral be causing the liquidity problems? As a private lender myself, how can a central bank (or anyone) lend against its par value (even overnight) when held to maturity you receive less than par?
2) What Brokers can protect against a Corzine / MF Global invasion of segregated accounts?
3) I am an Italian national. Do you think living low-key in Panama may be a way to ride out the coming chaos?

I appreciate your insights and opinion.

All the best,
JTK

ANSWER: There is about $17 trillion in outstanding negative-yielding bonds. It is far too complicated to go into great detail on a mere blog post. Suffice to say that the negative-yielding bonds are going to crash like something not witnessed since 1931. While a complete default is not likely prior to 2025/2026, we are going to witness the start of the collapse in 2020. These bonds have been bought by PUNTERS who are just trading them back and forth like a game of musical chairs. When the music stops, a lot of people will get caught holding these new 2.0 versions of financial debt bombs. Nobody is buying these things to actually hold. It is more akin to trading commodities where people are not actually interested in taking deliveries of lumber, hogs, silos of wheat or bars of silver. These are trading instruments only.

 

I strongly urge people to write to the White House and demand LEGAL REFORM in New York City. The entire fate of both the world economy and the domestic economy rests on the integrity of the rule of law which no longer exists. President Trump has the power to address this problem. He could clean house in the SEC and CFTC who will ALWAYS protect the bankers, as is the case in the Department of Justice. The banks have blown up the entire world economy. M.F. Global was using their clients’ money for its own punting and lost big time. Not a single banker was EVER changed, no less Corzine.

GlennJudge Martin Glenn presided on M.F. Global bankruptcy and created the first BAIL-IN without Congressional Authority. He was the first one to engage in FORCED LOANS by abandoning the rule of law to help the bankers and protect Corzine from losses by taking client accounts to cover M.F. Global’s losses. That is no different from what we saw in Cyprus. He simply allowed the confiscation of client funds when in fact the rule of law should have been that the bankers were responsible and M.F. Global’s losses and it should have been reversed. Never should the clients’ funds be taken for M.F. Global’s losses to the NY Bankers.

What Judge Martin Glenn’s ruling warns is you should NOT trust any company based in New York City. No other circuit would uphold what Glenn did to protect Corzine. While Glenn could not prosecute Corzine, the Department of Justice closed its eyes as did the SEC and CFTC. We lack legal integrity and that leaves a COUNTRY RISK that we would have to warn a client about if we were dealing with a third-world country. This is part of the reason China is still lagging behind. There MUST BE a straight forward Rule of Law or capital that cannot invest if there are no definitive rules.

As far as Panama is concerned, it has been one place that people have moved. Another is Thailand if you are looking at Asia

DRUDGE REPORT THE SEQUEL: THE SEARCH FOR MORE MONEY


Drudge knows which side his bread is buttered on–the search for more clicks!

We remember when the Drudge Report played up President Trump’s successes; he was one of the few sites that did. Since August, the Drudge Report has been pushing one negative Trump story after another on the website.

Has Drudge turned on President Trump just like the opportunist Ann Coulter?

It’s starting to look that way. The site’s tone has changed and some days you can’t tell the Drudge Report from CNN.

Has Matt Drudge abandoned conservatism?

Everyone is noticing, so the negative stories are not an outlier.

Christmas Gifts From Amazon

Matt Drudge has sold his conservative soul for clicks and money. In August, the Drudge Report dropped its advertising representative of close to 20 years, Intermarkets, in favor of a new and unknown company, Granite Cubed.

Author and political commentator, Jerome Corsi, has repeatedly tweeted about the shift in coverage, saying Drudge has “lost his mind,” “turned left,” and become a “leftist hack beating [the] impeachment drum.”

The reclusive Matt Drudge is a one man box of mystery,  we may never know the whole truth.

 

Tina

 

Peter Navarro: If Pelosi Could Pause the Impeachment, Congress Could Pass the USMCA…


White House trade and manufacturing policy advisor Peter Navarro appears on Fox News to discuss two key economic and trade issues: (1) the current status of U.S-China trade discussions “round one”; and (2) the status of USMCA ratification (Pelosi’s delay).

Nothing in the China trade discussion is solid, until everything in the China trade discussion is settled; this is one of the key aspects to President Trump’s directive to USTR Robert Lighthizer.  No deal is a more favorable outcome than the construct of a trade deal that cannot be enforced.

On the USMCA ratification, again it all falls upon the politics of Pelosi.  The agreement would pass tomorrow if it were put up to a vote; there is no controversy.  Speaker Pelosi is holding back the ratification vote for pure political purposes.

.

USMCA ratification is the first domino in long-chain of ‘America First’ economic benefits. As soon as USMCA passes a wave of North American investment will surge. The downstream consequences includes leverage for U.S-China, U.S-Europe, U.S-India and U.S-U.K trade agreements.

Sunday Talks – John Ratcliffe: “The Inspector General is going to have to find that there were things that were done wrong”…


As a reminder John Ratcliffe is one of only four members of congress who has reviewed all of the classified documents that surrounds the current background for the Inspector General report on FISA abuse.  That said, the quoted comment from Ratcliffe, while it will be overlooked by most, is the first visible sign reconciling a fundamental challenge previously highlighted.

In the 2018 IG report on FBI conduct in the 2016 election, the IG stated there was no evidence of any FBI activity being taken for political intents.  Yes, there was a tremendous amount of politically motivated evidence noted within the report; but the top-line statement by Horowitz was counter to the underlying evidence.

A year ago that led us to ask: how could the IG outline political motives in the FISA investigation, if he previously stated there was no politically motivated action by the FBI?

The statement today by Rep. John Ratcliffe seems to speak to this issue.  The implication within the words is that the evidence is so overwhelming the IG has few options.

[2018 IG Report Link]

Candidate Joe Biden: President Trump “is not fit to command our troops”…


Former Vice-President Joe Biden doesn’t necessarily write his tweets.  The political careerists within his campaign are the ones who construct his messaging; however, the content is an accurate representation of where Biden stands on the specific issue:

Note: I was a Special Forces officer in Vietnam in 1967 and we had the same problem their with Government rules of Engagement that meant my troops could be needlessly killed. I support what president Trump did 100%.  Biden is an idiot!

(Tweet Link)

The Joe Biden campaign objective is to delegitimize President Trump.  Aside from the reality that Biden has just positioned himself outside the mainstream military, his position serves purposefully in using the military as a political weapon.

Politicizing the military is the same sentiment behind the impeachment crew instructing Lt. Col Alexander Vindman to wear his uniform for an impeachment hearing.  Same goals; same intents; same purpose.  {Go Deep}

(White House) – Executive Clemency for Army First Lieutenant Clint Lorance and Army Major Mathew Golsteyn, and the Promotion of Special Warfare Operator First Class Edward Gallagher

Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Grant of Clemency (Full Pardon) for Army First Lieutenant Clint Lorance, an Executive Grant of Clemency (Full Pardon) for Army Major Mathew Golsteyn, and an order directing the promotion of Special Warfare Operator First Class Edward R. Gallagher to the grade of E-7, the rank he held before he was tried and found not guilty of nearly all of the charges against him.

♦ In early July 2012, only days after Lieutenant Lorance had taken command of his platoon in one of the most dangerous battle zones in Afghanistan, a motorcycle with three men approached him and his men with unusual speed. Under difficult circumstances and prioritizing the lives of American troops, Lorance ordered his men to engage, and two of the three men were killed.

Following these events, Lorance was convicted of several charges. He has served more than six years of a 19-year sentence he received. Many Americans have sought executive clemency for Lorance, including 124,000 people who have signed a petition to the White House, as well as several members of Congress, including Senators Bill Cassidy and John Kennedy, and Representatives Steve Scalise, Garret Graves, Duncan Hunter, Paul Gosar, Adam Kinzinger, Scott Perry, Brian Babin, Neal Dunn, Michael Waltz, Louie Gohmert, Daniel Webster, Steve King, Ralph Norman, Mark Meadows, Clay Higgins, Ralph Abraham, Mike Johnson, and Jody Hice.

♦ Major Mathew Golsteyn, an officer of the United States Army and graduate of West Point, is currently set to stand trial for an allegedly unlawful killing in connection with one of the largest battles of the Afghanistan War.

As our forces cleared the Taliban from the city of Marjah, an Improvised Explosive Device detonated, killing two Marines. The terrorist bombmaker, as identified by an Afghan informant, who had killed our troops, was detained and questioned. Golsteyn was compelled to release him, however, due in part to deficiencies within the fledgling Afghan detention system. Golsteyn has said he later shot the terrorist because he was certain that the terrorist’s bombmaking activities would continue to threaten American troops and their Afghan partners, including Afghan civilians who had helped identify him.

After nearly a decade-long inquiry and multiple investigations, a swift resolution to the case of Major Golsteyn is in the interests of justice. Clemency for Major Golsteyn has broad support, including from Representatives Louie Gohmert, Duncan Hunter, Mike Johnson, Ralph Abraham, and Clay Higgins, American author and Marine combat veteran Bing West, and Army combat veteran Pete Hegseth.

♦ Before the prosecution of Special Warfare Operator First Class Edward Gallagher, he had been selected for promotion to Senior Chief, awarded a Bronze Star with a “V” for valor, and assigned to an important position in the Navy as an instructor. Though ultimately acquitted on all of the most serious charges, he was stripped of these honors as he awaited his trial and its outcome. Given his service to our Nation, a promotion back to the rank and pay grade of Chief Petty Officer is justified.

The United States military justice system helps ensure good order and discipline for our millions of uniformed military members and holds to account those who violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Due in part to this system, we have the most disciplined, most effective, most respected, and most feared fighting force in the world.

The President, as Commander-in-Chief, is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the law is enforced and when appropriate, that mercy is granted. For more than two hundred years, presidents have used their authority to offer second chances to deserving individuals, including those in uniform who have served our country. These actions are in keeping with this long history. As the President has stated, “when our soldiers have to fight for our country, I want to give them the confidence to fight.”

White House ~

Sunday Talks: Doug Collins -vs- Maria Bartiromo – Interview Brushes Up Against FISA Reauthorization…


Representative Doug Collins appears with Maria Bartiromo and points out a position on FISA reauthorization that is hopefully carried by the majority of Republicans.  Collins states an approach where he, perhaps others, would advance a “short-term” FISA extension pending a full review of the upcoming FISA report from Inspector General Michael Horowitz, prior to any longer term reauthorization.

FISA-702 authority, bulk U.S. person metadata collection, storage and surveillance, is set to terminally expire December 15th.  The last FISC report from Judge Boasberg stated that all violations of FISA law are still ongoing and there have been no substantive corrections by the intelligence community to fix the abuse issues. The Judge Boasberg report was written in September of 2018 but not released (redacted) until last month. {Go Deep}

The Intelligence Community (writ large), the FBI and the DOJ are all seeking a permanent reauthorization.  In my humble opinion this FISA reauthorization is the cornerstone motive for an IG report delay.  There is an alignment of interests.

.

We know what the FBI and “contractors” were doing in 2016; and given how invested the intelligence community is within the current stop-trump operations (writ large); and given the political stakes for the intelligence community; well, would there be a reason they would just stop electronic surveillance in January 2017 when President Trump was inaugurated?

Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein authorized Mueller to investigate the Steele Dossier in the second scope memo (August 2017). If my suspicions are accurate, the reason Mueller wanted the dossier included would be to maintain Mueller’s investigation as a counterintelligence operation. [An extension of Crossfire Hurricane] More importantly, as a result, all previous FBI exploits using FISA(702) database searches would be authorized.

FISA Court judges Rosemary Collyer (declassified 2017) and James Boasberg (declassified 2019) both identified issues with the NSA database being exploited for unauthorized reasons. We have a large amount of supplemental research to see through most of Collyer’s report and we are now starting the same process for Boasberg. However, an alarming possibility makes it important to outline a rough draft of what appears present.

Boasberg notes the “about” query option that NSA Director Mike Rogers halted, technically didn’t stop. Instead operators used the “to and from” option almost identically as the “about” queries for downstream data review and extraction. The FISA Appellate Court appointed amici curiae to review Boasberg’s opinion and reconcile counter claims by the FBI. Boasberg was never satisfied despite the FISC-R amicus assurances. His opinion reflects valid judicial cynicism within his reluctant re-authorization.

The violations that Boasberg is identifying (March 2017 through March 2018) must also include FISA database searches conducted by Mueller’s FBI team. It is all within the same system of electronic surveillance. The pattern, frequency and specifics of the Boasberg report are identical to the 2017 Rosemary Collyer report. Same violations. Same processes.

Against what we see more visible every day; and thinking about how corrupt we already know the Mueller investigation to be; now consider that without going to federal courts to gain legal authority, warrants, taps etc…. using their database access Mueller’s team could continue to exploit the FISA(702) process.

They could gather material for their criminal cases through the NSA database and then transfer those results to their spun off prosecutions.

That’s why the Steele Dossier would be so important. The Dossier formed the basis to continue making the Mueller investigation a counterintelligence operation, Title-I authority. Without the Dossier creating the foreign construct, Mueller’s team would have had to follow Title-III.

There is a better than strong possibility the Mueller team monitored all of their targets, extracted the evidence they needed, transferred it to prosecutors and proceeded to construct cases. They didn’t need too much actual investigation because: (a) they knew the Russian-collusion/conspiracy was false; and (2) they could just access the NSA database and pull all the material they needed.

My hunch is all of this exploitation is why ODNI Dan Coats sat on this Boasberg ruling for a year. Boasberg presented this FISC opinion in October 2018, but it wasn’t released until October 2019. That could also be a motive why Dan Coats left right before Boasberg’s opinion was released. Perhaps IC interests did not want anyone putting 2+2 together if this judicial review was released during the ongoing Mueller probe.

Keep in mind ICIG Michael Atkinson has dirty hands here.  Within the ongoing OIG FISA investigation by Michael Horowitz and John Durham, Atkinson has a conflict of interest that has not yet been disclosed and could very likely be influencing his decision-making.

The CIA ‘whistle-blower’ Eric Ciaramella had no first-hand knowledge; everything within his originating complaint was based on hearsay. The CIA operative never informed the ICIG about prior contact and coordination with the House Intelligence Committee (Adam Schiff). The CIA operative never disclosed congressional contact on the complaint form; and the complaint forms were changed specifically to accommodate this CIA operative.

ICIG Michael Atkinson never reviewed the Trump-Zelenskyy call transcript and facilitated the complaint processing despite numerous flaws.  Additionally Atkinson ignored legal guidance from both the director of national intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel that highlighted Atkinson’s poor decision-making.

This makes the activity of ICIG Atkinson very questionable.  What exactly is his purpose within this enterprise?  Well… given the nature of Atkinson’s background, it appears his prior work in 2016, during his tenure as the lead legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, likely played a role in his decision.

The center of the 2016 Lawfare Alliance election influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok. It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.

Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.

Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.

Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse.

If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.

Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Pelosi-Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.  Sketchy!

ICIG Michael Atkinson is the link that connects Spygate to the Schiff Impeachment Effort – An alignment of interests

The people defending President Trump against impeachment are also people who do not want the intelligence apparatus to lose their bulk data collection (FISA-702) authority.

This is an interesting situation…

Sunday Talks: Jim Jordan -vs- Margaret Brennan – Important Note: Media Given Leaked Sealed Transcripts from Friday Depositions…


Representative Jim Jordan appears on CBS Face The Nation to discuss the ongoing impeachment fiasco. Ms. Brennan struggles to define a new journalistic concept for “first-hand” information as she claims David Holmes, who claims to have overheard half of a phone conversation that two other people were having, is a “first-hand” witness.

Jordan points out that Ms. Brennan is quoting from a seal transcript given to her by Adam Schiff that has not been released. [Video and Transcript Below]

.

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re back now with Republican Congressman Jim Jordan. Good morning to you.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JORDAN: Morning. Good to be with you.

MARGARET BRENNAN: It’s good to have you here in person. And- and before we get going, the cut above your eye. You didn’t get into a fistfight. This was just a run in–

REP. JORDAN: No I- I- I got between Adam Schiff and a camera. How bout that? No, actually, it’s somewhat embarrassing. But the door to the Intelligence Committee hearing room–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

REP. JORDAN: –in the bunker in the basement where- where we’ve been doing these depositions, it opens and it stays open all the time and then it closes on its own. I stepped out to say something to my colleague, Mr. Meadows. It started to close and I didn’t realize I turned and bumped into the door so yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So just so we clear that up–

REP. JORDAN: Yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –right out of the gate.

REP. JORDAN: Exactly. That’s real important.

MARGARET BRENNAN: As you heard from the speaker in that interview, she argues that the aid to Ukraine was only released because of the whistleblower. What reason were you given that the aid to Ukraine–

REP. JORDAN: Five–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –was eventually released?

REP. JORDAN: Because President Zelensky met five times with senior U.S. officials. One, of course, was the phone call with President Trump. And then four meetings, actually face to face meetings, with U.S. senators, ambassadors, with Vice President Pence. And in each of those meetings, never was it talked about linking the security assistance dollars to any type of investigations. But what did happen in those meetings is they all became convinced Zelensky’s the real deal. Remember, we’re talking about Ukraine. One of the three most corrupt countries on the planet. And we’re talking about the hard earned tax dollars of the American people. So, they became convinced that this media star, this new guy to politics, his party just won an overwhelming majority in their parliament, was the real deal. And he was legit and he was worth the risk–

MARGARET BRENNAN: So that September 9th complaint–

REP. JIM JORDAN: –and they said we’ll release the aid.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –and then the September 11th release of the aid, you’re saying that’s just- just the calendar just happened to happen that way?

REP. JORDAN: Well, it did and plus, remember, the aid didn’t have to be released till September 30th.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. JORDAN: So it gets released on the 11th and most importantly–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Got it.

REP. JORDAN: –most importantly, the Ukrainians did nothing to, as- as far as investigations goes, to get the aid release. So there was never this quid pro quo that the Democrats all promise existed before President Trump released the phone call.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I want to get to some new testimony. An American diplomat named David Holmes testified before- behind closed doors on Friday. And I want to know, do you think, because he now has firsthand knowledge in which he explains he overheard a conversation between the president of the United States and Gordon Sondland, isn’t he credible? This was first hand.

REP. JORDAN: Well, I mean, look, he overheard a conversation–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Specifically, mention of the Bidens–

REP. JORDAN: We don’t know if the other two people–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –and investigation into the Bidens.

REP. JORDAN: –at the table are gonna vouch for his story. We’ll see, because there was four people at the table and–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Are they coming to testify? Those other two?

REP. JORDAN: That’s Adam Schiff. Adam Schiff controls the witness list. We gave our list. He doesn’t give us the witnesses we want and he can call witnesses anytime he wants. We had to give our list last Saturday. Just one of the many problems and- and unfairness of this process. So I’m sure Mr. Holmes will get called by the Democrats. He’ll come in and we’ll have him under oath in front of the committee, in front of the cameras and we’ll ask him questions, and we’ll see how his story holds up.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the EU is a ally of the president. He was a financial donor to the president’s campaign, but he’s changed his testimony already. Do you think he’s credible?

REP. JORDAN: His- his addendum to his testimony, never forget he said, ‘I presume this happened.’ So, again, this is- he’ll be in front of us this week as well, as will Mr. Morrison, as will Mr. Vindman, as was Ms. Williams. And we’re gonna have a host of witnesses. So, again, we’ll see how his testimony plays out. What I also know is he said there was never any quid pro quo in the text message responding to others on that text chain. So, we’ll have him in front of us and we’ll find out.

MARGARET BRENNAN: That text chain- you’re, you’re right, but then in this conversation that David Holmes has testified about, he says he heard the president ask, “So he’s going to do the investigation.” And Sondland replied, “He’s going to do it.” Holmes then said he spoke to Sondland, who told him Trump was interested in the Biden investigation, that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.

REP. JORDAN: It’s interesting you’re talking about all these details from a deposition that hasn’t been released, that just happened Friday night that we’re not supposed to even talk about, is it? This is, again, an example of the unfair process. He’ll be under oath–

MARGARET BRENNAN: You want him to testify under oath–

REP. Jordan: He’ll be- well–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –in the public eye?

REP. JORDAN: I- I- I assume Adam Schiff–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Holmes?

REP. JORDAN: –is going to call him. And remember this, based on what Mr. Taylor told us in the open hearing earlier this week as their first witness, he said that this happened with- with a- a conversation that he wasn’t a part of, Mr. Holmes, and he’s listening in on a conversation between Ambassador Sondland and the President of the United States. So we’ll have questions for him. We’ll see how it stands out.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think Gordon Sondland was acting on his own? He says he talks to the president all the time.

REP. JORDAN: He’s the Senate confirmed ambassador to the European Union. Mr. Volker is- is the special envoy, distinguished career serving our country in the diplomatic corps.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, but Sondland–

REP. JORDAN: We had- we had–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –is who I was asking about.

REP. JORDAN: –Rick Perry. We have Secretary Perry, Senate confirmed, working. This whole- this whole irregular channel I find interesting because they’re all Senate confirmed individuals, respected individuals, accomplished individuals–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. JORDAN: –working on a diplomatic mission, and somehow that’s- that’s- that’s crazy. I just don’t follow- here’s the- here’s the bottom line–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But do you think that the project that Gordon Sondland was working on here, when he said, ‘the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing,’ was that with the president’s ‘OK’?

REP. JORDAN: Here’s what I understand. We haven’t heard from Kurt Volker yet. The first witness the Democrats call, the special envoy, Ambassador Volker, he said everything that was done here, there was no quid pro of any kind and it was all done in a way that was consistent with the mission of making sure the aid ultimately gets to the- to Ukraine and that things are done in the best interests of the United States, done in the best interests of Ukraine. And that’s all- that all happened. And Ambassador Volker’s testimony, I think, will be particularly good and particularly powerful when we get to hear from him later this week.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Specifically, Volker said he didn’t know there was a quid pro quo.

REP. JORDAN: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: That none was ever communicated to him. Not that there was definitively no quid pro quo, just that he was not aware of it.

REP. JORDAN: No one’s testified that there’s been a quid pro quo. Everyone’s got second, third hand, fourth hand information. Mr. Morrison, who was on the call, said he didn’t think anything was improper or illegal on the call. Ms. Williams didn’t think anything improper or illegal on the call. So–

MARGARET BRENNAN: She said inappropriate.

REP. JORDAN: So, but that- that’s- those are the facts. Four facts will never change. Will never- that’s a funny thing about facts. They don’t change. The fact that the- that we have the transcript and there was no linkage of any type of a search- security assistance dollars for investigations–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. JORDAN: –on the call. We have the two guys on the call–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Are you–

REP. JORDAN: –President Trump and President Zelensky said no pressure, no linkage–

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, just to be clear, though, are you okay–

REP. JORDAN: The Ukrainians didn’t know that their aid was held at the time of the call, and most importantly, they didn’t do anything. Any specific actions on investigations–

MARGARET BRENNAN: I- I understand you’re saying that the aid was released–

REP. JORDAN: –to get the aid released.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I understand you’re saying the aid was released, but to- to put a fine point on it, are you comfortable with the investigation that was requested?

REP. JORDAN: The investigation that- that- that was requested? Look, the president–

MARGARET BRENNAN: That the president spoke to Gordon Sondland–

REP. JORDAN: –I thought that–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –about this request to have–

REP. JORDAN: –I thought the–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –the Biden’s investigated.

REP. JORDAN: I thought we were supposed to be looking–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Are you comfortable with that?

REP. JORDAN: –into potential impact on the 2016 election in- in- in foreign countries involvement in 2016 election. So, I’m comfortable with that. I think everyone is–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, this is the 2020 election. Does that make you uncomfortable?

REP. JORDAN: Well, I don’t think that’s what took place here, because there was never an investigation undertaken. There was never an announcement from President Zelensky–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But the request for one that was overheard and testified to.

REP. JORDAN: But it didn’t happen. There’s- there’s all kinds of talk about things, but they- it didn’t happen. And well, remember when this all broke? What the Democrats tell us?

MARGARET BRENNAN: And the attempt itself doesn’t bother you?

REP. JORDAN: What the Democrats tell us? There was a quid pro quo. The scary thing is the Democrats have been out to get this president. I was struck by listening to Speaker Pelosi’s comments, her answer to your second question. She used the word impostor. I’m talking about the president of the United States, who 63 million people voted for, who won an Electoral College–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. JORDAN: –landslide. And yet these Democrats have been trying to get him- the start of this Congress, Congresswoman Tlaib said–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

REP. JORDAN: –she wants to impeach him before any evidence. Five members, think about this–

MARGARET BRENNAN: I understand.

REP. JORDAN: –five members of the Dem- of the Democrat- five Democrat members on the Intelligence Committee have voted to move forward with impeachment even before the whistleblower complaint was filed.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I’ve got to go to a commercial break. Thank you very much, Congressman.

REP. JORDAN: Thank you

[END TRANSCRIPT]

House Releases Transcripts from Jennifer Williams and Tim Morrison Depositions….


House Democrats on Saturday released the transcripts of closed-door testimony from Jennifer Williams and Tim Morrison (both pdf’s linked below).

House Link Williams – House Link Morrison

The first transcript is from career foreign service officer and Vice President Pence staffer Jennifer Williams.

The House did not need to subpoena Williams who was willing to deliver testimony to the impeachment committee with support from the Vice-President.

Ms. Williams was among the officials actually on the July 25th call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. She is also one of the only witnesses who has testified with firsthand knowledge of the exchange.

Interestingly Ms. Williams, a senior staffer for Vice-President Pence, delivered testimony that later had to be modified.

Keeping in mind that Jennifer Williams was actually on the call with Trump and Zelensky, it is curious that Ms. Williams originally testified that President Trump brought up the company Burisma during the call… only later having to modify her testimony to state that it was Zelensky who brought up the company.  A curious mistake all things considered.

Ms. Williams delivered her testimony on November 7th. Ms. Williams corrected her testimony on November 11th. Ms. Williams is the Senior Advisor to Vice-President Pence.

 

CTH takes a lot of flak for pointing out inconvenient issues that make us all a little uncomfortable.  However, it would be intellectually dishonest not to be concerned about a senior staffer within the executive branch who makes a “mistake“, during a highly important deposition, that specifically undermines President Trump.

Surely one would accept that if Ms. Williams had the best interest of the executive in mind; and keeping in mind that she held her own reference notes from the phone call; and also keeping in mind Ms. Williams could easily refresh her memory from the released transcript of the phone call; well, under those circumstances such a significant mistake should be/would be very difficult to make. I digress…

Here’s the transcript:

.

The second transcript is from National Security Council aide Tim Morrison’s deposition to the House impeachment committee. Mr. Morrison replaced Mrs. Fiona Hill in July as the National Security Council expert on Eastern Europe

During his testimony, Mr. Morrison told impeachment investigators about concerns that President Trump withheld U.S. aid to Ukraine. Mr. Timothy Morrison also testified that Fiona Hill said she had questions about Lt. Col. Vindman’s judgment and that some people suspected Vindman of being a leaker.

It is almost certain that Lt. Col. Vindman was the source (#1) for the CIA report produced by Eric Ciaramella as part of an aligned Pentagon and CIA operation to remove President Trump from office.

Here’s the Morrison transcript:

.

UPDATE: Louisiana Governors Race – Election Results – Open Discussion Thread – Democrat Incumbent John Bel Edwards Wins Reelection…


Tonight is the last governors race of the year. Democrat Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards is facing off against a Republican challenger Eddie Rispone, a Baton Rouge businessman who emerged as the winner in last month’s nonpartisan primary.

President Trump is very popular in Louisiana and has supported Mr. Rispone in his challenge.  It is expected to be a very close race, and the media is hoping for an opportunity to frame President Trump’s reelection outcome with a loss for Mr. Rispone.

If John Bel Edwards wins, the media will joyfully proclaim the victory as overwhelming evidence of President Trump’s weakness.  If Eddie Rispone wins the media will play it down and say it means nothing.

UPDATE:  Incumbent Governor John Bell Edwards Wins by 40,000 votes.

Louisiana Secretary of State – Election Results Here

It was Democrat votes from within Orleans Parish that overwhelmingly voted for Governor John Bel Edwards (almost 90%) and eliminated any possibility for Eddie Rispone.  Orleans voted +100,000 for JBE (see graph below):

New York Times – Election Results Here

After Rep. Elise Stefanik Highlights Ambassador Yovanovitch False Statement – Stefanik Becomes a Target…


On March 20th, 2017, New York Representative Elise Stefanik first made a name for herself when she questioned FBI Director James Comey about why he purposefully did not inform congressional oversight, Gang-of-Eight, about the FBI investigation of candidate Donald Trump in 2016.   Ms. Stefanik caught Comey off-guard and his only response, albeit stuttered, was: “because of the sensitivity of the matter?”  {LINK}

Fast forward to November 15th, 2019, yesterday, and Rep. Stefanik again showed her acumen when she asked Ambassador Yovanovitch to reconcile her opening statement about not ever discussing Hunter Biden or Burisma against evidence Ms. Yovanovitch previously admitting to an extensive briefing session specifically about Hunter Biden and Burisma.  Once again, Stefanik caught a political operative in their network of lies. {LINK}

Having watched events closely it is obvious Elise Stefanik is a smart young representative with serious skills to see through the chaff, countermeasures and false narratives advanced by political left.

Hence, as if on cue, the entire apparatus of the political left began attacking their #1 new enemy.  Today the unholy alliance of corrupt political operatives and the allied media went on the attack.

Rising serpent@rising_serpent

Guess what was on the Democratic talking points memo today?

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
237 people are talking about this
They even started posting fake pictures in an effort to make Stefanik look bad.

BOOMER💥CONFIDENTIAL HUMAN SOURCES [4K]@BOOMER4K

There is a fake picture of @EliseStefanik flipping the bird. This is the original without the photoshop.

View image on Twitter
142 people are talking about this

Rising serpent@rising_serpent

This is the original video of Rep Elise Stefanik that was altered by to make it seem that she was giving the middle finger (see next post).
George Conway retweeted it and called her trash.

Embedded video

998 people are talking about this

Svetlana Lokhova@RealSLokhova

Hilary Clinton campaign manager (and friend of Avenatti) started the attack on Congresswoman Stefanik. This is the first tweet. Then it gets worse. https://twitter.com/adamparkhomenko/status/1194640725297774599 

Adam Parkhomenko

@AdamParkhomenko

Elise Stefanik is a great reminder that it isn’t just trump. All republicans are awful.

504 people are talking about this

Svetlana Lokhova@RealSLokhova

Clinton hit on Stefanik and Nunes in action—see below. Parkhomenko was Hillary’s advisor. https://twitter.com/adamparkhomenko/status/1195399410160525312 

Adam Parkhomenko

@AdamParkhomenko

Is there anything sadder than Elise Stefanik wanting to be Devin Nunes? Like who looks at that bumbling kiss ass and thinks now that’s who I want to be like? https://twitter.com/EliseStefanik/status/1195396189824409600 

206 people are talking about this

It is always easy to see who the left really fears by the approach they take to smearing strong and articulate people.

Indeed Ms. Stefanik is a threat to the political left and has now become their enemy.

Svetlana Lokhova@RealSLokhova

George Conway and Schiff publicly attacked a talented and beautiful Congresswoman @EliseStefanik. This means she is over the target. Good on you, Congresswoman! Keep going!

View image on Twitter
1,467 people are talking about this

Elise Stefanik

@EliseStefanik

It’s VERY Clear. Far-left Dems & Never Trumpers CANNOT handle the Truth. That’s why they are launching disgusting smears & doctoring photos of me in a sick attempt to intimidate me. Thx for proving that our side is WINNING. Donate NOW to help me fight backhttps://secure.winred.com/EliseStefanik/donate 

Elise Stefanik for Congress

They will stop at NOTHING to impeach our President. Donate today to help us FIGHT BACK!

secure.winred.com

20.3K people are talking about this