China Allows Currency to Drop – President Trump Responds – Devaluation Lowers Consumer Import Prices…


China needs to buy dollars to backstop their own currency (¥uan). When China trades with the U.S. they hold the return dollars as a peg against their weak currency.  Remove the flow of dollars (lessen exports) and they start to run out of strong pegged currency.

What is happening today is not as much direct devaluation by China; rather they are intentionally allowing their currency to drop in value, in an effort to lower export prices and off-set any tariffs from the U.S.   Simultaneously, Beijing is spending internally, burning cash, to keep their economy from weakening.  Their Yuan burn rate is greater than the influx of higher valued dollars needed to hold their position.

They cannot keep this position indefinitely.

First, here’s a solid interview with former CEO Gerald Storch on how the currency devaluation leads to lower prices for U.S. consumers.  Again, emphasizing the point that U.S. consumers are not paying for the tariffs against China.  Watch:

President Trump responds to the current activity by China:

.

Beijing says they will keep lowering the value of their currency to keep the flow of cheap Chinese manufactured goods flowing to the United States, regardless of tariffs.  Simultaneously they need the returning higher valued dollars to prop-up their own diminishing currency.

.

Hang on folks…. this is going to continue:

President Trump Delivers Remarks on Shootings in El Paso and Dayton – (Video and Transcript)…


Earlier today President Donald Trump delivered remarks from the White House about the shooting incidents in El Paso, TX, and Dayton, OH.  [Video and Transcript]

.

[Transcript]  – THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. My fellow Americans, this morning, our nation is overcome with shock, horror, and sorrow. This weekend, more than 80 people were killed or wounded in two evil attacks.

On Saturday morning, in El Paso, Texas, a wicked man went to a Walmart store, where families were shopping with their loved ones. He shot and murdered 20 people, and injured 26 others, including precious little children.

Then, in the early hours of Sunday morning in Dayton, Ohio, another twisted monster opened fire on a crowded downtown street. He murdered 9 people, including his own sister, and injured 27 others.

The First Lady and I join all Americans in praying and grieving for the victims, their families, and the survivors. We will stand by their side forever. We will never forget.

These barbaric slaughters are an assault upon our communities, an attack upon our nation, and a crime against all of humanity. We are outraged and sickened by this monstrous evil, the cruelty, the hatred, the malice, the bloodshed, and the terror. Our hearts are shattered for every family whose parents, children, husbands, and wives were ripped from their arms and their lives. America weeps for the fallen.

We are a loving nation, and our children are entitled to grow up in a just, peaceful, and loving society. Together, we lock arms to shoulder the grief, we ask God in Heaven to ease the anguish of those who suffer, and we vow to act with urgent resolve.

I want to thank the many law enforcement personnel who responded to these atrocities with the extraordinary grace and courage of American heroes.

I have spoken with Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, as well as Mayor Dee Margo of El Paso, Texas, and Mayor Nan Whaley of Dayton, Ohio, to express our profound sadness and unfailing support.

Today, we also send the condolences of our nation to President Obrador of Mexico, and all the people of Mexico, for the loss of their citizens in the El Paso shooting. Terrible, terrible thing.

I have also been in close contact with Attorney General Barr and FBI Director Wray. Federal authorities are on the ground, and I have directed them to provide any and all assistance required — whatever is needed.

The shooter in El Paso posted a manifesto online consumed by racist hate. In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America. Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart, and devours the soul. We have asked the FBI to identify all further resources they need to investigate and disrupt hate crimes and domestic terrorism — whatever they need.

We must recognize that the Internet has provided a dangerous avenue to radicalize disturbed minds and perform demented acts. We must shine light on the dark recesses of the Internet, and stop mass murders before they start. The Internet, likewise, is used for human trafficking, illegal drug distribution, and so many other heinous crimes. The perils of the Internet and social media cannot be ignored, and they will not be ignored.

In the two decades since Columbine, our nation has watched with rising horror and dread as one mass shooting has followed another — over and over again, decade after decade.

We cannot allow ourselves to feel powerless. We can and will stop this evil contagion. In that task, we must honor the sacred memory of those we have lost by acting as one people. Open wounds cannot heal if we are divided. We must seek real, bipartisan solutions. We have to do that in a bipartisan manner. That will truly make America safer and better for all.

First, we must do a better job of identifying and acting on early warning signs. I am directing the Department of Justice to work in partisan — partnership with local, state, and federal agencies, as well as social media companies, to develop tools that can detect mass shooters before they strike.

As an example, the monster in the Parkland high school in Florida had many red flags against him, and yet nobody took decisive action. Nobody did anything. Why not?

Second, we must stop the glorification of violence in our society. This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace. It is too easy today for troubled youth to surround themselves with a culture that celebrates violence. We must stop or substantially reduce this, and it has to begin immediately. Cultural change is hard, but each of us can choose to build a culture that celebrates the inherent worth and dignity of every human life. That’s what we have to do.

Third, we must reform our mental health laws to better identify mentally disturbed individuals who may commit acts of violence and make sure those people not only get treatment, but, when necessary, involuntary confinement. Mental illness and hatred pulls the trigger, not the gun.

Fourth, we must make sure that those judged to pose a grave risk to public safety do not have access to firearms, and that, if they do, those firearms can be taken through rapid due process. That is why I have called for red flag laws, also known as extreme risk protection orders.

Today, I am also directing the Department of Justice to propose legislation ensuring that those who commit hate crimes and mass murders face the death penalty, and that this capital punishment be delivered quickly, decisively, and without years of needless delay.

These are just a few of the areas of cooperation that we can pursue. I am open and ready to listen and discuss all ideas that will actually work and make a very big difference.

Republicans and Democrats have proven that we can join together in a bipartisan fashion to address this plague. Last year, we enacted the STOP School Violence and Fix NICS Acts into law, providing grants to improve school safety and strengthening critical background checks for firearm purchases. At my direction, the Department of Justice banned bump stocks. Last year, we prosecuted a record number of firearms offenses. But there is so much more that we have to do.

Now is the time to set destructive partisanship aside — so destructive — and find the courage to answer hatred with unity, devotion, and love. Our future is in our control. America will rise to the challenge. We will always have and we always will win. The choice is ours and ours alone. It is not up to mentally ill monsters; it is up to us.

If we are able to pass great legislation after all of these years, we will ensure that those who were attacked will not have died in vain.

May God bless the memory of those who perished [DEL: in Toledo :DEL] . May God protect them. May God protect all of those from Texas to Ohio. May God bless the victims and their families. May God bless America.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

END 10:18 A.M. EDT

Advertisements

Wall Street Multinationals React to U.S-China Trade Decoupling…


Originally outlined over two years ago. Reposted by request, because we are watching it play out in real time: Believe me, at the heart of the professional/political opposition the issue is the money; there are trillions at stake.

President Trump’s MAGAnomic trade and foreign policy agenda is jaw-dropping in scale, scope and consequence. There are multiple simultaneous aspects to each policy objective; they have been outlined for a long time, even before the election victory in November ’16.

If you get too far into the weeds the larger picture can be lost. CTH objective is to continue pointing focus toward the larger horizon, and then at specific inflection points to dive into the topic and explain how each moment is connected to the larger strategy.

Today we repost an earlier dive into how MAGAnomic policy interacts with multinational Wall Street, the stock market, the U.S. financial system and perhaps your personal financial value. Again, reference and source material is included at the end of the outline.

If you understand the basic elements behind the new dimension in American economics, you already understand how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. The intentional shift in monetary policy is what created the distance between two entirely divergent economic engines.

REMEMBER […] there had to be a point where the value of the second economy (Wall Street) surpassed the value of the first economy (Main Street).

Investments, and the bets therein, expanded outside of the USA. hence, globalist investing…. investing in foreign manufacturing; multinational corporations moved manufacturing outside the U.S. and into Asia (China).

However, a second more consequential aspect happened simultaneously. The politicians became more valuable to the Wall Street team than the Main Street team; and Wall Street had deeper pockets because their economy was now larger.

As a consequence Wall Street started funding political candidates and asking for legislation and trade policies that benefited their, now international, interests.

When Main Street was purchasing the legislative influence the outcomes were -generally speaking- beneficial to Main Street, and by direct attachment those outcomes also benefited the average American inside the real economy.

When Wall Street began purchasing the legislative influence, the outcomes therein became beneficial to Wall Street. Those benefits are detached from improving the livelihoods of main street Americans because the benefits are “global”.

Global financial interests, multinational investment interests -and corporations therein- became the primary filter through which the DC legislative outcomes were considered.

There is a natural disconnect. (more)

As an outcome of national monetary policy allowing the blending of commercial banking with institutional investments (Glass-Stegal repeal), something happened on Wall Street that few understand. If we take the time to understand what happened we can understand why the Stock Market grew and what risks exist today as U.S. policy is reversed to benefit Main Street.

President Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin have already begun assembling and delivering a new banking system.

Instead of attempting to put Glass-Stegal regulations back into massive banking systems, the Trump administration began supporting a parallel, smaller financial system, of less-regulated small commercial banks, credit unions and traditional lenders who can operate to the benefit of Main Street without the burdensome regulation of the mega-banks and multinationals. This really is one of the more brilliant solutions to work around a uniquely American economic problem.

♦ When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.

Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their traditional role as traded stocks on the U.S. Stock Market and were evaluated accordingly. However, over time investment instruments -which are secondary to actual company results- created a sub-set within Wall Street that detached from actual bottom line company results.

The resulting secondary financial market system was essentially ‘investment markets’. Both ordinary company stocks and the investment market stocks operate on the same stock exchanges. But the underlying valuation is tied to entirely different metrics.

Financial products were developed (as investment instruments) that are essentially wagers or bets on the outcomes of actual companies traded on Wall Street. Those bets/wagers form the hedge markets and are [essentially] people trading on expectations of performance. The “derivatives market” is the ‘betting system’.

♦Ford Motor Company (only chosen as a commonly known entity) has a stock valuation based on their actual company performance in the market of manufacturing and consumer purchasing of their product. However, there can be thousands of financial instruments wagering on the actual outcome of their performance, both domestically and internationally.

There are two initial bets on these outcomes that form the basis for Hedge-fund activity. Bet ‘A’ that Ford hits a profit number, or bet ‘B’ that they don’t. There are financial instruments created to place each wager. [The wagers form the derivatives.] But it doesn’t stop there.

Additionally, more financial products are created that bet on the outcomes of the A/B bets. A secondary financial product might find two sides betting on both A outcome and B outcome.

Party C bets the “A” bet is accurate, and party D bets against the A bet. Party E bets the “B” bet is accurate, and party F bets against the B. If it stopped there we would only have six total participants. But it doesn’t stop there, it goes on and on and on…

The outcome of the bets forms the basis for the tenuous investment markets. The important part to understand is that the investment funds are not necessarily attached to the original company stock, they are now attached to the outcome of bet(s). Hence an inherent disconnect is created.

Subsequently, if the actual stock doesn’t meet it’s expected P-n-L outcome (if the company actually doesn’t do well), and if the financial investment was betting against the outcome, the value of the investment actually goes up. The company performance and the investment bets on the outcome of that performance are two entirely different aspects of the stock market. [Hence two metrics.]

♦Understanding the disconnect between an actual company on the stock market, and the bets for and against that company stock, helps to understand what can happen when monetary policy and trade policy is geared toward helping the underlying company (Main Street MAGAnomics), and not toward the bets therein (Wall St – Investment).

The U.S. stock markets’ overall value can increase with Main Street policy, and yet the investment class can simultaneously decrease in value even though the company(ies) in the stock market is/are doing better. This detachment is critical to understand because the ‘real economy’ is based on the company, the ‘paper economy’ is based on the financial investment instruments betting on the company.

Trillions can be lost in investment instruments, and yet the overall stock market -as valued by company operations/profits- can increase.

Conversely, there are now classes of companies on the U.S. stock exchange that never make a dime in profit, yet the value of the company increases. This dynamic is possible because the financial investment bets are not connected to the bottom line profit. (Examples include Tesla Motors, Uber and Amazon, and a host of internet stocks.) It is this investment group of companies that stands to lose the most if/when the underlying system of betting on them stops or slows.

Specifically due to most recent U.S. monetary policy, modern multinational banks, including all of the investment products therein, are more closely attached to this investment system on Wall Street. It stands to reason they are at greater risk of financial losses overall with a shift in policy.

That financial and economic risk is the basic reason behind Trump and Mnuchin putting a protective, secondary and parallel, banking system in place for Main Street.

Big multinational banks can suffer big losses from their overseas investments; and yet the Main Street economy can continue growing, and have access to capital, uninterrupted.

U.S. companies who have actual connection to a growing internal U.S. economy can succeed; based on the advantages of the new economic environment and MAGA trade policy, specifically in the areas of manufacturing, domestic supply chain and the ancillary benefactors.

Meanwhile U.S. investment assets (multinational investment portfolios) that are disconnected from the actual results of those benefiting U.S. companies, and as a consequence also disconnected from the U.S. economic expansion, can simultaneously drop in value even though the U.S. economy is thriving.  Those assets are heavily dependent on prior overseas investments in China.

♦China and the EU have devalued their currency, and continue to devalue their currency, in an effort to block the impacts from President Trump and the ‘America First’ trade policy.  In essence they are trying to maintain their part of a global economic system of manufacturing and export.

However, because those currencies are pegged against the dollar, the resulting effect is a rising dollar value. In essence, the globalist IMF is now blaming President Trump for having a strong economy that forces international competition to devalue their currency.

That’s the stupid hypocrisy of global banking outlooks. They make a decision to devalue their currency, which causes the dollar value to rise, and then turn around and blame the U.S. dollar for being overvalued.

The root cause of the devaluation is unaddressed in the Wall Street/Globalist argument. The EU and China are trying to retain their global manufacturing position and offset the impact of President Trump’s tariffs by lowering the end value of their exports.

President Trump is now engaged in a massive and multidimensional effort to re-balance the entire global trade and wealth dynamic. By putting tariffs on foreign imports he has counterbalanced the never-ending Marshall Plan trade program and demanded renegotiation(s).

Trump’s trade goal is reciprocity; free and fair trade.  However, the EU and Asia, specifically China, don’t want to give up a decades-long multi-generational advantage. This is part of the fight.

Because so many shifts -policy nudges- have taken place in the past several decades few academics and even fewer MSM observers are able to understand or explain how Trump planned to get off the service-driven economic path and chart a better course.

President Trump began a process for less dependence on foreign companies for cheap goods, (the cornerstone of a service economy), and began a return to a more balanced U.S. larger economic model where the manufacturing and a production base can be re-established and competitive based on American entrepreneurship and innovation.

No other economy in the world innovates like the U.S.A, Trump sees this as a key advantage across all industry – including manufacturing.  The benefit of cheap overseas labor, which is considered a global market disadvantage for the U.S, is offset by utilizing innovation and energy independence.  Additionally, the wage rates in the Asian manufacturing economies have risen as their national wealth has increased.

The third highest variable cost of goods beyond raw materials first, labor second, is energy.  By unleashing the energy sector -fully developed- the manufacturing price of any given product will allow for global trade competition even with higher U.S. wage prices.

In 2019 the Total Cost of Production (TCP) is now entirely different than it was in 2016.

The U.S. has a key strategic advantage with raw manufacturing materials such as: iron ore, coal, steel, precious metals and vast mineral assets which are needed in most new modern era manufacturing.  Trump’s policies stopped selling those valuable national assets to countries we compete against – they belong to the American people, they should be used for the benefit of American citizens. Period.

As the U.S. economy expands; and as blue-collar manufacturing returns; the demand for labor increases, and as a consequence so too does the U.S. wage rate (currently +3.4%) which was stagnant (or non-existent) for the past three decades.  Total compensation for U.S. workers is now growing at a +5.5 percent rate.

As the wage rate increases, and as the economy expands, the governmental dependency model is reshaped and simultaneously receipts to the U.S. treasury improve. More money into the U.S Treasury and less dependence on welfare programs have a combined exponential impact. You gain a dollar, and have no need to spend a dollar.

As the GDP of the U.S. expands, we stop thinking about how to best divide a limited economic pie, and begin thinking about how many more economic pies we can create.

So yeah, there’s going to be pain – for them: massive economic pain as the process of reestablishing a fair trading system is rebuilt; and also for U.S. interests that are dependent on returns from prior investments in China.

The dynamic of reciprocal and balanced trade is the essential policy that benefits Main Street USA.  Unfortunately, in the initial phase where putting ‘America First’ is the priority, the policy is against the interests of the multinationals on Wall Street connected to Chinese manufacturing.

As a result, President Trump has to fight adverse economic opponents on multiple fronts…. and their purchased mercenary army we know as DC politicians….

♦The Modern Third Dimension in American Economics – HERE

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

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

The FED Begins to Question the Economic Assumptions – HERE

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

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

How to Fail at Almost Everything with Scott Adams


Published on Sep 14, 2017

Recorded on July 12, 2017 The Dilbert comic strip artist and political philosopher Scott Adams sits down with Peter Robinson to discuss his book How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big. He discusses with Peter his theory of “talent stacking,” the idea that rather than being an expert in one particular skill (i.e., Tiger Woods and golf), one can become successful by stacking a variety of complementary nonexpert skills. Adams demonstrates how talent stacking has been beneficial in his life because he has stacked comic artist skills with his MBA and experience in corporate environments to create a wildly successful comic strip that resulted in spin-off books, a television series, a video game, and merchandise. His business skills gave him the tools to create a business satire comic strip and the skill set to manage the business that evolved from that strip. Adams also discusses how he uses his Dilbert blog to discuss his political philosophies and observations about the Trump administration. He wrote blogposts about the 2016 election and predicted that Donald Trump would win based on President Trump’s talent stack as a media mogul and businessman who had spent significant time in the public eye so was immune to scandals and thick-skinned enough to handle what the media and other politicians would throw at him. Adams argues that President Trump is one of the best branders, influencers, and persuaders he has ever seen, in that the president uses persuasive techniques in debates and on social media as a way to get people to do what he wants. Adams contends that President Trump’s persuasive techniques will help solve the problem of North Korea because he has already set up China to get involved by intimating that it tried and failed. Adams believes this will cause China to get involved to save face. Scott Adams and Peter Robinson finish by chatting about Adams’s views on the story arc of life. Adams says that he believes he started intentionally selfish so that by the end of his life he can give away all of his wealth, knowledge, and wisdom, a process he says he has already begun. They also briefly discuss his new book, Win Bigly, about the persuasive strategies of Donald Trump. Scott Adams is releasing his new book, Win Bigly, in October 2017. For the full transcript go to http://www.hoover.org/research/how-fa… Interested in exclusive Uncommon Knowledge content? Check out Uncommon Knowledge on social media!

 

President Trump Impromptu Presser Departing Morristown New Jersey – (Video and Transcript)…


[Unrelated, Chinese financial markets are off-the-charts tonight as the currency is dropping like a rock, Beijing is intervening to stop the bleeding…. and Hong Kong workers are going on strike. Yikes, could be trouble.]

Earlier today while departing from Morristown municipal airport, President Trump and First Lady Melania delivered remarks to the media. [Video and Transcript below]

“Hate has no place in our country”…

.

[Transcript] –  THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. I want to extend our condolences to the people of El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. They’re incredible people and they’ve been through a lot.

I just want to also thank the law enforcement in both places. The job they’ve done is incredible. I also want to congratulate them. I mean, nobody could have done what they’ve done. This could have been — as bad as it was, it could have been so much worse.

I just have to thank them. The job they’ve done is incredible. And they were right on the ball in El Paso; they were there so quickly. And, in Dayton, in less than a minute — think of the damage he did in just a short period of time — in less than a minute, the law enforcement acted and killed him. And it would have been unbelievable. It was — it would have been — it was horrible, but it would have been so much worse. It could have been so much worse.

I just want to say that these are two incredible places. We love the people. Hate has no place in our country. And we’re going to take care of it.

I spoke with Attorney General Bill Barr at length; I spoke to Christopher Wray, Director of the FBI; I spoke to the governors — both governors — and we’re doing a lot of work. A lot of people are working right now — a lot of law enforcement people and others. I spoke to members of Congress about whatever we can do and a lot of — a lot of things are being done right now, as we speak.

I’ll be making a statement tomorrow sometime. But just on behalf of our First Lady and myself, condolences to all. We have to get it stopped. This has been going on for years — for years and years — in our country. And we have to get it stopped.

So thank you very much. And I will be making a statement tomorrow at about 10 o’clock. And I’ll see you there. Thank you all very much.

Q What are you going to do about the problem of automatic and semiauto- —

THE PRESIDENT: You have to talk up.

Q The gun problem. What are you going to do about it? What — how are you going to address it?

THE PRESIDENT: We’re talking to a lot of people, and a lot of things are in the works, and a lot of good things. And we have done much more than most administrations. And it does — it’s not — really not talked about very much, but we’ve done, actually, a lot. But perhaps more has to be done.

But this is also a mental illness problem. If you look at both of these cases, this is mental illness. These are peop- — really, people that are very, very seriously mentally ill. So a lot of things are happening. A lot of things are happening right now.

And I will see you tomorrow at 10 o’clock. Thank you.

END 4:35 P.M. EDT

Explosive Interview – Maria Bartiromo Drops Big News With Trey Gowdy….


Whooo doggies, Maria Bartiromo outdid herself this morning with an interview segment just packed with information, insight and discussion into the DOJ and FBI corruption and DNI Ratcliffe’s nomination. (h/t Michael Sheridan)  This is a MUST WATCH:

After the first segment on the El Paso and Dayton shootings, Ms. Bartiromo segued into a discussion of George Papadopoulos and the secret informant transcripts; from recordings that were part of the FBI sting operation using U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper; and are now being held in evidence by U.S. Attorney John Durham and Inspector General Michael Horowitz. [Background] Keep in mind Gowdy has seen these transcripts.

According to Bartiromo those transcripts include FBI wire-taps of Halper attempting to get Papadopulos to accept assistance from Russia (delivering Clinton emails), and George Papadopoulos absolutely refusing to accept any engagement therein.  Confirming that outline, Gowdy notes there are more recordings (and transcripts) of a similar nature, where the FBI was attempting to bait other Trump campaign officials.

Additionally, Bartiromo confirms that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to meet with DNI nominee John Ratcliffe after his nomination; and exactly as we suspected it was the lack of support from the SSCI and McConnell that led to his nomination withdrawal. Stunning interview.

Also, the point brought up by Trey Gowdy contrasting the experience of John Ratcliffe and Senator Kamala Harris is exceptionally acute. Both Ratcliffe and Harris were State Prosecutors; Ratcliffe for Texas and Harris for California. Both Ratcliffe and Harris sit on the same committees – one House and one Senate… Yet Ratcliffe was accused of being unqualified for the job of ODNI, while Harris is claimed -by those same voices- to be qualified for President.

An excellent rebuttal point by Gowdy.

A stunning admission earlier this year by The New York Times described how the FBI enlisted a female agent to work the “operation” in the U.K. during August-September 2016 posing as an aide for U.S. intelligence asset/FBI informant Stefan Halper.

Halper was an FBI operative and Cambridge professor who set up meetings with Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos. The female agent used a fake name, Azra Turk, and presented herself as an assistant to Stefan Halper; however, she was actually an undercover intelligence operative of the FBI.

NYT […] The woman had set up the meeting to discuss foreign policy issues. But she was actually a government investigator posing as a research assistant, according to people familiar with the operation. The F.B.I. sent her to London as part of the counterintelligence inquiry opened that summer to better understand the Trump campaign’s links to Russia.

The American government’s affiliation with the woman, who said her name was Azra Turk, is one previously unreported detail of an operation that has become a political flash point in the face of accusations by President Trump and his allies that American law enforcement and intelligence officials spied on his campaign to undermine his electoral chances. Last year, he called it“Spygate.”

Ms. Turk went to London to help oversee the politically sensitive operation, working alongside a longtime informant, the Cambridge professor Stefan A. Halper. The move was a sign that the bureau wanted in place a trained investigator for a layer of oversight, as well as someone who could gather information for or serve as a credible witness in any potential prosecution that emerged from the case.

A spokesman for the F.B.I. declined to comment, as did a lawyer for Mr. Halper, Robert D. Luskin. Last year, Bill Priestap, then the bureau’s top counterintelligence agent who was deeply involved in the Russia inquiry, told Congress during a closed-door hearing that there was no F.B.I. conspiracy against Mr. Trump or his campaign.

Obviously the group (CIA, DOJ and FBI) who constructed the political surveillance and spy operations are trying to present their side of the story, prior to investigation by AG Bill Barr and the soon-to-be-released IG report.

The London operation yielded no fruitful information, but F.B.I. officials have called the bureau’s activities in the months before the election both legal and carefully considered under extraordinary circumstances.

They are now under scrutiny as part of an investigation by Michael E. Horowitz, the Justice Department inspector general. He could make the results public in May or June, Attorney General William P. Barr has said. Some of the findings are likely to be classified.

It is unclear whether Mr. Horowitz will find fault with the F.B.I.’s decision to have Ms. Turk, whose real name is not publicly known, meet with Mr. Papadopoulos.

Mr. Horowitz has focused among other things on the activities of Mr. Halper, who accompanied Ms. Turk in one of her meetings with Mr. Papadopoulos and also met with him and other campaign aides separately. The bureau might also have seen Ms. Turk’s role as essential for protecting Mr. Halper’s identity as an informant if prosecutors ever needed court testimony about their activities.

Notice how the leaker of this information to the New York Times appears to have direct knowledge of exactly what IG Horowitz has investigated. This leaked story is coming from within the still employed corrupt elements of the FBI.

[…] This account was described in interviews with people familiar with the F.B.I. activities of Mr. Halper, Ms. Turk and the inspector general’s investigation. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the subjects of a continuing inquiry.

As part of Mr. Horowitz’s investigation, his office has examined Mr. Halper’s past work as an F.B.I. informant and asked witnesses about whether agents had adequate control of Mr. Halper’s activities, people familiar with the inquiry have said.

While in London in 2016, Ms. Turk exchanged emails with Mr. Papadopoulos, saying meeting him had been the “highlight of my trip,” according to messages provided by Mr. Papadopoulos. “I am excited about what the future holds for us :),” she wrote.

Notice how The New York Times is intentionally conflating the timing and sequencing of events in this article.

[…] One of the agents involved in the Russia inquiry, a seasoned counterintelligence investigator out of New York, turned to Mr. Halper, whom he viewed as a reliable and trusted informant. They had a longstanding relationship; the agent had even spoken at an intelligence seminar that Mr. Halper taught at the University of Cambridge, discussing his work investigating a Russian espionage ring known as the illegals.

[That section tells the possibilities of who the FBI agent might be. [TWE] George J. Ennis, Jr. (ASAC NY Counterintelligence), Alan E. Kohler Jr. (SSA, NY Counterintelligence) and Stephen M. Somma (SA, NY Counterintelligence) attended the intelligence seminar by Stefan Halper in 2011 (LINK). Alan Kohler, FBI representative at the United States Embassy in London, returned to the seminar in May 2014 (LINKGeorge Ennis was named the Special Agent In Charge of the Administrative Division at the New York Field Office on April 1, 2015, having had a background in counterterrorism and counterintelligence. (LINK)]

Mr. Halper had the right résumé for the task. He was a foreign policy expert who had worked for the Pentagon. He had been gathering information for the F.B.I. for about two decades and had good contacts in Chinese and Russian government circles that he could use to arrange meetings with high-ranking officials, according to a person briefed on Mr. Halper’s relationship with the F.B.I.

The F.B.I. instructed Mr. Halper to set up a meeting in London with Mr. Papadopoulos but gave him few details about the broader investigation, a person familiar with the episode said.

His job was to figure out the extent of any contacts between Trump campaign advisers and Russia. Mr. Halper used his position as a respected academic to introduce himself to both Mr. Papadopoulos and Mr. Page, whom he also met with several times. He arranged a meeting with Mr. Papadopoulos in London to discuss a Mediterranean natural gas project, offering $3,000 for his time and a policy paper.

[…] The F.B.I. also decided to send Ms. Turk to take part in the operation, people familiar with it said, and to pose as Mr. Halper’s assistant. For the F.B.I., placing such a sensitive undertaking in the hands of a trusted government investigator was essential.

British intelligence officials were also notified about the operation, the people familiar with the operation said, but it was unclear whether they provided assistance. A spokeswoman for the British government declined to comment.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly claimed that British intelligence spied on his campaign, an accusation the British government has vigorously denied. Last month, the president quoted on Twitter an accusation that the British had spied on his campaign and added: “WOW! It is now just a question of time before the truth comes out, and when it does, it will be a beauty!”

When Mr. Papadopoulos arrived in London on Sept. 15, he received a text message from Ms. Turk. She invited him for drinks.

In his book, “Deep State Target,” Mr. Papadopoulos described her as attractive and said she almost immediately began questioning him about whether the Trump campaign was working with Russia, he wrote.

Mr. Papadopoulos was baffled. “There is no way this is a Cambridge professor’s research assistant,” he recalled thinking, according to his book.

The day after meeting Ms. Turk, Mr. Papadopoulos met briefly with Mr. Halper at a private London club, and Ms. Turk joined them. The two men agreed to meet again, arranging a drink at the Sofitel hotel in London’s posh West End.

Notice how Ms. Turk is the primary focus of the interaction.

Turk emailed Papadopoulos; Turk text’d Papadopoulos; Turk met him for drinks etc. However, Halper only “met briefly” with Papadopoulos with Turk present. FBI agent Turk is the working operative here, agent Halper is simply the inconsequential cover.

During that conversation, Mr. Halper immediately asked about hacked emails and whether Russia was helping the campaign, according to Mr. Papadopoulos’s book. Angry over the accusatory questions, Mr. Papadopoulos ended the meeting.

The F.B.I. failed to glean any information of value from the encounters, and Ms. Turk returned to the United States.

Mr. Halper continued to work with the F.B.I. and later met with Mr. Page repeatedly in the Washington area. The two had coincidentally run into each other in July as well at Cambridge, according to people familiar with the episode.

At the urging of Mr. Page, he met another campaign aide, Sam Clovis, Mr. Trump’s campaign co-chairman, to discuss foreign policy. (read more)

It’s obvious the people who ran these spy operations into the Trump campaign are nervous now. After years of denying spying; and after weeks of apoplectic pearl-clutching over AG Barr’s use of the word “spy”; the New York Times now outlines spying directly?

Make sure you go back and re-read the House testimony transcript of how Papadopoulos describes this interaction with Turk and Halper (embed below). Start around page 101

George Papadopoulos@GeorgePapa19

I agree with everything in this superb article except “Azra Turk” clearly was not FBI. She was CIA and affiliated with Turkish intel. She could hardly speak English and was tasked to meet me about my work in the energy sector offshore Israel/Cyprus which Turkey was competing with https://twitter.com/MarkMazzettiNYT/status/1123997367756296192 

Mark Mazzetti@MarkMazzettiNYT

NEW: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/fbi-government-investigator-trump.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share 

3,359 people are talking about this

George Papadopoulos@GeorgePapa19

I think the meeting between the President and the U.K. PM will be even more interesting now. The day there was a CIA op against me in London, Halper/Turk, the #2 at the U.K. ministry of foreign affairs invited me to the offices to continue to spy on me and probe me more.

1,273 people are talking about this

(Papadopoulos Testimony to House Committee start around page 101)

.

It must be first noted that Devin Nunes outlined the two-page “Electronic Communication” or “EC” from CIA Director John Brennan to FBI Director James Comey was not from official intelligence channels. Meaning the intelligence used to originate Crossfire Hurricane did not come through officials Five-Eyes intelligence communication.

When we reviewed the documents recently released by the Australian government, there was a disparity between the dates of George Papadopoulos meeting Australia’s High Commissioner Alexander Downer. The Weissmann report seemed to put the meeting as May 6th, 2016, but Papadopoulos and Downer (Australian docs) put the London meeting on May 10th.

Here’s the excerpt from Special Counsel Weissmann/Mueller report that describes the events.  Note Weissmann assigns a meeting date of May 6th, 2016:

[Page #89, Muller Report]

The paragraphs and the footnote direct the reader to assume a meeting between Papadopoulos and Downer on May 6th, and later the communication from Downer on July 26th, as the impetus for Crossfire Hurricane.  However, there’s some strategic conflation in the presentation because Downer and Papadopoulos didn’t meet until May 10th.

Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller carefully word the paragraphs because they don’t want the background of the May 6th, 2016, event attached to western intelligence.

Sneaky.

When Weissmann/Mueller write: “On May 6th, 2016, 10 days after that meeting with Mifsud, Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government“… they are not writing about Alexander Downer.

They are writing about an aide to Downer, Erika Thompson.

As noted in Papadopoulos’ book:

After meeting with Downer’s aide, Erika Thompson on May 6th, she sets up a meeting between George Papadopoulos and her boss for May 10th.  The meeting is put on the official schedule for the Australian Ambassador to the U.K:

[Note in the meeting schedule the dates/times are listed in both Australian and U.K. time zones.]  On May 10th, 2016, Ms Erika Thompson and Mr. Alexander Downer then meet with George Papadopoulos.

After the meeting, Ambassador Downer reports back to the Australian government on his conversation with Papadopoulos. [As noted in the recent document release]:

The details of the conversation, and how Alexander Downer viewed the information from Papadopoulos is heavily redacted.  Essentially, he writes out what the Trump foreign policy seems to be from the perspective of George Papadopoulos.  This would be typical for any government to assemble the views and perspectives of a potential presidential nominee.

Additionally, Downer was a major supporter of Bill and Hillary Clinton; but in general terms, any personal bias is irrelevant for the purposes of outlining information from the Trump campaign that might be useful later on in understanding how the relationship between Australia and the U.S. might evolve.

As noted in the Weissmann/Mueller report, it is from this May 10th, 2016, meeting where  later communication from Ambassador Downer, July 26th, 2016, is referenced as the origin of Crossfire Hurricane.  However, here’s where it gets interesting.  Notice how Mueller presents the May 6th conversation as confirmation of the information from Joseph Mifsud, and not May 10th.

Weissmann and Mueller are saying the information: “that the Trump campaign had received information from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton”, came from Erika Thompson on May 6th, 2016.

Weissmann/Mueller are NOT saying that information came from Alexander Downer, despite the connection to the footnote that now appears to be intentionally conflating the origin of their claim.  They are “technically” saying the information came from Erika Thompson.

This makes sense, because Downer has denied that Papadopoulos ever brought up anything about Clinton “dirt”, or Clinton emails with him in the May 10th meeting.

Now the origin of this set-up takes on a new understanding.

Remember, a large portion of the CIA’s foreign agents work overseas as members of various U.S. embassies.  The U.S. State Department is the cover for a lot of CIA work; reference the “Benghazi Consulate” etc.

Rather than keep writing “U.S. intelligence officers”, and/or “U.S. intelligence assets”, let us just use the word “spies” to make things more honest and easier to understand.

Also consider “unofficial channels” as useful to a set-up; and “official channels” as part of a needed legitimacy for this operation.

George Papadopoulos was contacted by two members of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA),Terrence Dudley and Greg Baker, working out of the U.S. embassy in London.  Two American spies working in London put Papadopoulos in contact with their ally/counterpart in the Australian Embassy, Erika Thompson. [ie. ‘unofficial channels’]

Erika Thompson takes it from there… and sets up the meeting with Alexander Downer which will later be used to take an ‘unofficial channel’ and turn it into an ‘official channel’.

Now, which one did the CIA/FBI use: “unofficial” or “official”?   For the answer look at what Weissmann and Mueller say in their report.

The May 6th, 2016, Erika Thompson’s unofficial channel is cited for the quotation as to what Papadopoulos was claimed to have said…. as Papadopoulos is referencing information from Maltese Professor Joseph Mifsud, another unofficial channel.

See how that set-up was played?

And then there’s this:

The FBI Director of Counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, just happened to be in London on the exact same dates the ‘unofficial’ operation was happening… Now things really come into focus.

Remember, this is all happening in May, long before the official launch of the “official” FBI counterintelligence operation known as Crossfire Hurricane, July 31st, 2016.

What happens two days after Crossfire Hurricane is launched? …back to London: On August 2, 2016, Special Agent Peter Strzok and another agent at the Federal Bureau of Investigation met with Alexander Downer in London to discuss his conversation with Papadopoulos further. Strzok then received reading materials, which he texted about to Lisa Page.

Sunday Talks: Peter Navarro -vs- Chris Wallace – Fox Jumps Shark into Full Multinational Propaganda Mode…


It has always been clear that Fox News pundit Chris Wallace is a defender of all swamp activity based on his social network within the same cocktail circuit; however, today he completely dropped all pretense and launched a full propaganda effort on behalf of Wall Street, Multinational Corporations and the Global Financial Community.

White House Trade and Manufacturing Advisor Peter Navarro appears on Fox News and Wallace literally takes the talking points of Goldman Sachs Asian Investment Division, complete with graphics, and attempts to argue -despite empirical evidence to the contrary- that tariffs have made consumer prices rise.   This segment is just ridiculous:

.

To retain their export position -and offset the tariffs- China and the EU have devalued their currency; and China is directly subsiding their manufacturers.  A lower ¥uan, and a lower €uro make the value of the dollar rise.  That means it takes less dollars to import Chinese and European goods.  That means prices do not rise.  That’s just a fact.

Additionally, the graphic made by Fox News to push their propaganda is literally from Goldman Sachs, Asian Investment Division.  Look:

Also notice how they use 103% index to make it appear a big number.  Ridiculous.  It’s 3 percent… which entirely proves the point being made by Navarro and President Trump.  The 25% tariffs have been in place for over a year.  The Steel and Aluminum tariffs are almost two years old…. and yet the cumulative effect of all that is 3% to consumers?

DUH !!  That’s Navarro’s argument proved in Wallace’s stupid graphic.

Inflation is currently wiggling around 1.4 to 1.5 percent while the rest of the world tries to avoid higher prices to U.S. consumers because they don’t want to lose their market position in the most valuable economy, the USA.

Goldman Sachs, just like the rest of the Wall Street multinationals, have invested billions in overseas manufacturing while ignoring the impact to Main Street USA.   Now they are fighting to keep the ‘rust belt’ rusty.

The IMF is now upgrading their forecast of U.S. economic growth; and admitting -in essence- that President Trump’s America-First agenda is relocating global wealth back to the primary host nation known as the U.S.A.   The increase in their forecast isn’t a small increase, it is essentially adding .3 percent (from 2.3% to 2.6%) or $60 billion more.

The U.S. economy was the host for around 50 years of parasitic wealth exfiltration, or as most would say “distribution”.  [Note I use the term *exfiltration* because it better highlights that American citizens paid higher prices for stuff, and paid higher taxes within the overall economic scheme, than was needed.]

President Trump is the first and only president who said: “enough”, and prior politicians who didn’t stop the process were “stupid” etc. etc.  Obviously, he is 100% correct.

For the past 30 years the U.S. was a sucker to keep letting the process remain in place while we lost our manufacturing base to overseas incentives.  The investment process from Wall Street (removal of Glass-Stegal) only made the process much more severe and faster.  Wall Street was now investing in companies whose best bet (higher profit return) was to pour money overseas.  This process created the “Rust Belt”, and damn near destroyed the aggregate manufacturing industry.

Fast forward to 2017 through today, and President Trump is now engaged in a massive and multidimensional effort to re-balance the entire global wealth dynamic.  By putting tariffs on foreign imports he has counterbalanced the never-ending Marshal Plan trade program and demanded renegotiation(s).  Trump’s goal is reciprocity; however, the EU and Asia, specifically China, don’t want to give up a decades-long multi-generational advantage.  This is part of the fight.

One could argue that China’s rise happened inside this period, and as a consequence they have no comprehension of an economic history without the institutional advantages.  They’ve never competed with the U.S. under any terms of equivelence or fairness; they’ve only ever known the advantages.  Combine that with the Chinese communist mindset and you get the extreme severity of their position.

So yeah, there’s going to be pain – for them; massive economic pain – as the process of reestablishing a fair trading system is rebuilt.  This dynamic is the essence of reciprocity that benefits Main Street USA.  Unfortunately, putting ‘America First’ is now also against the interests of the multinationals on Wall Street; so President Trump has to fight adverse economic opponents on multiple fronts…. and their purchased mercenary army we know as DC politicians.

No-one, ever, could take on all these interests.  Think about it…  The EU, Asia, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, China, Russia, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Iran, U.S. Congress, Democrats, U.S. Senate, Wall Street, the Big Club, Lobbyists, Hollywood, Corporate Media (foreign and domestic), and the ankle-biters in Never Trump…. All of these financial interests are aligned against Main Street USA and against President Trump.

Rod Rosenstein Contacted Mueller About Special Counsel 14 Hours After Comey Fired…


During the congressional testimony of Robert Mueller, Representative Andy Biggs noted evidence of a phone call between Mueller and Rod Rosenstein on Wednesday May 10th, 2017, at 7:45am.

Listen carefully at the 2:26 point of the video.

.

♦James Comey was fired at approximately 5:00pm EST on Tuesday May 9th, 2017. That means Rosenstein first contacted Mueller about the special counsel appointment less than 15 hours after James Comey was fired.

♦According to his own admissions (NBC and CBS), Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe immediately began a criminal ‘obstruction’ investigation the next day, Wednesday May 10th; and he immediately enlisted Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

♦The next day, Thursday May 11th, 2017, Andrew McCabe testifies to congress. With the Comey firing fresh in the headlines, Senator Marco Rubio asked McCabe: “has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigation?”

McCabe responded: “So there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date. Quite simply put, sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.”

Also on Thursday May 11th, 2017, The New York Times printed an article, based on information seemingly leaked by James Comey, about a dinner conversation between the President and the FBI Director.   The “Loyalty” article.   [link]

Despite claiming he never revealed his memo content until May 16th, in hindsight this New York Times article on May 11th is the first article that seems to be based on Comey leaking his memo content to the media.

♦That New York Times article drew this response on Friday May 12th from President Trump:

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

James Comey better hope that there are no “tapes” of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!

79K people are talking about this

Again referencing McCabe’s own admissions, also on Friday May 12th McCabe met with DAG Rod Rosenstein to discuss the issues, referencing the criminal ‘obstruction’ case McCabe had opened just two days before.  According to McCabe:

… “[Rosenstein] asked for my thoughts about whether we needed a special counsel to oversee the Russia case. I said I thought it would help the investigation’s credibility. Later that day, I went to see Rosenstein again. This is the gist of what I said: I feel strongly that the investigation would be best served by having a special counsel.” (link)

According to Andy Biggs questioning of Mueller, on this same day – Friday May 12th – evidence shows Robert Mueller met “in person” with Rod Rosenstein.

♦On Saturday May 13th, 2017, another meeting between Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller, this time with Jeff Sessions also involved. [Per Andy Biggs]

♦Sunday May 14th, TBD

♦After the weekend, Monday May 15th, McCabe states he and Rosenstein conferred again about the Special Counsel approach. McCabe: “I brought the matter up with him again after the weekend.”

♦On Tuesday May 16th, 2017, Rod Rosenstein takes Robert Mueller to the White House for a meeting in the oval office between President Trump, VP Pence, Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein.    While they were meeting in the oval office, the following story was published by the New York Times (based on Comey memo leaks):

Also during the approximate time of this Oval Office meeting, Peter Strzok texts with Lisa Page about information relayed to him by Tashina Guahar (main justice) on behalf of Rod Rosenstein (who is at the White House).

Later that night, after the Oval Office meeting – According to the Mueller report, additional events on Tuesday May 16th, 2017:

Interesting that Tashina Gauhar was taking notes presumably involved in the 5/16/17 meeting between, Lisa PageRod Rosenstein, and Andrew McCabe. 

This meeting at Main Justice appears to be happening in the evening (“later that night”) after the visit to the White House with Robert Mueller.  This meeting appears to be Lisa Page, Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe; along with Tashina Gauhar taking notes.

Why is the Tuesday May 16th, 2017, date of additional importance?

QUESTION:

Why didn’t anyone ever ask Tashina “Tash” Guahar about the “wear a wire” comments?

♦ Wednesday May 17th, 2017:  The next day, May 17th, 2017, Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe go to brief the congressional “Gang-of-Eight”: Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, ¹Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Richard Burr and Mark Warner.

… […] “On the afternoon of May 17, Rosenstein and I sat at the end of a long conference table in a secure room in the basement of the Capitol. We were there to brief the so-called Gang of Eight—the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. Rosenstein had, I knew, made a decision to appoint a special counsel in the Russia case.”

[…] “After reminding the committee of how the investigation began, I told them of additional steps we had taken. Then Rod took over and announced that he had appointed a special counsel to pursue the Russia investigation, and that the special counsel was Robert Mueller.” (link)

Immediately following this May 17, 2017, Go8 briefing, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein notified the public of the special counsel appointment.

According to President Trump’s Attorney John Dowd, the White House was stunned by the decision. [Link] Coincidentally, AG Jeff Sessions was in the oval office for unrelated business when White House counsel Don McGahn came in and informed the group.  Jeff Sessions immediately offered his resignation, and Sessions’ chief-of-staff Jody Hunt went back to the Main Justice office to ask Rosenstein what the hell was going on.

This investigative ‘small group’ are the people inside Main Justice (DOJ) and FBI headquarters who redacted the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages; removed messages and communication antithetical to their goals; kept key documents and information away from congress; stalled any effort to expose the unlawful aspects of “SpyGate’ and the fraudulent foundation behind the Carter Page FISA application; and undermined any adverse discoveries in the leak investigations (James Wolfe) writ large.

This investigative small group didn’t change when Mueller arrived, they just retooled the focus of their effort based on new leadership and new objectives. Those who created the Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy case of 2016, evolved into creating the Trump obstructing justice case of 2017, 2018 and 2019.

Everything Mueller and Rosenstein were doing in late 2017 and throughout 2018 was intended to drag-out the Russia conspiracy narrative as long as possible, even though there was no actual Trump-Russia investigation taking place.

It was always the “obstruction” investigation that could lead to the desired result by Mueller’s team of taking down President Trump through evidence that would help Pelosi and Nadler achieve impeachment .  The “obstruction case” was the entirety of the case they were trying to make from May 2017 through to March 2019.

**Working on a more detailed timeline, more will follow.

Was 9/11 A Plot to Seize Power?


QUESTION: What is your view on the new demands for an investigation that there is “overwhelming evidence” that the buildings were brought down by explosives?

KD

ANSWER: I do not know about the Twin Towers, but I can say that the first World Trade Center bombers drew the World Trade Center on the wall of their cell in MCC with planes flying into it. There is no question that there was a terrorist attack. HOWEVER !!!!!!!! There is evidence, I know PERSONALLY, that the government knew what they were going to do. Do not confuse the fact that there were planted explosives to try to pretend there was not a terrorist attack. They just used the attack as cover.

I focus on building 7, which was never hit by any plane, yet it fell like a pancake and that was indicative of explosives. Curiously, the SEC was there and this is where they kept the evidence for court cases. Gun possession cases should have been dismissed but the prosecutors then showed photos of guns. The joke was that they used the same photo for everyone. Judges just accepted it and pronounced, “Take him away.” That is not the way the law is supposed to work.

I had tapes that would have put the whole New York banker crew in prison if we had a real government. There were tapes covering every manipulation they pulled off from rhodium to platinum and silver. It was the platinum manipulation that I had a tape of where they admitted to bribing to a Russian minister to “recall” their platinum to take an inventory. They forced platinum to rally, then the Russian minister announced they found “more” platinum to ensure the price would crash after they flipped their positions. Even Ford Motor Company was looking into suing over that manipulation.

All the evidence I had documenting each player and what they did was seized and vanished. My requests for documents were never honored. One is supposed to be entitled to discovery. There is no rule of law. You cannot win against the bankers. When I asked a New York lawyer why the bankers are never prosecuted, he smiles and laughed. His response: “You don’t shit where you eat!”

We will never have a secure financial market until someone is ready to clean up the corruption in New York City.

There is no question that 9/11 was the event that destroyed the constitution. We lost all of our privacy and rights ever since.

 

Devin Nunes Discusses IG Criminal Referral and DOJ Position on James Comey…


House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes appears on Fox News with Tucker Carlson to discuss the ongoing investigative situation with James Comey.

Representative Nunes highlights the difference between Inspector General Michael Horowitz and U.S. Attorney John Durham; noting there is a possibility the investigative review of Mr. Durham touches on a great deal more than IG Horowitz.  WATCH:

Here’s the opening statement by Tucker Carlson toward James Comey.

Advertisements