|Home||Switchboard||Unix Administration||Red Hat||TCP/IP Networks||Neoliberalism||Toxic Managers|
|May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)|
|News||Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism||Recommended Links||Peak cheap Energy and Oil Price Slump||Secular Stagnation under Neoliberalism||Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks: The efficient m hypothesis||Casino Capitalism|
|Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime||Neoliberal Attacks on Social Security||Unemployment||Inflation vs. Deflation||Coming Bond Squeeze||Notes on 401K plans||Vanguard|
|401K Investing Webliography||Retirement scams||Stock Market as a Ponzy scheme||Financial Sector Induced Systemic Instability||Neoclassical Pseudo Theories||The Great Stagnation||Investing in Vanguard Mutual Funds and ETFs|
|OIL ETNs||Peak Cheap Energy and Oil Price Slump||Notes on 100-your age investment strategy behavior in rigged markets||Chasing a trade||The Possibility Of No Mean Reversion||Junk Bonds For 401K Investors||Tax policies|
|John Kenneth Galbraith||The Roads We Take||Economics Bookshelf||Who Rules America||Financial Quotes||Financial Humor||Etc|
“When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product
of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done.”
John Maynard Keynes
"Life is a school of probabilities."
Neoliberal economics (aka casino capitalism) function from one crash to another. Risk is pervasively underpriced under neoliberal system, resulting in bubbles small and large which hit the economy periodically. The problem are not strictly economical or political. They are ideological. Like a country which adopted a certain religion follows a certain path, The USA behaviour after adoption of neoliberalism somewhat correlate with the behaviour of alcoholic who decided to booze himself to death. The difference is that debt is used instead of booze.
Hypertrophied role of financial sector under neoliberalism introduces strong positive feedback look into the economic system making the whole system unstable. Any attempts to put some sand into the wheels in the form of increasing transaction costs or jailing some overzealous bankers or hedge fund managers are blocked by political power of financial oligarchy, which is the actual ruling class under neoliberalism for ordinary investor (who are dragged into stock market by his/her 401K) this in for a very bumpy ride. I managed to observe just two two financial crashed under liberalism (in 2000 and 2008) out of probably four (Savings and loan crisis was probably the first neoliberal crisis). The next crash is given, taking into account that hypertrophied role of financial sector did not changes neither after dot-com crisis of 200-2002 not after 2008 crisis (it is unclear when and if it ended; in any case it was long getting the name of "Great Recession").
Timing of the next crisis is anybody's guess but it might well be closer then we assume. As Mark Twain aptly observed: "A thing long expected takes the form of the unexpected when at last it comes" ;-):
This morning that meant a stream of thoughts triggered by Paul Krugman’s most recent op-ed, particularly this:
Most of all, the vast riches being earned — or maybe that should be “earned” — in our bloated financial industry undermined our sense of reality and degraded our judgment.
Think of the way almost everyone important missed the warning signs of an impending crisis. How was that possible? How, for example, could Alan Greenspan have declared, just a few years ago, that “the financial system as a whole has become more resilient” — thanks to derivatives, no less? The answer, I believe, is that there’s an innate tendency on the part of even the elite to idolize men who are making a lot of money, and assume that they know what they’re doing.
As most 401K investors are brainwashing into being "over bullish", this page is strongly bearish in "perma-bear" fashion in order to serve as an antidote to "Barrons" style cheerleading. Funny, but this page is accessed mostly during periods of economic uncertainty. At least this was the case during the last two financial crisis(2000 and 2008). No so much during good times: the number of visits drops to below 1K a month.
Still I hope it plays a small but important role: to warn about excessive risk taking by 401K investors in neoliberal economic system. It designed to serve as a warning sign and inject a skeptical note into MSM coverage. There are not many such sites, so a warning about danger of taking excessive risk in 401K accounts under neoliberalism has definite value. The following cartoon from 2008 illustrated this point nicely
As far as I know lot of 401K investors are 100% or almost 100% invested at stocks. Including many of my friends. I came across a very relevant to this situation joke which nicely illustrated the ideas of this page:
Seven habits that help produce the anything-but-efficient markets that rule the world by Paul Krugman in Fortune.
1. Think short term.
2. Be greedy.
3. Believe in the greater fool
4. Run with the herd.
6. Be trendy
7. Play with other people's money
I would like to stress again that it is very difficult to "guess" when the next wave of crisis stikes us: "A thing long expected takes the form of the unexpected when at last it comes".
But mispricing of risk in 401K accounts is systemic for "overbullish" 401 investors, who expect that they will be able to jusp of the train in time, before the crash. Usually such expectations are false. And to sell in the market that can lose 10% in one day is not easy psychologically. I remember my feelings in 2001-2002 and again 2008-2009. That's why many people who planned to "jump" stay put and can temporarily lose 30 to 50% of value of their 401k account in a very short period of time (and if you think that S&P500 can't return to 1000, think again; its all depends on FED). At this point some freak out and sell their holdings making paper losses permanent.
Even for those who weathered the storm and held to their stock holdings, it is important to understand that paper losses were eliminated mostly by Fed money printing. As such risks remains as at one point FED might find itself out of ammunition. The fact that S&P500 recovered very nicely it does not diminish the risk of such behavior. There is no guarantee that the third crisis will behave like previous two.
Next crash will have a new key determinant: the attitude toward the US government (and here I mean the current government of Barack Obama) and Wall Street after 2008 is the lack of trust. That means that you need to hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Injection on so much money into financial system was a novel experiment which is not ended yet. So how it will end is anybody's guess. We are now in uncharted waters. I think when Putin called Bernanke a hooligan, he meant exactly this. Since Bernanke was printing money out of thin air to buy financial paper, his action were tantamount to shoplifting. In some way this probably is more similar to running meth labs inside Fed building. The system was injected with narcotics. Everybody felt better, but the mechanism behind it was not healthy.
The complexity of modern financial system is tremendous and how all those new financial instruments will behave under a new stress is unknown. At the same time in the Internet age we, the great unwashed masses, can't be keep in complete obscurity like in good old time. Many now know ( or at least suspect ) that the neoliberal "show must goes on" after 2008 is actually going strongly at their expense. And while open rebellion is impossible, that results in lack of trust which represents a problem for financial oligarchy which rules the country. The poor working slobs are told be grateful for Walmart's low (poverty-subsidized) prices. Middle class is told that their declining standard of living is a natural result of their lack of competitiveness in the market place. Classic "bread and circuses" policy still works but for how long it will continue to work it is unclear.
But nothing is really new under the sun. To more and more people it is now clear that today the US is trying to stave off the inevitable decline by resorting to all kinds of financial manipulations like previous empires; yesterday, it was the British Empire and if you go further back, you get the USSR, Hapsburg empire, Imperial Russia, Spanish empire, Venetian empire, Byzantium and Roman empire. The current "Secretary of Imperial Wars" (aka Secretary of Defense) Ashton Baldwin Carter is pretty open about this:
“We already see countries in the region trying to carve up these markets…forging many separate trade agreements in recent years, some based on pressure and special arrangements…. Agreements that…..leave us on the sidelines. That risks America’s access to these growing markets. We must all decide if we are going to let that happen. If we’re going to help boost our exports and our economy…and cement our influence and leadership in the fastest-growing region in the world; or if, instead, we’re going to take ourselves out of the game.”
For the US elite it might be a time to rethink its neocon stance due to which the US is exposing ourselves to the enmity of the rising economic powers, and blowing serious cash to maintain it hegemony via maintaining huge military budget, financing wars and color revolutions in distant countries. In a way the US foreign policy became a financial racket, and racket can't last forever because it incite strong opposition from other countries.
Neoliberalism (aka casino capitalism) as a social system entered the state of decline after 2008. Like communism before it stopped to be attractive to people. But unlike communism it proved to have greater staying power, surviving in zombie state as finanfial institutions preserved political power and in some cases even enhanced it. It is unclear how long it will say in this state. Much depends on the availability of "cheap oil" on which neoliberal globalization is based.
But the plausible hypothesis is that this social system like socialism in xUSSR space before entered down slope and might well be on its way to the cliff. Attempts to neo-colonize other states by the West became less successful and more costly (Compare Ukraine, Libya and Iraq with previous instances of color revolutions). Some became close to XIX century colonial conquests with a lot of bloodshed (from half million to over a million of Iraqis, by different estimates, died ). As always this is mainly the blood of locals, which is cheap.
Libya and Ukraine are two recent examples. Both countries are now destroyed (which might be the plan). In Ukraine population is thrown in object poverty with income of less that $5 a day for the majority of population. And there is no other way to expand markets but to try to "neo-colonize" new countries by putting them into ominous level of debt while exporting goods to the population on credit. That is not a long term strategy as Greece, Bulgaria, and now Spain and Portugal had shown. With shrinking markets stability of capitalism in general and neoliberalism in particular might decrease.
Several researchers points to increased importance Central banks now play in maintaining of the stability of the banking system. That's already a reversal of neoliberal dogma about free (read "unregulated") markets. Actually the tale about "free markets", as far as the USA is concerned, actually was from the very beginning mainly the product designed for export (read about Washington consensus).
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
May 16, 2018 | stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com
Is neoliberalism even a thing? This is the question posed by Ed Conway, who claims it is "not an ideology but an insult." I half agree.
I agree that the economic system we have is "hardly the result of a guiding ideology" and more the result of "happenstance".
I say this because neoliberalism is NOT the same as the sort of free market ideology proposed by Friedman and Hayek. If this were the case, it would have died on 13 October 2008 when the government bailed out RBS . In fact, though, as Will Davies and Adam Curtis have said, neoliberalism entails the use of an active state. A big part of neoliberalism is the use of the state to increase the power and profits of the 1% - capitalists and top managers. Increased managerialism, crony capitalism and tough benefit sanctions are all features of neoliberalism. In this respect, the EU's treatment of Greece was neoliberal – ensuring that banks got paid at the expense of ordinary people.
I suspect, though, that measures such as these were, as Ed says, not so much part of a single ideology as uncoordinated events. Tax cuts for the rich, public sector outsourcing and target culture, for example, were mostly justified by appeals to efficiency, and were not regarded even by their advocates as parts of a unified theory. To believe otherwise would be to subscribe to a conspiracy theory which gives too much credit to Thatcher and her epigones.
In this sense, I mostly agree with Paull Mason :
Neoliberalism is a time-limited global system sustained by coercive imposition of competitive behaviour, parasitic finance & privatisation.
I'm not sure about that word "system". Maybe it attributes too much systematization to neoliberals: perhaps unplanned order would be a better phrase. But it's better to think of neoliberalism as a bunch of arrangements ("system" if you remove connotations of design) rather than as an ideology. Ed has a point when he says that almost nobody fully subscribes to "neoliberal ideology": free market supporters, for example, don't defend crony capitalism.
And it's useful to have words for economic systems. Just as we speak of "post-war Keynesianism" to mean a bundle of policies and institutions of which Keynesian fiscal policy was only a small part, so we can speak of "neoliberalism" to describe our current arrangement. It's a better description than the horribly question-begging "late capitalism".
This isn't to say that "neoliberalism" has a precise meaning. There are varieties of it, just as there were of post-war Keynesianism. Think of the word as like "purple". There are shades of purple, we'll not agree when exactly purple turns into blue, and we'll struggle to define the word (especially to someone who is colour-blind). But "purple" is nevertheless a useful word, and we know it when we see it.
If neoliberalism is a system rather than an ideology, what role does ideology play?
I suspect it's that of post-fact justification.
Put it this way. In the mid-80s nobody argued that the share of GDP going to the top 1% should double. Of course, many advocated policies which, it turns out, had this effect. Some of them intended this. But those policies were justified on other grounds, often sincerely. Instead, the belief that the top 1% "deserve" 15% of total incomes rather than 7-8% has mostly followed them getting 15%, not led it. A host of cognitive biases – the just world illusion, anchoring effect and status quo bias underpin an ideology which defends inequality. John Jost calls this system justification (pdf) . You can gather all these biases under the umbrella term "neoliberal ideology" if you want. But it follows economic events rather than is the creator of them.
So, I half agree with Ed that neoliberalism isn't a guiding ideology. But I also agree with Paul, that it is a way of describing a particular economic system.
I don't, however, want to get hung up on words: I'd rather leave such pedantry to the worst sort of academic. What's more important than language is the brute fact that productivity and hence real incomes for most of us have stagnated for years. In this sense, our existing economic system has failed the majority of people. And this is true whatever name you give it.
May 16, 2018 | Permalink
Scratch , May 16, 2018 at 04:13 PMPerhaps the texts of transnational trade treaties might be the best place to search for a de facto definition of neoliberalism.Luis Enrique , May 16, 2018 at 04:53 PM
There's not much room to blur, obfuscate (beyond the natural impenetrability of legalese) or wreath around with dubious ethicism in these documents I'd imagine.if it's a way of describing the prevailing economic system, does it make sense to describe people as neoliberals? Does that imply that everyone who is not a radical revolutionary (i.e. anyone who if they got their way in government would still be within normal variation in policies from a USA Republican administration to the Danish Labour party?). So the Koch brothers are neoliberals and Brad De Long is a neoliberal despite them disagreeing vehemently about most things?Mike W , May 16, 2018 at 06:04 PM
I know we have lots of other words that are used in wildly inconsistent ways (capitalism, socialism) but I can't help being irked by the sheer incoherence of the things that neoliberals are accused of. Most recent example to come to mind, somebody in conversation with Will Davies on Twitter claimed neoliberals oppose redistribution (and Will did not correct him). FFS.Conway says:Ralph Musgrave , May 16, 2018 at 06:32 PM
'But, despite the fact that neoliberalism is frequently referred to as an ideology, it is oddly difficult to pin down. For one thing, it is a word that tends to be used almost exclusively by those who are criticising it - not by its advocates, such as they are (in stark contrast to almost every other ideology, nearly no-one self-describes as a neoliberal). In other words, it is not an ideology but an insult.'
Well political science and history uses models too. What is the problem of say David Harvey's definition in, A Brief History of ...that which doesn't exist (2007)?
Rather I think he means it upsets 'main stream' economics professors, to be called this term, and rather than opt for Wren Lewis gambit (there is such a thing as 'Media Macro' or 'Tory Macro', or 'Econ 101', which I found interesting as it happens) Conway has gone for pedantry and first year Politics student essentialism, ie what is Democracy? type stuff.
As it happens he is dated and plain wrong above.
Hope this helps EdNeoliberalism, at least in the UK, was in part a reaction by Thatcher & Co to the excesses of previous Labour administrations: excesses in the form of "if an industry looks like going bust, let's pour whatever amount of taxpayer's money into it needed to save it". Thatcher & Co's reaction was: "s*d that for a lark – the rules of the free market are better than industrial subsidies (especially industrial subsidies in cabinet ministers' constituencies)"Kevin Carson , May 16, 2018 at 06:39 PMWhether or not the present neoliberal system is the result of a single coherent ideology, it emerged from the 70s on as a set of related (if not deliberately coordinated) responses to the structural crises of the older postwar Keynesian system. And there was definitely a cluster of policy-making elites in the early 70s making similar observations about the failure of consensus capitalism.Ben Philliskirk , May 16, 2018 at 07:11 PM"if it's a way of describing the prevailing economic system, does it make sense to describe people as neoliberals?"From Arse To Elbow , May 16, 2018 at 07:40 PM
Yes, these are largely people who reacted to the 'series of events' that occurred in the global economy in the 1970s by essentially accepting a certain set of policies and responses, many of which involved seeking to insulate the state against collective popular demands, intervening against organised labour, deregulating finance and targeting state intervention towards private business.
It is possible to have 'hard' and 'soft' neoliberalism depending on whether the state employs 'carrots' or 'sticks', but essentially almost the entire UK political system agreed that 'There Is No Alternative' until Corbyn became Labour leader. Many of these people were hardly hardcore ideologists but rather pragmatic or unimaginative types that were unwilling to challenge the 'status quo' or the prevailing economic system, just as there were very few classical liberals from WWI onwards.I think Will Davies has hit the spot with his definition of neoliberalism as "the disenchantment of politics by economics". In other words, neoliberalism is first and foremost a political praxis, not an economic theory. It is about power, hence the continuing importance of the state.Sarah Miron , May 16, 2018 at 09:06 PM
This instrumentality echoes Thatcher's insistence that "Economics are the method; the object is to change the heart and soul", which shows that there was more in play in the late-70s and early-80s than simply responding to the "structural crises of the older postwar Keynesian system".You should be reading Philip Mirowski instead. The economist and historian of science Philip Mirowski is considered the foremost expert on this subject, he has written many books on this the latest is:Sarah Miron , May 16, 2018 at 09:11 PM
"The Knowledge We Have Lost in Information: The History of Information in Modern Economics":
Neoliberalism is a philosophy based on the metaphor/idea that the "market" is an information process ad it is quasi-omniscient, that "knows" more than any and all of us could ever know. It makes certain claims about what "information" is and what a "market" is. It's mostly started with the Mont Perelin Society think-tank.Here's an intro:Blissex , May 16, 2018 at 10:02 PM
Some lectures:Blissex , May 16, 2018 at 10:05 PM"productivity and hence real incomes for most of us have stagnated for years."
But for many, usually people who vote more often or more opportunistically, they have been years of booming living standards.
The core of the electoral appeal of thatcherism is that thatcherites whether Conservative or New Labour have worked hard to ensure that upper-middle (and many middle) class voters collectively cornered the southern property market, creating a massive short squeeze on people short housing.
So many champagne leftists of some age talk about policies and concepts, but for the many the number one problem for decades has been managing to pay rent.Blissex , May 16, 2018 at 10:12 PM
"neoliberalism is first and foremost a political praxis, not an economic theory. It is about power, hence the continuing importance of the state."
That's a very good point, but I would rather say that's a good description of New Right/thatcherite (and "third way" clintonian/mandelsonian) politics, and neoliberalism is the economic policy aspect.
There is after all something called "The Washington consensus" that is a "standard" set of neoliberal economic policies.Blissex , May 16, 2018 at 10:17 PM"Neoliberalism is a philosophy based on the metaphor/idea that the "market" is an information process"
Written that wait it evokes Polanyi's "Great transformation" where markets mechanisms have displaced social mechanisms in many areas.
But Just yesterday I realized that Polanyi was subtly off-target: it is not markets-vs-society (two fairly abstract concepts) but instead institutions-vs-businesses.
That is the Great Transformation and neoliberalism as its current phase are about turning institutions into businesses (including marriage), and part of this is "managerialism". This is not done because businesses are inherently better for every purpose than institutions, but because businesses are better vehicles than institutions for tunnelling (looting) by their managers.Nanikore , May 17, 2018 at 07:21 AM"the "market" is an information process ad it is quasi-omniscient, that "knows" more than any and all of us could ever know"
There have been a few books arguing that "the market", being omniscient, all powerful, and just in judging everybody and giving them exactly what they deserve, has replaced God, and today's sell-side neoliberal Economists are its preachers:Economists started using the term neo-liberalism a bit later, after it became a derogatory term - and after 2008 began to disassociate from it (a few, and very few, did after the Asian Financial Crisis).Nanikore , May 17, 2018 at 07:46 AM
It is important to realise I think that it is a term that closely linked to political science -- and in particular a branch of international relations. The person most associated with Neo-liberalism is Francis Fukuyama. What he did was link capitalism and democracy; both he said had triumphed and because they respect the freedom of individual liberty and they allowed markets, which are the most efficient way of allocating resources, to operate liberally. Its heyday was at the time of the collapse of the Berlin Wall - "the end of history" as FF famously said.
Political scientists see neo-classical economics and neo-liberalism as very compatible, because of the formers basic construct of individual optimisation, rational choice and market efficiency. Often they are grouped together and contrasted with radical and realist (realpolitik) approaches. For neo-liberals and neo-classicists, markets get prices right, whether they do so with a lag is a minor point.
NK.Neo-liberals are not opposed to all types of government intervention. But like neo-classical economists, they believe ultimately in the price mechanism to allocate resources - in the long run, if not the short.Nanikore , May 17, 2018 at 08:49 AM
They have no problem with welfare states. Like neo-classical economists they accept the second welfare theorem.
They are pro-globalisation: they don't like international trade, capital or immigration controls. Why? Because they impact on individual liberty and distort market prices.
International relations were often guiding reasons behind economic policy that were pro-globalisation. By encouraging globalisation, you were encouraging international capitalism and thereby the spread of democracy (a la Francis Fukuyama). International relations policy was close to the PM, and run from the Cabinet Office.
I would argue that Blair and Jonathan Portes are prime examples of neo-liberals. And indeed the Clinton/Blair years were quintessentially neo-liberal in the formerly correct use of the term. Thatcher, as a strong opponent of the welfare state, was not.One further point. Neo-liberals are progressively and socially liberal, as well as economically liberal. They believe in cosmopolitanism and diversity and put much emphasis on minority and women's rights.Anarcho , May 17, 2018 at 09:31 AM
NK.Luis Enrique , May 17, 2018 at 12:12 PM"In fact, though, as Will Davies and Adam Curtis have said, neoliberalism entails the use of an active state."
It has always been like that -- Kropotkin was attacking Marxists for suggesting otherwise over a hundred years ago.
"In the mid-80s nobody argued that the share of GDP going to the top 1% should double. Of course, many advocated policies which, it turns out, had this effect. Some of them intended this. But those policies were justified on other grounds, often sincerely."
Yes, different rhetoric was often used -- but the net effect was always obvious, and pointed out at the time. But you get better results with honey than vinegar...
In terms of sincerity, Milton Friedman asserted in "Capitalism and Freedom" that the more a society was "free market," the more equal it was. Come the preface to 50th anniversary edition, he simply failed to mention that applying his own ideology had refuted his assertion (and it was an assertion).
Neo-liberalism never been about reducing "the State" but rather strengthening it in terms of defending and supporting capital. Hence you see Tories proclaim they are "cutting back the state" while also increasing state regulation on trade unions -- and regulating strikes, and so the labour market.how coherent are the comments above?Nanikore , May 17, 2018 at 03:13 PM
"intervening against organised labour" China bans unions, doesn't it? Are they in this tent too?
"targeting state intervention towards private business" not quite sure what that means but pre-1970 import substitution industrial policy is what?
am I a neoliberal because I think markets do process dispersed information and that competition does some good things (I am worried about monopolies, I would be worried about non-competitive government procurement) or am I not a neoliberal because I am nowhere near thinking markets are omniscient and could write long essays on how markets fail?
am I a neoliberal because I think the Washington Consensus is broadly sensible (with some reservations) or not a neoliberal because I'd like to see far more social housing?
and so onSomewhere along the line neo-liberalism got associated with austerity and small-government policies. The latter I think was because they are (correctly) associated with promoting privatisation and deregulation policy.e , May 17, 2018 at 03:28 PM
But neo-liberals have never been against welfare states in principle or counter-cyclical policy in principle.
Key-neo-liberals, however, were pro-austerity policy after the Asian Financial Crisis - but this included most of the mainstream economics establishment (most crucially of all Stanley Fischer at the IMF). Their rational (naturally enough) related to consistency, credibility, incentives and moral hazard arguments. There were a few who protested (eg Stiglitz). But they were exceptions.
NK.@ Luis EnriqueC Adams , May 17, 2018 at 06:48 PM
I don't think you'd make the grade as a 'true' neo-liberal unless you'd be happy for your social housing to be less then optimal and only for the destitute. Do you see moral hazard if the housing market is once again sidestepped in favour of decent homes for average every-day heroes, or do you subscribe (explicitly) to the view that the state must sanction and hurt in order that individuals strive?@BlissexBen Philliskirk , May 17, 2018 at 08:17 PM
"There have been a few books arguing that "the market", being omniscient, all powerful, and just in judging everybody and giving them exactly what they deserve, has replaced God...."
But the market is the creation of man. It has no power, no judgement, other than that bestowed on it by us. My problem with neoliberalism is the belief that decisions can be made on the basis of a money metric whereas we know that money is not necessarily a good measure of value.@ Luis EnriqueLuis Enrique , May 17, 2018 at 09:26 PM
'"intervening against organised labour" China bans unions, doesn't it? Are they in this tent too?'
Well yes. They have taken it further than most countries, stripping back their welfare system while increasing state promotion of capitalist development.
'"targeting state intervention towards private business" not quite sure what that means but pre-1970 import substitution industrial policy is what?'
Import substitution industrial policy is protectionism, not neoliberalism. I'm referring to governments' privatisation and outsourcing of public services and industries, taking them out of political responsibility and collective provision, while at the same time providing them with subsidies and guaranteed markets.Ben, ok protectionism is a different tactic than outsourcing but it's intervention towards private business so maybe that's not a defining characteristic of neoliberalism?Avraam Jack Dectis , May 17, 2018 at 10:31 PM
And if the Chinese Communist party is neoliberal and also the Koch brothers I am not convinced this is a useful nomenclatureIs Productivity Growth like Evolution ? Is it possible that productivity growth is like evolution: It can be a fortitous accident or it can happen due to competitive pressure. The fortuitous accidents are the new technologies whose advantages are so obvious they are quickly adopted.Hubert Horan , May 18, 2018 at 04:53 PM
The competitive pressures can be constraints on profits or resources that force greater efficiency. Perhaps, now, in the UK, there is no shortage of reasonably priced personnel, infrastructure and goods. So, if productivity growth is low, you can be certain neither requirement has been met.
If neither requirement has been met, then, it may well be that there is excessive unused capacity and, if that is the case, GDP growth has been suboptimal.
Which leads to the best question: Is greater GDP growth the result of greater efficiency or is greater efficiency the result of greater GDP growth?
The conclusion is that it may be a mistake to guide policy under the assumption that GDP growth must he preceded by productivity growth. Failing to realize this may be a cause of unnoticed suboptimal GDP growth. .1. Neoliberalism is real, but only describes background theoretical claims. It is wrong to apply the term to the broader political movement it supported. The political movement was dedicated to maximizing the power and freedom of action of large-scale capital accumulators. Lots of ideas from neoliberal intellectual argumentation were used to increase the power of capital accumulators, and neoliberal economists tended to ignore many aspects of the political movement they supported (strongr state power, crony capitalism, monopoly power) not strictly part of neoliberal theoryCalgacus , May 18, 2018 at 07:38 PM
2. The overlap and confusion between neoliberal theory and the political movement for unfettered freedom for capital accumulator is consistent with the broader history of movement conservatism. After WW2, conservatives (broadly defined) had a fixation with developing an intellectual foundatation/justification for their policy preferences. Partly as a reaction to the perception that FDR-LBJ era liberalism was based on theories published by Ivy League professors. The Mont Pelerin intellectual thread that Mirowski and others describe was part of this process. But (even for the liberals) it was always a mistake to claim that intellectual/ideological theorizing lead to political policy and action. It was sometimes the opposite; usually the theory was just a weapon used in internal battles or as a PR tool to mask less savory political objectives.
3. Democratic neoliberalism (Brad DeLong) was always a totally different animal. It was a reaction to the economic crises of the 70s/80s--New Deal policies written in 1934 didn't seem to be working; maybe would should incorporate market forces a bit more.
At the same time Republican neoliberalism had abandoned all pretense of detached analysis and was now strictly a tool supporting the pursuit of power."Put it this way. In the mid-80s nobody argued that the share of GDP going to the top 1% should double. Of course, many advocated policies which, it turns out, had this effect. Some of them intended this. But those policies were justified on other grounds, often sincerely. Instead, the belief that the top 1% "deserve" 15% of total incomes rather than 7-8% has mostly followed them getting 15%, not led it. "Blissex , May 18, 2018 at 09:54 PM
This is just not true. People did argue that, did announce the intent of these policies in public. Bill Mitchell's former student Victor Quirk is great on such declarations of war on the poor from the rich throughout history. Mitchell himself wrote that he was surprised how many and how blatant these declarations were.Blissex , May 18, 2018 at 09:57 PM"But the market is the creation of man. It has no power, no judgement, other than that bestowed on it by us."
But the neoliberal thesis is that it is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-judging. "vox populi vox dei" taken to an extreme.
"My problem with neoliberalism is the belief that decisions can be made on the basis of a money metric"
That to me seems a very poor argument, because then many will object that ignoring the money metric means that you want someone else to pay. Consider the statement "everybody has a right to healthcare free at the point of use": it is mere handwaving unless you explain who and how to pay for it.
The discussion in the money yes/no terms is for me fruitless, because there are two distinct issues in a project: the motivation for there being the project, and the business of doing the project.
Claiming that the *only* motivation for a project should be money seems to me as bad a claiming that given a good motivation how to pay for a project does not matter. Projects don't reduce to their motivation any more than they reduce to the business of doing them.
An extreme example I make is marriage: for me it is (also) a business, as it requires a careful look at money and organization issues, but hopefully the motivation to engage in that business is not economic, but personal feelings.
That's why I mentioned a better-than-Polanyi duality between businesses and institutions: institutions as a rule carry out businesses but for non-business motivations, while "pure" businesses have merely economic motivations.
For example a university setup as a charity versus one setup a a business: both carry out business activities, but the motivation of the former is not merely to do business.Repeating the message: "neoliberalism" has a pretty much official definition, the "Washington Consensus". And the core part of the "Washington Consensus" is "labour market reform", that is in practice whichever policies make labour more "competitive" and wages more "affordable".Mike the Mad Biologist , May 19, 2018 at 01:06 AM
The "free markets" of neoliberalism are primarily "free" labour markets, that is free of unions.I would argue that, in terms of practical working definitions, Max Sawicky's definition of neo-liberalism seems to work well, at least in the U.S. context (second half of post): https://mikethemadbiologist.com/2017/04/28/remember-the-victims-of-the-nebraska-public-power-district/C Adams , May 19, 2018 at 08:06 PMdilberto , May 19, 2018 at 08:11 PM@ Blissex "ignoring the money metric means that you want someone else to pay."
Not sure I follow. If payment is made via money then that is not ignoring the money metric, i.e. money as a measure of value. Do we want someone to do the project and is someone willing and able to do it? If, yes, then money is not (or at least does not need to be) the constraint. It is a mechanism to facilitate the project. If we want universal healthcare, money is not the constraint, the constraint is the ability of society to train and sustain (feed and house) the required expertise."What is neoliberalism?"nicholas , May 19, 2018 at 10:16 PM
Neo-liberalism is an economic idea based on the conjecture that by reverting the level of state spending and regulation of an economy to that which existed at an earlier stage of its economic development will produce the same level of economic growth which the economy experienced then.
But the level of output of an economy is a reflection of the level of the efficiency of that economy, the level of economic growth therefore reflects the rate of increase in its efficiency in terms of increased economic output as the economy develops, a measure which inevitably reduces in its order as an economy approaches its maximum level of efficiency and output. So the rate of economic growth of an economy will inevitably be progressively reduced as an economy matures as the opportunities for efficiency improvements are exploited and the number that remain diminish.
The level of state spending and regulation typical of economically developed societies are responses to the social change which economic development itself has brought about. Abolishing those responses therefore is likely only to serve to reintroduce the social problems which led to their introduction and to make the social consequences of economic development more arduous for the lower social and economic groups disfavoured by that process of social change.
Neo-liberalism is, like other materialist ideology of the progressive left and right, a predominantly economic idea which is a product of the affluent and intellectual classes who themselves, being a product of their elevated economic condition, being dependent upon it and therefore having a vested interest in its continuance, are imbued with a bias which sees the improvement in the general economic condition as a natural unmitigated good and are therefore oblivious or apathetic to its non-material consequences as material progress causes a society and its population to diverge from its native and surviving character as it adapts to the historically exceptional conditions of modernity and undermines its cultural foundation and ultimately threatens its long term cultural future.
It seems clear from the above posts that there is no clear consensus about what neo-liberalism actually is.Nanikore , May 20, 2018 at 07:26 AM
I suggest the use of the term is little more than a cloak used to cover up an uncomfortable reality for those on the left. Traditional left wing policies, such as nationalisation, state intervention in the economy such as rent controls, high marginal tax rates, and strong trade unions systematically failed to deliver prosperity. States which moved to economic models involving more reliance on markets to shift labour and capital to new activities seemed to prosper far better. Rather than say that conservatives such as Friedman were proved right about the fundamental propositions about how an economy should be organised, the soft left adopted conservative policies, and have dressed it up as 'neo-liberalism' to save face.
Indeed, some on the left, such as 'filthy rich' Mandelson, embraced the market economy with the zeal of converts, and have ignored its faults and problems, and have failed to seek to mitigate or remedy these faults and problems.@nicholasNanikore , May 20, 2018 at 07:42 AM
The best thing to do is consult a first or second year undergraduate political science or international relations text. Burchill "Theories of International Relations, Palgrave is a good one, and used in many UK universities. There will be a chapter on neo-liberalism in them. These texts give you the standard blurb on what neo-liberalism really is (as well as what the other major schools of thoughts are together with critiques of all of them).
Neo-liberalism is very much a coherent (but by no means flawless) theory.
Neo-liberalism comes from the subject of international relations. Fukuyama is the most representative neo-liberal. Important is the notion of 'soft power': the spread of capitalism and western culture and other forms of globalisation spreads western notions of democracy and human rights. It was important to integrate countries into the international capitalist (and engage them in the multilateral) system. At the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall this seemed to be a convincing theory. It was very much adopted as a key foreign policy strategy in the UK and the US. One of its biggest blows, however, is the lack of political reform we have seen in China. What this showed was that democratisation does not necessarily follow capitalism and globalisation.
NK.Just to qualify what I said above - the would not use the term "western notions". Ie they would not associate democracy or human rights with being western. They are very cosmopolitan, and believe in the notion of universal, (not relative), values.Blissex , May 20, 2018 at 03:29 PM""ignoring the money metric means that you want someone else to pay."Jo Park , May 20, 2018 at 07:08 PM
... then money is not (or at least does not need to be) the constraint. It is a mechanism to facilitate the project. If we want universal healthcare, money is not the constraint,"
Oh please, this is just two-bit nominalism: "money" then is just the mechanism by which "you want someone else to pay" and indeed:
"the constraint is the ability of society to train and sustain (feed and house) the required expertise."
That is the *physical* aggregate constraint, regardless of whoever pays, the practical constraint, given that physical stuff is purchased with money, creating or obtaining that money.
The question is then distributional, who is going to pay the money to "train and sustain (feed and house) the required expertise". Unless there are ample unused resources, someone will have to pay.
What right-wingers object to is the idea that "universal health care" is paid for as a percent of income, so that someone on £100,000 a year pays £8,000 a year for exactly the same level of service that someone on £10,000 a year pays £800 a year for.@Luis Enrique: Correct - you are not a neoliberal as you'd like to see far more social housing? A neoliberal believes in more economic freedom, so you achieve the aim of housing people who need state help for housing, food, energy etc by giving them the money to buy a basic level of those things. The State should not be in the business of saying this house here is not a social housing one, but this next that gets built is.Calgacus , May 21, 2018 at 02:37 AMBlissex: "Oh please, this is just two-bit nominalism: "money" then is just the mechanism by which "you want someone else to pay""Robert Mitchell , May 21, 2018 at 04:37 AM
Umm, no. In real terms, the someone else who is paying in health care is mainly the health care professional treating you.
"Unless there are ample unused resources, someone will have to pay."
But in all modern capitalist countries there are ample unused resources as far as the eye can see. Medicine is one way to use them up, nearly cost-free, and all benefit. Most people value "not being dead" highly. As Paul Samuelson said responding to stupid worries about the cost of the US health care system, so it's 15% (or whatever). It's the best 15% of the economy.
The real problem is that "socialized medicine" is too efficient in real terms, and doesn't create corrupt and powerful satrapies to demand public money, as the US health system does. Since the UK has the most efficient health care system, it has the least real resource "someone has to pay" problem, but it causes the biggest demand gap, the true longterm, macro problem. The opposite for the USA. The real right wing concern is that the underpeople get health care at all, not some smokescreen triviality about nominal taxation.
Most written about health care, as about war, follows the backwards, mainstream way. C Adams is following the correct, MMT/Keynesian way. If that is two-bit nominalism, we need more of it.Blissex: "Oh please, this is just two-bit nominalism: "money" then is just the mechanism by which "you want someone else to pay""
"Unless there are ample unused resources, someone will have to pay."
The Fed proved in 2008 it has ample resources, created with keystrokes, without limits.
In normal times banks and private money markets create dollar-denominated credit at will; in a panic, the Fed backstops the private credit.
Thus, print to pay for social spending. Index incomes to price rises. You can print faster than prices will rise ...
May 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Until recently I haven't been closely following the controversy between Wikipedia and popular anti-imperialist activists like John Pilger, George Galloway, Craig Murray, Neil Clark, Media Lens, Tim Hayward and Piers Robinson. Wikipedia has always been biased in favor of mainstream CNN/CIA narratives, but until recently I hadn't seen much evidence that this was due to anything other than the fact that Wikipedia is a crowdsourced project and most people believe establishment-friendly narratives. That all changed when I read this article by Craig Murra y, which is primarily what I'm interested in directing people's attention to here.
The article, and this one which prompted it by Five Filters , are definitely worth reading in their entirety, because their contents are jaw-dropping. In short there is an account which has been making edits to Wikipedia entries for many nears called Philip Cross. In the last five years this account's operator has not taken a single day off–no weekends, holidays, nothing–and according to their time log they work extremely long hours adhering to a very strict, clockwork schedule of edits throughout the day as an ostensibly unpaid volunteer.
This is bizarre enough, but the fact that this account is undeniably focusing with malicious intent on anti-imperialist activists who question establishment narratives and the fact that its behavior is being aggressively defended by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales means that there's some serious fuckery afoot.
"Philip Cross", whoever or whatever that is, is absolutely head-over-heels for depraved Blairite war whore Oliver Kamm, whom Cross mentioned as a voice of authority no fewer than twelve times in an entry about the media analysis duo known collectively as Media Lens. Cross harbors a special hatred for British politician and broadcaster George Galloway, who opposed the Iraq invasion as aggressively as Oliver Kamm cheered for it, and on whose Wikipedia entry Cross has made an astonishing 1,800 edits.
Despite the overwhelming evidence of constant malicious editing, as well as outright admissions of bias by the Twitter account linked to Philip Cross, Jimmy Wales has been extremely and conspicuously defensive of the account's legitimacy while ignoring evidence provided to him.
"Or, just maybe, you're wrong," Wales said to a Twitter user inquiring about the controversy the other day. "Show me the diffs or any evidence of any kind. The whole claim appears so far to be completely ludicrous."
"Riiiiight," said the totally not-triggered Wales in another response. "You are really very very far from the facts of reality here. You might start with even one tiny shred of some kind of evidence, rather than just making up allegations out of thin air. But you won't because trolling."
"You clearly have very very little idea how it works," Wales tweeted in another response. "If your worldview is shaped by idiotic conspiracy sites, you will have a hard time grasping reality."
As outlined in the articles by Murray and Five Filters , the evidence is there in abundance. Five Filters lays out "diffs" (editing changes) in black and white showing clear bias by the Philip Cross account, a very slanted perspective is clearly and undeniably documented, and yet Wales denies and aggressively ridicules any suggestion that something shady could be afoot. This likely means that Wales is in on whatever game the Philip Cross account is playing. Which means the entire site is likely involved in some sort of psyop by a party which stands to benefit from keeping the dominant narrative slanted in a pro-establishment direction.
A 2016 Pew Research Center report found that Wikipedia was getting some 18 billion page views per month . Billion with a 'b'. Youtube recently announced that it's going to be showing text from Wikipedia articles on videos about conspiracy theories to help "curb fake news". Plainly the site is extremely important in the battle for control of the narrative about what's going on in the world. Plainly its leadership fights on one side of that battle, which happens to be the side that favors western oligarchs and intelligence agencies.
How many other "Philip Cross"-like accounts are there on Wikipedia? Has the site always functioned an establishment psyop designed to manipulate public perception of existing power structures, or did that start later? I don't know. Right now all I know is that an agenda very beneficial to the intelligence agencies, war profiteers and plutocrats of the western empire is clearly and undeniably being advanced on the site, and its founder is telling us it's nothing. He is lying. Watch him closely.
* * *
Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website , so you'll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . Vote up! 13 Vote down! 0
Cardinal Fang Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:47 PermalinkNo1uNo -> Cardinal Fang Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:51 Permalink
Of course it's a psyopBitchface-KILLAH -> No1uNo Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:53 Permalink
reading the "talk" tab page background on ANY wiki page is ALWAYS recommended - it shows the content war by different editors. - Anything on Israel / Palestine for example.cheka -> Bitchface-KILLAH Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:05 Permalink
Post or edit anything on that shit site that goes against the ziomaster's narrative and you will be blocked. Wikipedia just rehashes all the bullshit from the corporate media on Television.
Metabunk and Rationalwiki are the exact same thing too.Leakanthrophy -> cheka Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:15 Permalink
look up the wiki definition of hate group
hint - white, conservative.... nothing else even gets a passing mentionCognitive Dissonance -> Leakanthrophy Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:23 Permalink
Does the pope shit in the woods after playing with little boys?
95% of things placed in top 3 of Google search are PSYOP. The remaining 5% are those pesky old school blackhat SEO guys that know how to game the search engine.
Wikipedia is as fake as WWE is. But at least WWE has some juicy stuff:
WWE Diva Zelina Vega Nude Photos Leaked
https://celebrity-leaks.net/wwe-diva-zelina-vega-nude-photos-leaked/ClickNLook -> Cognitive Dissonance Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:31 Permalink
The method is as old as the hills.
To maintain Empire, truth must be co-opt, controlled or crushed.robertsgt40 -> ClickNLook Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:35 Permalink
Was it really smart to put history on internet and make it editable?DownWithYogaPants -> robertsgt40 Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:39 Permalink
Is that a trick question? I'll check with Snopes.Automatic Choke -> DownWithYogaPants Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:43 Permalink
The Zionist side is ALWAYS the side that is presented.
Eustace Mullins was a truly kind individual. His only crime was to not swallow the hogwash Koolaid of the ZioNAZI. For that he was followed by the FBI for 30 years.
But of course all the standard tropes are trotted out on Wikipedia. I suspect that Wiki / Wales gets a lot of funding from YOU KNOW WHO. Same people who has the Germans put people in jail for thought crimes.
You are only safe when you are looking at a page regarding theoretical mathematics. But not mathematics about global warming.The First Rule -> Leakanthrophy Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:34 Permalink
among scientists, wiki is well known for utility and accuracy of boring stuff like the thermal conductivity of copper. any controversy involved, and it is worthless.VWAndy Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:51 Permalink
Wikipedia is completely unreliable. Especially when it comes to politics.
You can find LIES GALORE. You can edit the Lies out, document them and backup with sourced justification; but within an hour they will have reset the Lie.
They simply don't care about the Truth.
911bodysnatchers322 Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:03 Permalink
Full spectrum dominance folks. Its not like they are short on cash.Urban Roman Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:09 Permalink
People are finally catching up
- wikipedia redirects crytpohistory to pseudohistory, revealing their own authoritarian biases ('what WE say is history is REAL history. There is no 'hidden' history, only fake history' --> https://www.reddit.com/r/C_S_T/comments/4z8i3o/the_occult_is_a_type_of_
- Ak Prison Blood Scandal removed from Wikipedia --> https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4jv950/clinton_scandal_you
Aaaand finally: James Corbett of Corbettreport.com, a prolific documentary filmmaker--whose docs are always top rated on topdocumentaryfilms.com, doesn't have a wikipedia page, despite MANY people trying to create one for him. Why is that, you ask? Because they are extremely subversive to the CIA and the established globalist order, and therefore that fact of suppression of Corbett suggests coordination between Wikipedia and the globalist thalassocracy of the empire of the cityDavid Rockefeller Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:24 Permalink
More to the point:
How close is ZH to being a limited hangout?
How much 'filtering' is being done, and through what channels do filtering requests arrive? (if any)
Lots of news outlets have changed over the last few years. Formerly respected papers have been reduced to tabloids. The Washington Post is now the Bezos Blog, for example. Twitter is popping up 'warnings' about 'fake news'. All the radio and TV channels run identical bullshit war stories within minutes of each other. And Wikipedia has been going downhill for years.
So, is ZH immune to the effluvia from the ministry of truth?
Nice article, but there is a much better way of proving that Wikipedia=CIA. It's true, everybody can edit Wikipedia, but not everyone gets to keep their edits. Here is an experiment that everyone can carry out :
If you edit well or create a new informative page on something of no interest to the FBI or CIA, say astronomy or physics, no problem, your contribution stays. But try to provide evidence--and there is plenty--that the government was involved in the assassinations of MLK, JFK, RFK or the demolitions of 9/11, and you'll be "reverted" (their term) within FIVE minutes. Try to quote Russia's version of the Crimeans' overwhelming vote to join Russia, and you'll be "reverted" lickety split. Provide evidence that Winston Churchill--lionized by our rulers--was an imperialist, a racist, a champion of inequality, and the contribution will disappear while you pause your honest labors for a cup of tea! Our rulers are masters of propaganda, and Wikipedia is just one of their brilliantly vicious outlets--created, controlled, and edited to brainwash us!
May 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
The reason we are not given a straight answer as to why we're meant to want our institutions fighting an information war on our behalf (instead of allowing us to sort out fact from fiction on our own like adults) is because the answer is ugly.
As we discussed last time , the only real power in this world is the ability to control the dominant narrative about what's going on. The only reason government works the way it works, money operates the way it operates, and authority rests where it rests is because everyone has agreed to pretend that that's how things are. In actuality, government, money and authority are all man-made conceptual constructs and the collective can choose to change them whenever it wants. The only reason this hasn't happened in our deeply dysfunctional society yet is because the plutocrats who rule us have been successful in controlling the narrative.
Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. This has always been the case. In many societies throughout history a guy who made alliances with the biggest, baddest group of armed thugs could take control of the narrative by killing people until the dominant narrative was switched to "That guy is our leader now; whatever he says goes." In modern western society, the real leaders are less obvious, and the narrative is controlled by propaganda.
Propaganda is what keeps Americans accepting things like the fake two-party system, growing wealth inequality, medicine money being spent on bombs to be dropped on strangers in stupid immoral wars, and a government which simultaneously creates steadily increasing secrecy privileges for itself and steadily decreasing privacy rights for its citizenry. It's also what keeps people accepting that a dollar is worth what it's worth, that personal property works the way it works, that the people on Capitol Hill write the rules, and that you need to behave a certain way around a police officer or he can legally kill you.
And therein lies the answer to the question. You are not being protected from "disinformation" by a compassionate government who is deeply troubled to see you believing erroneous beliefs, you are being herded back toward the official narrative by a power establishment which understands that losing control of the narrative means losing power. It has nothing to do with Russia, and it has nothing to do with truth. It's about power, and the unexpected trouble that existing power structures are having dealing with the public's newfound ability to network and share information about what is going on in the world.
May 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Economic analysis often uses the term ceteris paribus -- all other things being equal -- but all other things are not equal. The worker Tesla employed might have found employment elsewhere; it may have even been more stable, safer employment that did not entail payment in Tesla equity, that is subject to some uncertainty as to its ultimate value.
To highlight this point, it may be helpful to consider the economic activity generated by Tesla's competitors in California. These competitors' operations are being impaired by Tesla's sale of deeply subsidized cars in the state. While Tesla's competitors do not manufacture cars in the state, they account for
- 1,366 dealerships
- employing 140,596 jobs (that pay cash),
- accounting for $8.56 billion in wages,
- paying $9.38 billion in taxes, and
- making $50 million of charitable contributions per year.
On a more minor point, the IHS Markit report assumes that the $2.1 billion in "wages" paid to Tesla workers is spent in the California economy. As discussed above, the report includes in these "wages" Tesla equity granted to employees without quantifying what percentage of wages this equity represented. We are skeptical as to how many employees spent their Tesla stock to boost local economic activity.
snblitz Sat, 05/19/2018 - 22:20 Permalink
But Elon's Teslas consume twice the fossil fuel per mile driven and produce more pollution than light duty diesels.
Why would anyone give Tesla a break? Sure the fossil fuel industry is happy to double their income, but why would anyone else?
May 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
... ... ...
Thanks to Friday's carefully crafted deep-state disclosures by WaPo and the Times , along with actual reporting by the Daily Caller 's Chuck Ross, we now know it wasn't a mole at all - but 73-year-old University of Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, a US citizen, political veteran and longtime US Intelligence asset enlisted by the FBI to befriend and spy on three members of the Trump campaign during the 2016 US election .
Billy the Poet -> Keffus Sat, 05/19/2018 - 13:50 PermalinkMycroft Holmes IV -> unrulian Sat, 05/19/2018 - 10:17 Permalink
the "American academic who teaches in Britain" described by The Times,
Seems like Carter Page knew what he was talking about in this May 11 tweet.
Carter Page, Ph.D. @carterwpage
No @JackPosobiec, not me. But if what I'm hearing alleged is correct, it's a guy I know who splits most his time between inside the Beltway and in one of the other Five Eyes countries.
And if so, it'd be typical: swamp creatures putting themselves first.
4:17 AM - May 11, 2018Dickweed Wang -> brianshell Sat, 05/19/2018 - 15:34 Permalink
I think Rudy's flipped seeking redemption for his role in 911.
The deep state is not going down quietly or without a fight and they are in full attack mode. Multiple questionable instances yesterday to change news cycle, plus a week worths of leaks by major media mouthpieces justifying their crimes.
What's great is they are so caught up in their nest of lies, each new lie just contradicts previous ones and exposes more of the truth.
Now the question is: How do you bring these people to justice without starting a violent backlash / Civil War?
The cognitive dissonance is very strong on the left and they've fallen victim to hive mentality, simply regurgitating talking points they hear through pop culture and media. We are so afraid of not fitting in (as a society) that we will willingly accept completely contradicting "facts", defend them, and deride those who disagree. Further, there is no room for disagreement, for they are the party of tolerance, and if you disagree with them, you are intolerant, which cannot be tolerated in an open and free society (see how that works?).
The real hope is people are able to break the spell and think for themselves again. But I worry it's too late. A generation of children assaulted with excessive vaccination are now adults and it shows...mccvilb -> Americano Sat, 05/19/2018 - 18:41 Permalink
People in the USA better get a grip real fast and realize that it's not Russia, China or Iran that is the real enemy of Americans, it's the British . . . the money gnomes in London and the "Queens men". They've caused more problems for the USA in the last 100+ years than the other three combined many times over.T-NUTZ -> DingleBarryObummer Sat, 05/19/2018 - 10:12 Permalink
Let's see. Money was exchanged, foreign govt agents and contractors hired. The FBI knew about Hillary's criminal enterprises and illegal dissemination of classified documents and apparently has been complicit in helping or protecting her. The NYT and WaPo along with the network media regurgitated much of the anti-Trump rhetoric together in sync with the tsunami of fake news, either in creating it or knowingly participating in it. No wonder the news media in a sudden shift have been trying to paint themselves as now being on the other side of this Russkie Fubar after they promoted it 24/7 for two years without let-up. What's the penalty for trying to overthrow the President of the United States? Lots of folks here are sitting on potential indictments for treason. Enough talk. With all they got from the Congressional hearings, and now this, it's time!!!... for Trump to start draining.44magnum -> T-NUTZ Sat, 05/19/2018 - 11:32 Permalink
Why do dual citizens get to "serve" in our high positions of government??
Because that is what (((they))) want. Do a little research on how that came about in the US you will find that the same ole (((culprits))) got the law changed to their benefit of course.
May 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
bowie28 -> The First Rule Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:18 PermalinkKayman -> bowie28 Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:59 Permalink
" Of course it was setup. Rod Rosenstein & Co. have been in on this from the beginning. "
Rosenstein was appointed by Trump. If he is involved in a setup it's more likely it is a setup organized by Trump. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Rosenstein
President Donald Trump nominated Rosenstein to serve as Deputy Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice on February 1, 2017.   He was one of the 46 United States Attorneys ordered on March 10, 2017, to resign by Attorney General Jeff Sessions ; Trump declined his resignation. [ 27] Rosenstein was confirmed by the Senate on April 25, 2017, by a vote of 94–6
In May 2017, he authored a memo which President Trump said was the basis of his decision to dismiss FBI Director James Comey .  Later that month, Rosenstein appointed special counsel Robert Mueller to investigate alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election and related matters.
Ask yourself why Sessions ordered Rosenstein to resign and Trump declined his resignation? Likely because Sessions was recused from Russia investigation and could not be told Rosenstein was working for Trump from day 1.
(Mueller also met with Trump the day before Rosenstein appointed him SC.)
Also relevant, Rosenstein is Republican and in 2007/8 was blocked from getting a seat on appeals court by Dems. Doesn't seem he would be loyal to the Obama crowd and trying to take down Trump with a phony investigation.
In 2007, President George W. Bush nominated Rosenstein to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit . Rosenstein was a Maryland resident at the time. Barbara Mikulski and new Democratic Maryland senator, Ben Cardin , blocked Rosenstein's confirmation, stating that he did not have strong enough Maryland legal ties,  and due to this Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy did not schedule a hearing on Rosenstein during the 110th Congress and the nomination lapsed. Later, Andre M. Davis was renominated to the same seat by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the Senate in 2009.Withdrawn Sanction -> bowie28 Fri, 05/18/2018 - 18:16 Permalink
Rosenstein slithered in via Sessions.rosiescenario -> WarPony Fri, 05/18/2018 - 15:55 Permalink
"...a cabal of ruthless and dishonest people..."
You better believe it. What's happened to the NYC detectives who viewed the "insurance policy" on Weiner's laptop? The kiddie stuff is the real hot potato here. The power "elite" are pure unadulterated filth.GoingBig -> bowie28 Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:22 Permalink
Yes....when you start to add up various facts coming from this investigation it is easy to argue that the prime beneficiary has been Trump. Why would Trump even consider firing this guy? The more Mueller digs the more crap surfaces about the Dems, and they are in full support of it without any seeming awareness of the results. They are so blinded by their hatred they cannot see reality.
The info from Weiner's computer is really going to make for major popcorn sales. All Hitlery's "lost" emails are in there. All the names in his address book will also make for some interesting reading. Just a guess but there are a lot of very nervous NYC elected officials and pedos making sure their passports are up to date. The Lolita Express to Gitmo....Kayman -> GoingBig Fri, 05/18/2018 - 12:04 Permalink
You guys see everything through Trump colored glasses. Trump is dirty and just because the evidence hasn't been shown to you doesn't mean it isn't there. Mueller has the dirt on Trump. It will show. Does everyone here forget that Watergate took 2 1/2 years to play out?Emergency Ward -> GoingBig Fri, 05/18/2018 - 13:50 Permalink
Watergate was about a burglary and missing tapes.
It wasn't about the Department of Justice and the FBI being rotten to the core.Honest Sam -> GoingBig Fri, 05/18/2018 - 14:32 Permalink
Being in the business he is in, there is little doubt that Trump has paid out millions of dollars over the years in bribes and payoffs to greedy politicians, regulators, and zoning commissioners given to filthy lucre in return for building permits, zoning variances, and law changes.
I know he is but what are they? This could be one reason the politicians, regulators, and zoning commissioners hate him so much. He knows what they know.
Trump is no dirtier than other politicians and much less than some. He is just dirty in a way (he was usually the payer, they were the payees) that bothers the other ones.jmack -> One of We Fri, 05/18/2018 - 12:13 Permalink
All politicians and most of humanity 'is dirty'.
There is no man or woman who has or ever will run for office that is not dirty.
As Dershowitz so acutely pointed out, every one of them with an opposition Special Counsel on his case, can find at least 3 crimes they committed.
The only reason theBamster wasn't probed at all is because no one dared go after the only black man to ever run and win for POTUS. HE instead, was protected from any probes.
You're an idiot that doesn't know anything about what this is really all about. Or pretending to. Or a troll. Fuck you for being any of them.NoDebt Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:04 Permalink
Obama has a history of taking out his opponents in their personal life, so that he doesnt have to meet them in the political arena, just look at his state campaigns, and then his senate campaign. Look at how he used the bureaucracy during his admin to preempt opposition, not allowing opposition groups to get tax exempt status and sending osha/fbi/treasury etc to harrass people that were more than marginally effective.
With that context set I would like to know the following.
1. Did the brennan/comey/clapper cabal have investigations running on all the gop primary front runners?
2. Did they promote Trump to win the GOP primary, to eliminate those rivals from consideration, just to attempt to destroy him in the general with the russian collusion narrative and his own words.
3. Was Comey's failure to ensure Hillary's victory due to incompetence or arrogance? I say arrogance, because his little late day announcement of the new emails was obviously ass covering so that he could pass whatever senate hearing that would be required for his new post in the hillary administration.DingleBarryObummer Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:05 Permalink
Having to learn how to deal with mobbed-up lawyers and unions in NYC turns out the be pretty damned good preparation to be President Of The United States. I love watching this guy work.DingleBarryObummer -> brain_glitch Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:11 Permalink
The illegitimate liberal MSM is sucking all the oxygen out of the room for legitimate criticism of Trump. This Russian Collusion stormy daniels stuff is a bunch of bologna, and it's making a smokescreen for Trump to carry out his zio-bankster agenda.
Hegelian dialectic, Divide and conquer, kabuki theater
A real left would be covering this===>
As No One Watched, Trump Pardoned 5 Megabanks For Corruption Charges
Buy they won't because there is no left or right. It's one big uniparty club, and they work together to rob us and lie to us.
Picturing The March Of Tyranny | Zero HedgeRex Titter -> DingleBarryObummer Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:45 Permalink
In the second half of peter schiff's most recent podcast he goes on a good rant/lecture about this topic.
I know Peter Schiff is a controversial figure, and I don't agree with a lot of what he does or says, but sometimes he nails it.Pollygotacracker Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:05 Permalink
For the most part I like Peter Schiff. I don't think he talks enough about the criminal manipulation of commodities by the banksters and the seemingly endless reluctance by our glorious leaders to prosecute them.
On this topic: The lawlessness of the 17 agencies is beyond the pale. They have set themselves apart and for this they will have to pay eventually. I have no doubt that in the minds of the Bureau principals there was motive and there was opportunity. I don't believe anything that comes out of their mouths. Robert Mueller is a three letter word for a donkey. He is a criminal and a totally owned puppet of the deep and dark state. Last I heard, the FBI planted a mole in the Trump campaign. Iff true, that speaks volumes...Son of Captain Nemo -> Pollygotacracker Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:56 Permalink
It is amazing that President Trump is still standing on his feet and still out there swinging. The man is no coward. I'm glad I voted for him, although I am disappointed in some of his failings.ioniancat21 Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:16 Permalink
"although I am disappointed in some of his failings."...
Yeah I know just what ya mean...
The treason of war crimes he's committed exceeding all of his predecessor(s) in his short assed existence as President and threatening war on two nuclear superpowers that could easily wipe his office and 4 thousand square miles of CONUS " off the map "!...
Endorsing a torturer murder to head the CIA condoning her efforts in public "thumbing his nose" at Article 3 Geneva the U.S. Constitution and for his military to tacitly continue disobeying the UCMJ as a response to that "selection"!...
Telling the parasitic partner that owns him through blackmail that Jerusalem is the Capital of IsraHell as over 200 Palestinians are murdered and 3 thousand others injured in joyous celebration of that violation of international law which is the equivalent of pouring "gasoline" on a building that has already been reduced to "ash"...
And speaking of "buildings" and "ash"... The pledge he ignored before being "anointed" that he said he would investigate but of course DID NOT ( https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/11/14/trump-im-reopening-911-inve )
... ... ...Chief Joesph Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:21 Permalink
They didn't really think things through when they plotted against Trump and figured Hillary would win and they could sweep this under the rug and then she lost. Funnier is that many expected her to lose as she never won an election in her life despite her being "The Most Qualified" candidate as her parrots in the media lovingly called her. Now Trump and his team will stomp them all into the ground. My guess is that he'll pinch others in her gang who have big egos so that they'll talk and drop a dime which they will. The libtards are turning on themselves in every area now. Look at Hollywood and the sexual harassment cases in the pipeline.
It's just so pleasurable watching your enemy fall on their sword while you sit back and enjoy life and smile....GRDguy Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:15 Permalink
Was the Trump campaign "Set-up"? It's just another way the oligarchy is deflecting what the real problem is. Americans are fed up with the political status quo in this country, and wanted a change. Neither political party offers any change for the better. It is also why Bernie Sanders had a huge following, but no one is calling his campaign a "set-up", and he would have been the more likely choice the Russians would have helped.
It really doesn't make any sense why the Russians would have selected Trump, but it makes a lot of sense why the oligarchy would want to discredit Trump any means availble to them. And since they have always hated Russia so much, that is the big tip-off of who comes up with these stupid stories about Russians meddling in our elections.hooligan2009 Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:57 Permalink
We voted against the powers that be. With Truman, we got a decent man that was manipulated by the Deep State. With Trump, we got a not-so-decent man, but still manipulated by the Deep State. Sigh.Anonymous_Bene Fri, 05/18/2018 - 11:57 Permalink
there needs to be a schedule drawn up of charges against individuals. it's all very well talking and talking anf talking around the water cooler, but until the charges are drawn up and a grand jury empowered, it is all pissing into the wind.
the individuals range from obama through clinton, through the loathsome slimebags in the alphabet soup, through foundations, through DNC leaders/politicians, through Weiner, Abedin, Rice and the witches cabal (Wasserstein Schulz etc), UK intel agencies, awan brothers, pakistan intel supplying Iran with classified documents and so on.
there are charges (of treason, sedition, wilful mishandling of classifed documents, bribery, corruption, murder, child trafficking, election rigging, spying for/collusion with foreign powers, funding terrorism, child abuse, election rigging/tampering, misappropriation of federal funds, theft etc as well as general malfeasance, failure to perform duties and so on) that are not being brought that are so obvious, only a snowflake would miss them.
what charges can be brought against the MSM for propaganda, misdirection, lying, fabrication and attempting to ovetthrow a legitimately elected president using these techniques to further their own ends? there is no freedom of the press to lie and further civil unrest.
a list of charges against individuals in the DNC/alphabet soup is what is needed. if the DoJ is so incompetent or corrupt that it is unable to do its job, private law suits need to be brought to get all the facts out in the open.
someone needs to write the book and make it butt hole shaped to shove up all those that try to make a living out of making up gossip in the NYT, WaPo, CNN, BBC, Economist, Madcow, SNL, Oliver and so on.
these people are guilty of being assholes and need their assholes (mouths) plugged with a very think fifteen inch book.Anonymous_Bene Fri, 05/18/2018 - 12:01 Permalink
Divide and conquer playing out in front of your faces. Trump, Hitlary, Obama, DiGenova, Giuliani, etc. etc...all "deep state".
Mission accomplished.insanelysane -> Anonymous_Bene Fri, 05/18/2018 - 13:04 Permalink
It's amazing that you fools still believe in your hearts that Trump is not a deep stater. LOLRedDwarf Fri, 05/18/2018 - 12:45 Permalink
Trump might become a deep stater but he definitely wasn't one of them. Google "offer to pay trump to drop out of election" and see how many stories there were. Here is one of them.
http://fortune.com/2017/12/05/donald-trump-2016-race-mike-pence-presideinsanelysane Fri, 05/18/2018 - 13:13 Permalink
"At some point, the Russia investigation became political. How early was it?"
I am going to go out on the shortest limb in history and say it was political from the beginning.
I hope someone writes a book on this with all of the timing and all of the "little" things that happened on the way to the coronation of Hillary. Comey "interviews" Hillary on 4th of July weekend. Wraps up case by 9am Tuesday after 4th of July. By noon, Hillary and Obama are on Air Force 1 to begin campaign. Within a few weeks Seth Rich is dead and DWS avoids being "killed in an armed robbery gone bad" when she steps down as head of DNC. Above article forgets to mention that GPS also hired the wife of someone in the government as part of the "fact gathering" team.
May 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
As we reported on Thursday , a long-awaited report by the Department of Justice's internal watchdog into the Hillary Clinton email investigation has moved into its final phase, as the DOJ notified multiple subjects mentioned in the document that they can privately review it by week's end, and will have a "few days" to craft any response to criticism contained within the report, according to the Wall Street Journal .
Those invited to review the report were told they would have to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to read it , people familiar with the matter said. They are expected to have a few days to craft a response to any criticism in the report, which will then be incorporated in the final version to be released in coming weeks . - WSJ
Now, journalist Paul Sperry reports that " IG Horowitz has found "reasonable grounds" for believing there has been a violation of federal criminal law in the FBI/DOJ's handling of the Clinton investigation/s and has referred his findings of potential criminal misconduct to Huber for possible criminal prosecution ."
Who is Huber?
As we reported in March , Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed John Huber - Utah's top federal prosecutor, to be paired with IG Horowitz to investigate the multitude of accusations of FBI misconduct surrounding the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The announcement came one day after Inspector General Michael Horowitz confirmed that he will also be investigating allegations of FBI FISA abuse .
While Huber's appointment fell short of the second special counsel demanded by Congressional investigators and concerned citizens alike, his appointment and subsequent pairing with Horowitz is notable - as many have pointed out that the Inspector General is significantly limited in his abilities to investigate. Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) noted in March " the IG's office does not have authority to compel witness interviews, including from past employees, so its investigation will be limited in scope in comparison to a Special Counsel investigation ,"
Sessions' pairing of Horowitz with Huber keeps the investigation under the DOJ's roof and out of the hands of an independent investigator .
Who is Horowitz?
In January, we profiled Michael Horowitz based on thorough research assembled by independent investigators. For those who think the upcoming OIG report is just going to be "all part of the show" - take pause; there's a good chance this is an actual happening, so you may want to read up on the man whose year-long investigation may lead to criminal charges against those involved.
In short - Horowitz went to war with the Obama Administration to restore the OIG's powers - and didn't get them back until Trump took office.
Horowitz was appointed head of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in April, 2012 - after the Obama administration hobbled the OIG's investigative powers in 2011 during the "Fast and Furious" scandal. The changes forced the various Inspectors General for all government agencies to request information while conducting investigations, as opposed to the authority to demand it. This allowed Holder (and other agency heads) to bog down OIG requests in bureaucratic red tape, and in some cases, deny them outright.
What did Horowitz do? As one twitter commentators puts it, he went to war ...
In March of 2015, Horowitz's office prepared a report for Congress titled Open and Unimplemented IG Recommendations . It laid the Obama Admin bare before Congress - illustrating among other things how the administration was wasting tens-of-billions of dollars by ignoring the recommendations made by the OIG.
After several attempts by congress to restore the OIG's investigative powers, Rep. Jason Chaffetz successfully introduced H.R.6450 - the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2016 - signed by a defeated lame duck President Obama into law on December 16th, 2016 , cementing an alliance between Horrowitz and both houses of Congress .
1) Due to the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2016, the OIG has access to all of the information that the target agency possesses. This not only includes their internal documentation and data, but also that which the agency externally collected and documented.TrumpSoldier (@DaveNYviii) January 3, 2018
See here for a complete overview of the OIG's new and restored powers. And while the public won't get to see classified details of the OIG report, Mr. Horowitz is also big on public disclosure:
Horowitz's efforts to roll back Eric Holder's restrictions on the OIG sealed the working relationship between Congress and the Inspector General's ofice, and they most certainly appear to be on the same page. Moreover, FBI Director Christopher Wray seems to be on the same page
Here's a preview:
Which brings us back to the OIG report expected by Congress a week from Monday.
On January 12 of last year, Inspector Horowitz announced an OIG investigation based on " requests from numerous Chairmen and Ranking Members of Congressional oversight committees, various organizations (such as Judicial Watch?), and members of the public ."
The initial focus ranged from the FBI's handling of the Clinton email investigation, to whether or not Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe should have been recused from the investigation (ostensibly over $700,000 his wife's campaign took from Clinton crony Terry McAuliffe around the time of the email investigation), to potential collusion with the Clinton campaign and the timing of various FOIA releases. Which brings us back to the OIG report expected by Congress a week from Monday.
On July 27, 2017 the House Judiciary Committee called on the DOJ to appoint a Special Counsel, detailing their concerns in 14 questions pertaining to "actions taken by previously public figures like Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."
The questions range from Loretta Lynch directing Mr. Comey to mislead the American people on the nature of the Clinton investigation, Secretary Clinton's mishandling of classified information and the (mis)handling of her email investigation by the FBI, the DOJ's failure to empanel a grand jury to investigate Clinton, and questions about the Clinton Foundation, Uranium One, and whether the FBI relied on the "Trump-Russia" dossier created by Fusion GPS.
On September 26, 2017 , The House Judiciary Committee repeated their call to the DOJ for a special counsel, pointing out that former FBI Director James Comey lied to Congress when he said that he decided not to recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton until after she was interviewed, when in fact Comey had drafted her exoneration before said interview.
And now, the OIG report can tie all of this together - as it will solidify requests by Congressional committees, while also satisfying a legal requirement for the Department of Justice to impartially appoint a Special Counsel.
As illustrated below by TrumpSoldier , the report will go from the Office of the Inspector General to both investigative committees of Congress, along with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and is expected within weeks .
Once congress has reviewed the OIG report, the House and Senate Judiciary Committees will use it to supplement their investigations , which will result in hearings with the end goal of requesting or demanding a Special Counsel investigation. The DOJ can appoint a Special Counsel at any point, or wait for Congress to demand one. If a request for a Special Counsel is ignored, Congress can pass legislation to force an the appointment.
And while the DOJ could act on the OIG report and investigate / prosecute themselves without a Special Counsel, it is highly unlikely that Congress would stand for that given the subjects of the investigation.
After the report's completion, the DOJ will weigh in on it. Their comments are key. As TrumpSoldier points out in his analysis, the DOJ can take various actions regarding " Policy, personnel, procedures, and re-opening of investigations. In short, just about everything (Immunity agreements can also be rescinded). "
Meanwhile, recent events appear to correspond with bullet points in both the original OIG investigation letter and the 7/27/2017 letter forwarded to the Inspector General:
... ... ...
With the wheels set in motion last week seemingly align with Congressional requests and the OIG mandate, and the upcoming OIG report likely to serve as a foundational opinion, the DOJ will finally be empowered to move forward with an impartially appointed Special Counsel.
IntercoursetheEU -> Shitonya Serfs Thu, 05/17/2018 - 14:41 Permalinknmewn -> putaipan Thu, 05/17/2018 - 19:21 Permalink
"To save his presidency, Trump must expose a host of criminally cunning Deep State political operatives as enemies to the Constitution, including John Brennan, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, James Comey and Robert Mueller - as well as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton."
Killing the Deep State , Dr Jerome Corsi, PhD., p xinmewn -> IridiumRebel Fri, 05/18/2018 - 06:19 Permalink
I've been more than upfront about my philosophy. I have said on more than one occasion that progs will rue the day they drove a New Yorker like Trump even further to the right.
Now you see it in his actions from the judiciary to bureaucracy destruction to (pick any) and...as I often cite... some old dead white guy once said ..."First they came for the ___ and I did not speak out. Then they came for..."
Now I advocate for progs to swim in their own deadly juices, without a moment's hesitation on my part, without any furtive look back, without remorse or any compassion whatsover.
Forward! ...I think is what they said, welcome to the Death Star ;-)G-R-U-N-T -> Newspeaktogo Thu, 05/17/2018 - 21:06 Permalink
There have been (and are) plenty on "our side"...Boehner, Cantor, McCain, Romney and the thinly disguised "social democrat" Bill Kristol just to name several off the top of my head but the thing is, they always have to hide what they really are from us until rooted out.
That's what I try to point out to "our friends" on the left all the time, for example, there was never any doubt that Chris Dodd, Bwaney Fwank and Chuck Schumer were (and are) in Wall Streets back pocket. But for any prog to openly admit that is to sign some sort of personal death warrant, to be ostracized, blacklisted and harassed out of "the liberal community" so, they bite their tongue & say nothing...knowing what the truth really is.
Hell, they even named a "financial reform bill" after Dodd & Frank...LMAO!!!
It's just the dripping hypocrisy that gets me.
For another example, they knew what was going on with Weinstein, Lauer, Spacey, Rose etal but as long as the cash flowed and they towed-the-prog-BS-line outwardly, they gladly looked the other way and in the end...The Oprah...gives a speech in front of them (as they bark & clap like trained seals) about...Jim Crow?
Jim Crow?!...lol...one has nothing to do with the other Oprah! The perps & enablers are sitting right there in front of you!
It's just friggin surreal sometimes.Gardentoolnumber5 -> BigSwingingJohnson Thu, 05/17/2018 - 18:50 Permalink
"After the report's completion, the DOJ will weigh in on it. Their comments are key. As TrumpSoldier points out in his analysis, the DOJ can take various actions regarding " Policy, personnel, procedures, and re-opening of investigations. In short, just about everything (Immunity agreements can also be rescinded). "
Rescind Immunity, absolutely damn right, put them ALL under oath and on the stand! This is huge! Indeed this goes all the way to the top, would like to see Obama and the 'career criminal' testify under oath explaining how their tribe conspired to frame Trump and the American people.
Hell, put them on trial in a military court for Treason, what's the punishment for Treason these days???
Also would like to see Kerry get fried under the 'Logan Act'!jin187 -> IridiumRebel Fri, 05/18/2018 - 05:33 Permalink
As are half of their fellow travelers in the GOP. Neocon liars. Talk small constitutional govt then vote for war. Those two are direct opposites, war and small govt. The liars must be exposed and removed. The Never Trumpers have outed themselves but many are hiding in plain sight proclaiming they support the President. It appears they have manipulated Trump into an aggressive stance against Russia with their anti Russia hysteria. Time will tell. The bank and armament industries must be removed from any kind of influence within our govt. Most of these are run by big govt collectivists aka communists/globalists.
NO ONE IS GOING TO JAIL OVER THIS.
Who cares how many task forces, special prosecutors, grand juries, commissions, or other crap they throw at this black hole of corruption? We all know the score. The best we can hope for is that the liberals and neo-cons are embarrassed enough to crawl under a rock for awhile, and it slows down implementation of their Orwellian agenda for a few years.
May 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Insurrector -> yaright Fri, 05/18/2018 - 12:27 Permalink
MAGA = Mueller Ain't Going Away
May 18, 2018 | www.marketwatch.com
My alternative advice
There is no substitute to self-education. Those unwilling to learn are destined to repeat these same mistakes. The financial-advice industry is too rife with conflicts of interest for you to enter without equipping yourself with knowledge.
Maybe the best summation is by Dr. James M. Dahle in his book " The White Coat Investor ." He says: "The main difficulty with choosing an investment adviser is that by the time you know enough to choose a good one, you probably know enough to do your financial planning and asset management on your own."
You can find extensive information here to help you become a DIY investor. There are plenty of others dedicated to demystifying the process of investing as well.
Take time and educate yourself. Then, if you still think you still need help with your investments and financial planning, go out armed with knowledge and find a financial adviser that fits your needs.
Chris Mamula used principles of traditional retirement planning, combined with creative lifestyle design, to retire from a career as a physical therapist at age 41. This was first published on the blog site Can I Retire Yet?
Also from Chris Mamula: You can retire early without adopting Mr. Money Mustache's extreme frugality
May 09, 2018 | www.paulcraigroberts.org
Readers ask me how they can learn economics, what books to read, what university economics departments to trust. I receive so many requests that it is impossible to reply individually. Here is my answer.
There is only one way to learn economics, and that is to read Michael Hudson's books. It is not an easy task. You will need a glossary of terms. In some of Hudson's books, if memory serves, he provides a glossary, and his recent book "J Is for Junk Economics" defines the classical economic terms that he uses. You will also need patience, because Hudson sometimes forgets in his explanations that the rest of us don't know what he knows.
The economics taught today is known as neoliberal. This economics differs fundamentally from classical economics that Hudson represents. For example, classical economics stresses taxing economic rent instead of labor and real investment, while neo-liberal economics does the opposite.
An economic rent is unearned income that accrues to an owner from an increase in value that he did nothing to produce. For example, a new road is built at public expense that opens land to development and raises its value, or a transportation system is constructed in a city that raises the value of nearby properties. These increases in values are economic rents. Classical economists would tax away the increase in values in order to pay for the road or transportation system.
Neoliberal economists redefined all income as earned. This enables the financial system to capitalize economic rents into mortgages that pay interest. The higher property values created by the road or transportation system boost the mortgage value of the properties. The financialization of the economy is the process of drawing income away from the purchases of goods and services into interest and fees to financial entities such as banks. Indebtedness and debt accumulate, drawing more income into their service until there is no purchasing power left to drive the economy.
For example, formerly in the US lenders would provide a home mortgage whose service required up to 25% of the family's monthly income. That left 75% of the family's income for other purchases. Today lenders will provide mortgages that eat up half of the monthly income in mortgage service, leaving only 50% of family income for other purchases. In other words, a financialized economy is one that diverts purchasing power away from productive enterprise into debt service.
Hudson shows that international trade and foreign debt also comprise a financialization process, only this time a country's entire resources are capitalized into a mortgage. The West sells a country a development plan and a loan to pay for it. When the debt cannot be serviced, the country is forced to impose austerity on the population by cutbacks in education, health care, public support systems, and government employment and also to privatize public assets such as mineral rights, land, water systems and ports in order to raise the capital with which to pay off the loan. Effectively, the country passes into foreign ownership. This now happens even to European Community members such as Greece and Portugal.
Another defect of neoliberal economics is the doctrine's denial that resources are finite and their exhaustion a heavy cost not born by those who exploit the resources. Many local and regional civilizations have collapsed from exhaustion of the surrounding resources. Entire books have been written about this, but it is not part of neoliberal economics. Supplement study of Hudson with study of ecological economists such as Herman Daly.
The neglect of external costs is a crippling failure of neoliberal economics. An external cost is a cost imposed on a party that does not share in the income from the activity that creates the cost. I recently wrote about the external costs of real estate speculators. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/04/26/capitalism-works-capitalists/ Fracking, mining, oil and gas exploration, pipelines, industries, manufacturing, waste disposal, and so on have heavy external costs associated with the activities.
Neoliberal economists treat external costs as a non-problem, because they theorize that the costs can be compensated, but they seldom are. Oil spills result in companies having to pay cleanup costs and compensation to those who suffered economically from the oil spill, but most external costs go unaddressed. If external costs had to be compensated, in many cases the costs would exceed the value of the projects. How, for example, do you compensate for a polluted river? If you think that is hard, how would the short-sighted destroyers of the Amazon rain forest go about compensating the rest of the world for the destruction of species and for the destructive climate changes that they are setting in motion? Herman Daly has pointed out that as Gross Domestic Product accounting does not take account of external costs and resource exhaustion, we have no idea if the value of output is greater than all of the costs associated with its production. The Soviet economy collapsed, because the value of outputs was less than the value of inputs.
Supply-side economics, with which I am associated, is not an alternative theory to neoliberal economics. Supply-side economics is a successful correction to neoliberal macroeconomic management. Keynesian demand management resulted in stagflation and worsening Phillips Curve trade-offs between employment and inflation. Supply-side economics cured stagflation by reversing the economic policy mix. I have told this story many times. You can find a concise explanation in my short book, "The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalsim." This book also offers insights into other failures of neoliberal economics and for that reason would serve as a background introduction to Hudson's books.
I can make some suggestions, but the order in which you read Michael Hudson is up to you. "J is for Junk Economics" is a way to get information in short passages that will make you familiar with the terms of classical economic analysis. "Killing the Host" and "The Bubble and Beyond" will explain how an economy run to maximize debt is an economy that is self-destructing. "Super Imperialism" and "Trade, Development and Foreign Debt" will show you how dominant countries concentrate world economic power in their hands. "Debt and Economic Renewal in the Ancient Near East" is the story of how ancient economies dying from excessive debt renewed their lease on life via debt forgiveness.
Once you learn Hudson, you will know real economics, not the junk economics marketed by Nobel prize winners in economics, university economic departments, and Wall Street economists. Neoliberal economics is a shield for financialization, resource exhaustion, external costs, and capitalist exploitation.
Neoliberal economics is the world's reigning economics. Russia is suffering much more from neoliberal economics than from Washington's economic sanctions. China herself is overrun with US trained neoliberal economists whose policy advice is almost certain to put China on the same path to failure as all other neoliberal economies.
It is probably impossible to change anything for two main reasons. One is that so many greed-driven private economic activities are protected by neoliberal economics. So many exploitative institutions and laws are in place that to overturn them would require a more thorough revolution than Lenin's. The other is that economists have their entire human capital invested in neoliberal economics. There is scant chance that they are going to start over with study of the classical economists.
Neoliberal economics is an essential part of The Matrix, the false reality in which Americans and Europeans live. Neoliberal economics permits an endless number of economic lies. For example, the US is said to be in a long economic recovery that began in June 2009, but the labor force participation rate has fallen continuously throughout the period of alleged recovery. In previous recoveries the participation rate has risen as people enter the work force to take advantage of the new jobs.
In April the unemployment rate is claimed to have fallen to 3.9 percent, but the participation rate fell also. Neoliberal economists explain away the contradiction by claiming that the falling participation rate is due to the retirement of the baby boom generation, but BLS jobs statistics indicate that those 55 and older account for a large percentage of the new jobs during the alleged recovery. This is the age class of people forced into the part time jobs available by the absence of interest income on their retirement savings. What is really happening is that the unemployment rate does not include discouraged workers, who have given up searching for jobs as there are none to be found. The true measure of the unemployment rate is the decline in the labor force participation rate, not a 3.9 percent rate concocted by not counting those millions of Americans who cannot find jobs. If the unemployment rate really was 3.9 percent, there would be labor shortages and rising wages, but wages are stagnant. These anomalies pass without comment from neoliberal economists.
The long expansion since June 2009 might simply be a statistical artifact due to the under-measurement of inflation, which inflates the GDP figure. Inflation is under-estimated, because goods and services that rise in price are taken out of the index and less costly substitutes are put in their place and because price increases are explained away as quality improvements. In other words, statistical manipulation produces the favorable picture required by The Matrix.
Since the financial collapse caused by the repeal of Glass-Steagall and by financial deregulation, the Federal Reserve has robbed tens of millions of American savers by driving real interest rates down to zero for the sole purpose of saving the "banks too big to fail" that financial deregulation created. A handful of banks has been provided with free money -- in addition to the money that the Federal Reserve created in order to take the banks' bad derivative investments off their hands -- to put on deposit with the Fed from which to collect interest payments and with which to speculate and to drive up stock prices.
In other words, for a decade the economic policy of the United States has been run for the benefit of a few highly concentrated financial interests at the expense of the American people. The economic policy of the United States has been used to create economic rents for the mega-rich.
Neoliberal economists point out that during the 1950s the labor force participation rate was much lower than today and, thereby, they imply that the higher rates prior to the current "recovery" are an anomaly. Neoliberal economists have no historical knowledge as the past is of no interest to them. They do not even know the history of economic thought. Whether from ignorance or intentional deception, neoliberal economists ignore that the lower labor force participation rates of the 1950s reflect a time when married women were at home, not in the work force. In those halcyon days, one earner was all it took to sustain a family. I remember the days when the function of a married woman was to provide household services for the family.
But capitalists were not content to exploit only one member of a family. They wanted more, and by using economic policy to suppress pay while fomenting inflation, they drove married women into the work force, imposing huge external costs on the family, child-raising, relations between spouses, and on the children themselves. The divorce rate has exploded to 50 percent and single-parent households are common in America.
In effect, unleashed Capitalism has destroyed America. Privatization is now eating away Europe. Russia is on the same track as a result of its neoliberal brainwashing by American economists. China's love of success and money could doom this rising Asian giant as well if the government opens China to foreign finance capital and privatizes public assets that end up in foreign hands.
May 14, 2018 | www.rt.com
The economist John Maynard Keynes said "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" But many students continue to be deceived by their professors who, even after the great financial crisis, refuse to change their mind and continue to actively peddle theories that are plain wrong. So on the show we ask if the academics are failing us, how do we begin to reverse such a heavily entrenched education system? Host Ross Ashcroft is joined by Professor Steve Keen and the author and economist Steven Payson.
May 14, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,
Geologist Arthur Berman, who has been skeptical about the shale boom, warned on Thursday that the Permian's best years are gone and that the most productive U.S. shale play has just seven years of proven oil reserves left.
"The best years are behind us," Bloomberg quoted Berman as saying at the Texas Energy Council's annual gathering in Dallas.
The Eagle Ford is not looking good, either, according to Berman, who is now working as an industry consultant, and whose pessimistic outlook is based on analyses of data about reserves and production from more than a dozen prominent U.S. shale companies.
"The growth is done," he said at the gathering.
Those who think that the U.S. shale production could add significant crude oil supply to the global market are in for a disappointment, according to Berman.
"The reserves are respectable but they ain't great and ain't going to save the world," Bloomberg quoted Berman as saying.
Yet, Berman has not sold the EOG Resources stock that he has inherited from his father "because they're a pretty good company."
The short-term drilling productivity outlook by the EIA estimates that the Permian's oil production hit 3.110 million bpd in April, and will rise by 73,000 bpd to 3.183 million bpd in May.
Earlier this week, the EIA raised its forecast for total U.S. production this year and next. In the latest Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), the EIA said that it expects U.S. crude oil production to average 10.7 million bpd in 2018, up from 9.4 million bpd in 2017, and to average 11.9 million bpd in 2019, which is 400,000 bpd higher than forecast in the April STEO. In the current outlook, the EIA forecasts U.S. crude oil production will end 2019 at more than 12 million bpd.
Yet, production is starting to outpace takeaway capacity in the Permian, creating bottlenecks that could slow down the growth pace.
Drillers may soon start to test the Permian region's geological limits, Wood Mackenzie has warned. And if E&P companies can't overcome the geological constraints with tech breakthroughs, WoodMac has warned that Permian production could peak in 2021 , putting more than 1.5 million bpd of future production in question, and potentially significantly influencing oil prices.
The takeaway bottlenecks have hit WTI crude oil priced in Midland, Texas, which declined sharply compared with Brent in April, the EIA said in the May STEO.
" As production grows beyond the capacity of existing pipeline infrastructure, producers must use more expensive forms of transportation, including rail and trucks. As a result, WTI Midland price spreads widened to the largest discount to Brent since 2014. The WTI Midland differential to Brent settled at -$17.69/b on May 3, which represents a widening of $9.76/b since April 2," the EIA said.
May 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
XXX -> IntercoursetheEU Fri, 05/04/2018 - 11:43 PermalinkAttention Hookers : Special Counsel urgently needs your stories. We pay top dollar. Big tits, role-play, and lying required. Television experience preferred. No drug screening. No background check. Transportation included.
Call 1-800-George-Soros or contact the Law Offices of Wray, Mueller, and Rosenstein, LLC.
May 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Atlantic Council Explains Why We Need To Be Propagandized For Our Own Good
by Tyler Durden Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:05 9 SHARES Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,
I sometimes try to get establishment loyalists to explain to me exactly why we're all meant to be terrified of this "Russian propaganda" thing they keep carrying on about. What is the threat, specifically? That it makes the public less willing to go to war with Russia and its allies? That it makes us less trusting of lying, torturing, coup-staging intelligence agencies? Does accidentally catching a glimpse of that green RT logo turn you to stone like Medusa, or melt your face like in Raiders of the Lost Ark ?
"Well, it makes us lose trust in our institutions," is the most common reply.
Okay. So? Where's the threat there? We know for a fact that we've been lied to by those institutions. Iraq isn't just something we imagined . We should be skeptical of claims made by western governments, intelligence agencies and mass media. How specifically is that skepticism dangerous?
Trying to get answers to such questions from rank-and-file empire loyalists is like pulling teeth, and they are equally lacking in the mass media who are constantly sounding the alarm about Russian propaganda. All I see are stories about Russia funding environmentalists (the horror!), giving a voice to civil rights activists (oh noes!), and retweeting articles supportive of Jeremy Corbyn (think of the children!). At its very most dramatic, this horrifying, dangerous epidemic of Russian propaganda is telling westerners to be skeptical of what they're being told about the Skripal poisoning and the alleged Douma gas attack , both of which do happen to have some very significant causes for skepticism .
When you try to get down to the brass tacks of the actual argument being made and demand specific details about the specific threats we're meant to be worried about, there aren't any to be found. Nobody's been able to tell me what specifically is so dangerous about westerners being exposed to the Russian side of international debates, or of Russians giving a platform to one or both sides of an American domestic debate. Even if every single one of the allegations about Russian bots and disinformation are true ( and they aren't ), where is the actual clear and present danger? No one can say.
No one, that is, except the Atlantic Council.
In an absolutely jaw-dropping article that you should definitely read in its entirety , Elizabeth Braw took it upon herself to finally answer the question of why Russian propaganda is so dangerous, using the following hypothetical scenario :
What if Russia suddenly announced that its Baltic Fleet had dispatched an armada towards Britain? Would most people greet the news with steely resolve in the knowledge that their governments would know what to do, or would constant Kremlin-influenced reports about the incompetence of British institutions make them conclude that any resistance was pointless?
I mean, wow. Wow! Just wow. Where to even begin with this?
Before I continue, I should note that Braw is a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council, the shady NATO-aligned think tank with ties to powerful oligarchs whose name comes up when you look into many of the mainstream anti-Russia narratives, from the DNC hack to the discredited war propaganda firm Bellingcat to Russian trolls to the notorious PropOrNot blacklist publicized by the Washington Post . Her article , published by Defense One , is titled "We Need a NATO for Infowar", and it argues that westerners need to be propagandized by an alliance of western governments for our own good.
Back to the aforementioned excerpt. Braw claims that if Russian propaganda isn't shut down or counteracted, Russia could send a fleet of war ships to attack Britain, and the British people would react unenthusiastically? Wouldn't cheer loudly enough as the British Navy fought the Russians? Would have a defeatist emotional demeanor? What exactly is the argument here?
That's seriously her only attempt to directly address the question of where the actual danger is. Even in the most cartoonishly dramatic hypothetical scenario this Atlantic Council member can possibly imagine, there's still no tangible threat of any kind. Even if Russia was directly attacking the United Kingdom at home, and Russian propaganda had somehow magically dominated all British airwaves and been believed by the entire country, that still wouldn't have any impact on the British military's ability to fight a naval battle. There's literally no extent to which you can inflate this "Russian propaganda" hysteria to turn it into a possible threat to actual people in real life.
It gets better. Check out this excerpt:
Such responses to disinformation are like swatting flies: time-consuming and ineffective. But not addressing disinformation is ineffective, too. "Western media still have this thing where they try to be completely balanced, so they'll say, 'the Russians say this, but on the other hand the Americans say this is not true,' They end up giving a lie and the truth the same value," noted Toomas Hendrik Ilves, the former president of Estonia.
I just have so many questions. Like, how desperate does a writer have to be for an expert who can lend credibility to their argument that they have to reach all the way over to a former president of Estonia? And on what planet are these people living where Russian narratives are given the same weight as western narratives by western mainstream media? How can I get to this fantastical parallel dimension where western media "try to be completely balanced" and give equal coverage to all perspectives?
Braw argues that, because Russian propaganda is so dangerous (what with the threat of British people having insufficient emotional exuberance during a possible naval battle and all), what is required is a "NATO of infowar", an alliance of western state media that is tasked with combatting Russian counter-narratives. Because, in the strange Dungeons & Dragons fantasy fairy world in which Braw penned her article, this isn't already happening.
And of course, here in the real world, it is already happening. As I wrote recently , mainstream media outlets have been going out of their minds churning out attack editorials on anyone who questions the establishment narrative about what happened in Douma. A BBC reporter recently admonished a retired British naval officer for voicing skepticism of what we're being told about Syria on the grounds that it might "muddy the waters" of the "information war" that is being fought against Russia. All day, every day, western mass media are pummeling the public with stories about how awful and scary Russians are and how everything they say is a lie.
This is because western mass media outlets are owned by western plutocrats, and those plutocrats have built their empires upon a status quo that they have a vested interest in preserving, often to the point where they will form alliances with defense and intelligence agencies to do so. They hire executives and editors who subscribe to a pro-establishment worldview, who in turn hire journalists who subscribe to a pro-establishment worldview, and in that way they ensure that all plutocrat-owned media outlets are advancing pro-plutocrat agendas.
The western empire is ruled by a loose transnational alliance of plutocrats and secretive government agencies. That loose alliance is your real government, and that government has the largest state media network in the history of civilization. The mass media propaganda machine of the western empire makes RT look like your grandmother's Facebook wall.
In that way, we are being propagandized constantly by the people who really rule us. All this panic about Russian propaganda doesn't exist because our dear leaders have a problem with propaganda, it exists because they believe only they should be allowed to propagandize us.
And, unlike Russian propaganda, western establishment propaganda actually does pose a direct threat to us. By using mass media to manipulate the ways we think and vote, our true rulers can persuade us to consent to crushing austerity measures and political impotence while the oligarchs grow richer and medicine money is spent on bombs. When we should all be revolting against an oppressive Orwellian oligarchy, we are instead lulled to sleep by those same oligarchs and their hired talking heads lying to us about freedom and democracy.
Russian propaganda is not dangerous. Having access to other ways of looking at global geopolitics is not dangerous. What absolutely is dangerous is a vast empire concerning itself with the information and ideas that its citizenry have access to. Get your rapey, manipulative fingers out of our minds, please.
If our dear leaders are so worried about our losing faith in our institutions, they shouldn't be concerning themselves with manipulating us into trusting them, they should be making those institutions more trustworthy.
Don't manipulate better, be better. The fact that an influential think tank is now openly advocating the former over the latter should concern us all.
* * *
Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website , so you'll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .
EuroPox -> Bitchface-KILLAH Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalinktechpriest -> Bitchface-KILLAH Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:19 Permalink
BBC, CNN, etc. - they have already lost!
This is a great chart - it shows websites linked from 'false flag' tweets:
People are not turning to the MSM, they are heading straight to: MoA, ZH, PCR, RT... this is where people now turn to find the truth! The two most frequent, each appearing in six out of seven datasets? ZeroHedge and RT.
Well done ZH!navy62802 Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalink
"Well, it makes us lose trust in our institutions," is the most common reply.
I have never been a Trump supporter, but IMO the one positive I saw back in the elections is that his character would bring about exactly this loss of trust. Not "He's bad and we can't trust him," so much as the fact that he's polarizing, and will fight everyone, and has inadvertently caused a lot of bad people to expose themselves.
Why should you trust people who think they have the right to take whatever amount of your money they want, use it for any purpose they want, and also who believe they have the right to harass, torture, stalk, or kill whoever they want, on any pretext they feel like thinking up?
The Atlantic Council is just another tentacle of the Soros Squid. The man should have been dealt with as a Nazi collaborator in the aftermath of World War 2. Unfortunately for humanity, he evaded accountability for his crimes against humanity during the war.
May 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Judge Mulls Dismissal Of Manafort Charges, "Sharply Questioned" Mueller Overreach
by Tyler Durden Fri, 05/04/2018 - 11:39 4.1K SHARES
Like most motions to dismiss, Paul Manafort's was initially viewed as a long-shot bid to win the political operative his freedom and get out from under the thumb of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
But after today's hearing on a motion to dismiss filed by Manafort's lawyers, it's looking increasingly likely that Manafort could escape his charges - and be free of his ankle bracelets - because in a surprising rebuke of Mueller's "overreach", Eastern District of Virginia Judge T.S. Ellis, a Reagan appointee, said Mueller shouldn't have "unfettered power" to prosecute over charges that have nothing to do with collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
Ellis said he's concerned Mueller is only pursuing charges against Manafort (and presumably other individuals) to pressure them into turning on Trump. The Judge added that the charges brought against Manafort didn't appear to stem from Mueller's collusion probe. Instead, they appeared to be the work of an older investigation into Manafort that was eventually dropped.
"I don't see how this indictment has anything to do with anything the special prosecutor is authorized to investigate," Ellis said at a hearing in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, concerning a motion by Manafort to dismiss the case.
It got better: Ellis also slammed prosecutors saying it appeared they were using the indictment of Manafort to pressure him to cooperate against Trump. Manafort, 69, has pleaded not guilty and disputes Mueller's assertion that he violated U.S. laws when he worked for a decade as a political consultant for pro-Russian groups in Ukraine.
"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud," Ellis said. "You really care about what information he might give you about Mr. Trump and what might lead to his impeachment or prosecution. "
According to Bloomberg, Ellis is overseeing one of two indictments against Manafort. Manafort is also charged in Washington with money laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent of Ukraine.
* * *
Manafort's lawyers had asked the judge in the Virginia case to dismiss an indictment filed against him in what was their third effort to beat back criminal charges by attacking Mueller's authority. The judge also questioned why Manafort's case there could not be handled by the U.S. attorney's office in Virginia, rather than the special counsel's office, as it is not Russia-related . A question many others have asked, as well.
Ellis has given prosecutors two weeks to show what evidence they have that Manafort was complicit in colluding with the Russians. If they can't come up with any, he may, presumably, dismiss the case. Ellis also asked the special counsel's office to share privately with him a copy of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein's August 2017 memo elaborating on the scope of Mueller's Russia probe. He said the current version he has been heavily redacted.
At that point, should nothing change materially, Manafort may be a free man; needless to say, a dismissal would set precedent and be nothing short of groundbreaking by potentially making it much harder for Mueller to turn other witnesses against the president.
May 03, 2018 | oilprice.com
... hedging contracts could result in US$7 billion in losses if WTI prices were to stabilize at $68 a barrel this year, Wood Mackenzie analyst Andrew McConn told Bloomberg in an interview.
May 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
karlof1 | May 2, 2018 5:28:28 PM | 175
Just when during WW1 the British determined they were going to be backstabbed by their American cousins is unknown to me, but hopefully my unfinished research into that era will provide an answer. Clearly, Keynes knew what would occur as he observed the proceedings at Versailles, which prompted him to go to Marseilles to write Consequences. I greatly disagree with most of Wikipedia's discussion of Consequences except for this bit in the intro:
"In his book, he argued for a much more generous peace, not out of a desire for justice or fairness – these are aspects of the peace that Keynes does not deal with – but for the sake of the economic well-being of all of Europe, including the Allied Powers, which the Treaty of Versailles and its associated treaties would prevent. [My Emphasis]
Thanks to Wilson's stroke, we'll never know how he really felt about the last months of his administration; his wife becoming the first de facto female president of the USA. One of the better indicators about the nascent Deep States's feeling about Versailles is their behavior during the 1920s as it laid the ground work for the Great Depression's onslaught with Dollar Diplomacy and Teapot Dome exemplifying its moral compass. Prohibition's gangsters and coppers provided the required distraction of the masses until the money vanished. Then came radio, the beginnings of mass media and onset of media conglomeration.
paulmeli , May 2, 2018 6:07:44 PM | 176james @ 166ashley albanese , May 2, 2018 6:40:23 PM | 177i think what is missing in your analysis "how governments that print their own currency such as US, UK and China can print as much as they want and use it as they like" is the key acknowledgement that the us$ has been used as world currency.
The US $ is the World Currency because the US is the only country in the World that exports it's currency more than $0.5 Trillion/year. Like a virus really. It's that simple if the US didn't export $ it wouldn't be the reserve currency.
The other part about sovereigns being able to "print all they want" is a falsehood without context.
First of all, when people refer to "printing" it usually means "spending" although I'm not sure they think of it in those terms. The actual printing of physical currency/coins moves money from checking accounts in the banking system to petty cash accounts. No new money is created by that kind of "printing". About 2% of US $ is coins or currency, the rest exists only on balance sheets.
Secondly, a sovereign is able to buy anything for sale in it's own currency as long as the resource being bought exists and is for sale. You can't buy something that doesn't exist. The constraint on money creation is resources not arithmetic, which is the most widely misunderstood characteristic of fiat currencies.
Further, a sovereign that HAS NO DEBT IN A FOREIGN CURRENCY has zero risk of insolvency there is no liability (in it's own currency) a sovereign cannot satisfy. The US holds no foreign debt. Nor does Canada, Australia, Japan, UK, etc. as far as I know. Every member in the Eurozone is a de-facto holder of foreign debt (the Euro member countries cannot freely create Euro's. They are more like private borrowers).gov'ts were in a position to print their own money and not have to pay interest thru the private banking sector for it.
James, this is another myth unless you are talking about the Eurozone. The US Federal government does not pay interest to the banking sector, it pays interest to holders of Treasury securities. To do so was a CHOICE not a requirement. Paying interest on previously created monies was voluntary. Congress created the banking system (for the US) through the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which created and governs the banking system, and chose to pay interest later after WWI I believe (probably as a give-away to bankers who didn't think they made enough money off of WWi). MRW knows a lot more about this history if he's around.
Interest paid on the "debt" (all money is debt, interest or not by definition) is a net transfer of funds to the private sector (those who hold Treasury securities). Those funds increase the money supply. Anyone can hold Treasury securities, not just banks. They are a risk-free investment vehicle (the only one).
Further, it is the Fed that sets interest rates, not the bond-holders ("bond vigilantes") as they are referred to. 10 years of zero-interest rates post 2008 should be proof enough of that.
Treasury securities (bonds) move $ from a checking account at the Fed to a savings account at the FED. They are $ that earn interest. This is all explained in the Mosler pdf I linked to.
In double-entry accounting a National Debt™ for the government is NATIONAL SAVINGS for the citizens, as are the interest payments. All this worry about sovereign debt is silliness. Without sovereign debt the currency of issue wouldn't exist. Sovereign debt is our money (although the elites won't let us acquire much of it).May2 172paulmeli , May 2, 2018 6:49:08 PM | 178
Of course the Marxist critique of and challenge to Capitalism was central in all this ! The West was competing with the East ( simplifying)and when this situation changed with Anglo Hegemony 1990 , these balances that had seen overall development towards the 'welfare state ' disintegrated .
Once the U S got its opportunistic run at this situation, crudely grasping for further power we rapidly reached the present situation , with its repeat of World War scenarios , as competing economic / militarised blocs do exactly that !@ SteveK9 @ 160james , May 2, 2018 7:51:46 PM | 179
Yes, Mosler not being an economist is a feature, not a bug. I agree, economists are idiots, but I suspect they're paid idiots. What's the Upton Sinclair quote ?
From where I sit MMT savvy economists are not idiots. They are however outcasts. If your not an insider you're an outsider, and outsiders don't get to make the big money, if they don't starve.
Here's a video excerpt regarding our pre-eminent economist Paul Krugman lest you think he isn't in on the con:
"Never Touch the Money System"@176 paulmeli.. thanks.. i had to read your comment a few times, and it still isn't sinking in fully.. i am getting some of it, but maybe it is my conspiracy run brain that wants to know how we've been screwed over by the banks.. that is what i believe has happened...MRW.. haven't seen him in a good while.. every time he would come all my negative stereo types about the private banking sector were put on hold, as i recall!Josh , May 2, 2018 7:56:05 PM | 180
i think a lot of this has to do with exporting / importing between countries... especially the part about holding foreign debt.. how does another country pay for something? this is why we read today of how russia, china and iran are getting into financial arrangements whereby they don't have to go thru the us$.. wasn't this a good part of the reason the usa went to war in iraq, or libya? iraq and libya wanted to trade in euros, as opposed to us$.. well - hopefully MRW can come and bring me back to reality! it seems the world financial markets are one big ponzi scheme... think of the derivative markets.. one is not trading in some actual commodity.. it is increasingly opaque and shrouded in speculation, while run on computers...
i am sorry paul, but i can only go so far in my understanding here.. as i understand it, something is very wrong in the financial system at present.. it is also the reason these financial sanction games are typically a lead up to war... one group has undue power and influence over the worlds finances - the usa - and they exercise this clout via sanctions, and if that doesn't work - war / regime change - etc. etc... obviously i am missing something here, but i will be damned if i buy the official hokum from an economist! thanks for trying to educate me.. nI despise Netanyahu but please change the headline from Netanyahoo as Yahoo was used as an antisemtic slur in the past. I'm sure the author was not aware of this outdated meaning but it does the cause harm. Thank you.paulmeli , May 2, 2018 8:07:23 PM | 181james @ 179david hogg , May 2, 2018 8:23:36 PM | 182something is very wrong in the financial system at present..
I think it's always been this way but now the corruption is so out in the open it seems like it's worse. I'm not sure it is.
The way finance corrupts is that obscene riches are offered to state leaders to sell out their own citizens for pennies on the dollar. And they do it, because if they don't regime change will follow. It's similar to the way corporate raiders take over businesses, sell off the assets and load the business up with debt, then sell what's left. With all of that debt said business has no chance of success. A handful of financial guys (parasites of the worse kind) walk away with the cash.
Corporate strip-mining - the business plan is simple and it's always the same - no matter if it's a business or a country.Something to keep in mind about all of this Iran business is that Trump can now move full speed ahead with Bolton and Pompeo in place. I find it oddly comforting that, generally speaking, Trump and his administration make no attempt to cloak their psychopathy in coded language. I thought these remarks from Pompeo yesterday as he addressed the lackeys at Foggy Bottom yesterday particularly illuminating in this regard:spudski , May 2, 2018 8:44:26 PM | 183
"I talked at my hearing about the fact that this nation is so exceptional, and so incredibly blessed and the facts that derive from that are that it also creates a responsibility, a duty for America all across the world. And I know for certain that America can't execute that duty, can't achieve its objectives absent you all. Absent executing America's foreign policy in every corner of the world with incredible vigor and incredible energy. And I look forward to helping you all advance that."paulmeli @ 181Pft , May 2, 2018 9:16:21 PM | 184
Excellent précis of corporate/country asset stripping.@paulmeli 176
Money supply increases with debt creation and decreases with debt payment. Wipe out all debt and money supply is zero. Taking out a loan is an example of money creation. The money does not exist in the system till its deposited into your account. Paying off the mortgage depletes the money supply.
Its true that the government does not pay interest on money the Fed loans them. Thats why so little is loaned directly to the government until the last crash. Money is not created by interest. That money does not exist without new debt. The government borrows the money to pay the interest.
A key reason the US is the reserve currency is OPEC. OPEC serves Big Oil interests which is interlocked with Big Banking and requires purchases of Oil to be in USD. Hence the name Petro Dollar. OPEC may produce the oil but its The Big Oil (4 sisters) that transports most of it to market, refines much of it and provides the equipment for OPEC members to get the oil out of the ground.
We also export a tremendous amount of food that requires payment in USD, and US manufacturing is now in China and consumer debt allows us to purchase a great amount of goods from China in USD. Manufacturers in China need to pay expenses in RMB so sell USD to Chinese banks. Chinas Central Bank Prints up RMB at no interest to buy the USD and then loans it to the US at interest.
Its a perfect system and is basically why the USD will never fail unless those in control want it to.
May 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by James Bovard via The Mises Institute,
" Here I stand, I can do no other," James Comey told President George W. Bush in 2004 when Bush pressured Comey - who was then Deputy Attorney General - to approve an unlawful antiterrorist policy.
Comey, who was FBI chief from 2013 to 2017, was quoting a line reputedly uttered by Martin Luther in 1521, when he told Holy Roman Emperor Charles V that he would not recan t his sweeping criticisms of the Catholic Church. Comey's quotation of himself quoting the father of the Reformation is par for the self-reverence of his new memoir, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership .
MSNBC host Chris Matthews recently declared, "James Comey made his bones by standing up against torture. He was a made man before Trump came along." Washington Post columnist Fareed Zakaria , in a column declaring that Americans should be "deeply grateful" to lawyers like Comey, declared, "The Bush administration wanted to claim that its 'enhanced interrogation techniques' were lawful. Comey believed they were not... So Comey pushed back as much as he could."
Martin Luther risked death to fight against what he considered the heresies of his time. Comey, a top Bush administration policymaker, found a safer way to oppose the worldwide secret U.S. torture regime widely considered a heresy against American values. Comey approved brutal practices and then wrote some memos and emails fretting about the optics.
Comey became Deputy Attorney General in late 2003 and " had oversight of the legal justification used to authorize " key Bush programs in the war on terror. At that time, the Bush White House was pushing the Justice Department to again sign off on an array of extreme practices that had begun shortly after the 9/11 attacks. A 2002 Justice Department memo had leaked out that declared that the president was entitled to ignore federal law in approving extreme interrogation techniques. Photos had also leaked from Abu Ghraib prison showing the stacking of naked prisoners with bags over their heads, mock electrocution via a wire connected to a man's penis, guard dogs on the verge of ripping into naked men, and grinning U.S. male and female soldiers celebrating the bloody degradation. A confidential CIA Inspector General report had just warned that post-9/11 CIA interrogation methods may violate the international Convention Against Torture .
Rather than ending the abuses, Comey repudiated the memo. Speaking to the media in a not-for-attribution session on June 22, 2004, Comey declared that the 2002 memo was "overbroad," "abstract academic theory," and "legally unnecessary ." Comey helped oversee crafting a new memo with different legal footing to justify the same interrogation methods.
Comey twice gave explicit approval for waterboardin g, which sought to break detainees with near-drowning.
This practice had been recognized as a war crime by the U.S. government since the Spanish American War .
Comey wrote in his memoir that he was losing sleep over concern about Bush administration torture polices. But losing sleep was not an option for detainees because Comey approved sleep deprivation as an interrogation technique . Detainees could be forcibly kept awake for up to 180 hours until they confessed their sins. How did this work? At Abu Ghraib, the notorious Iraqi prison, one FBI agent reported seeing a detainee " handcuffed to a railing with a nylon sack on his head and a shower curtain draped around him, being slapped by a soldier to keep him awake ."
Comey also approved " wall slamming" -- which, as law professor David Cole wrote, meant that detainees could be thrown against a wall up to 30 times . Comey also signed off on the CIA using "interrogation" methods such as facial slaps, locking detainees in small boxes for 18 hours, and forced nudity. When the secret Comey memo approving those methods finally became public in 2009 , many Americans were aghast - and relieved that the Obama administration had repudiated Bush policies .
When it came to opposing torture, Comey's version of "Here I stand" had more loopholes than a reverse mortgage contract. Though Comey in 2005 approved each of 13 controversial extreme interrogation methods , he objected to combining multiple methods on one detainee. It was as if Martin Luther grudgingly approved of the Catholic Church selling indulgences to individually expunge sins for adultery, robbery, lying, and gluttony but vehemently objected if all the sins were expunged in one lump sum payment.
In 2014, the Senate Intelligence Committee finally released a massive report, Americans learned grisly details of the CIA torture regime that Comey helped legally sanctify - including death via hypothermia, rape-like rectal feeding of detainees, compelling detainees to stand long periods on broken legs, and dozens of cases of innocent people pointlessly brutalized. Psychologists aided the torture regime, offering hints on how to destroy the will and resistance of prisoners. The only CIA official to go to prison for the torture scandal was courageous whistleblower John Kiriakou.
If Comey had resigned in 2004 or 2005 to protest the torture techniques he now claims to abhor, he would deserve some of the praise he is now receiving. Instead, he remained in the Bush administration but wrote an email summarizing his objections, declaring that "it was my job to protect the department and the A.G. [Attorney General] and that I could not agree to this because it was wrong." A 2009 New York Times analysis noted that Comey and two colleagues "have largely escaped criticism [for approving torture] because they raised questions about interrogation and the law." In Washington, writing emails is "close enough for government work" to convey sainthood.
When Comey finally exited the Justice Department in August 2005 to become a lavishly-paid senior vice president for Lockheed Martin , he proclaimed in a farewell speech that protecting the Justice Department's "reservoir" of "trust and credibility" requires "vigilance" and "an unerring commitment to truth ." But Comey perpetuated policies that shattered the moral credibility of both the Justice Department and the U.S. government.
Comey failed to heed another Martin Luther admonition: " You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say ."Vote up! 7 Vote down! 0
enough of this Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:05 Permalinkbeepbop -> enough of this Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:20 Permalink
The guy is a sanctimonious liar.???ö? -> beepbop Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:32 Permalink
Torture is just a symptom of a BIGGER problem, and Paying lip service to Christianity is their way of hiding what they're really doing:
US Politicians have set aside the country's Christian roots and
fully embraced Satanic-Talmudic ways to please Israhell,
the Scourge of Empires .MillionDollarButter -> ???ö? Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:35 Permalink
I was against Comey, then I was for Comey, and now I'm against Comey again.
ˎ.l..gigadeath Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:06 Permalink
"We all voted for Hillary." -The Bushes
P.S. Don't trust the plan, the plan is Greater Israel.WTFUD Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:09 Permalink
A saint with a capital s. /SDiggingInTheDirt Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:49 Permalink
Lockheed, heard that name before, can't quite place it, it'll come back to me, every day in my nightmares.Neochrome Tue, 05/01/2018 - 23:58 Permalink
Fl*ck Comey. OMG. I've been wanting to puke into a wastebasket over all of Comey's crap lately. Actually, wanting to puke is one of my best bullshit barometers. He's a lying sack of shit, strutting his sanctimonious arrogance all over the tee-vee. Meanwhile back home his family of women wear pink hats to protest Trump. Wonder if James the Great told his family members he approved torture?Aireannpure Wed, 05/02/2018 - 00:17 Permalink
Keeping his back to the wall and stabbing others from behind...
And it worked until it didn't work anymore.
Bush was torture. Bowf of dem.
May 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
karlof1 , May 1, 2018 2:27:06 PM | 13Just finished reading the fascinating Michael Hudson interview I linked to on previous thread; but since we're discussing Jews and their religion in a tangential manner, I think it appropriate to post here since the history Hudson explains is 100% key to the ongoing pain us humans feel and inflict. My apologies in advance, but it will take this long excerpt to explain what I mean:psychohistorian , May 1, 2018 3:31:50 PM | 26
"Tribes: When does the concept of a general debt cancellation disappear historically?
"Michael: I guess in about the second or third century AD it was downplayed in the Bible. After Jesus died, you had, first of all, St Paul taking over, and basically Christianity was created by one of the most evil men in history, the anti-Semite Cyril of Alexandria. He gained power by murdering his rivals, the Nestorians, by convening a congress of bishops and killing his enemies. Cyril was really the Stalin figure of Christianity, killing everybody who was an enemy, organizing pogroms against the Jews in Alexandria where he ruled.
"It was Cyril that really introduced into Christianity the idea of the Trinity. That's what the whole fight was about in the third and fourth centuries AD. Was Jesus a human, was he a god? And essentially you had the Isis-Osiris figure from Egypt, put into Christianity. The Christians were still trying to drive the Jews out of Christianity. And Cyril knew the one thing the Jewish population was not going to accept would be the Isis figure and the Mariolatry that the church became. And as soon as the Christian church became the establishment rulership church, the last thing it wanted in the West was debt cancellation.
"You had a continuation of the original Christianity in the Greek Orthodox Church, or the Orthodox Church, all the way through Byzantium. And in my book And Forgive Them Their Debts, the last two chapters are on the Byzantine echo of the original debt cancellations, where one ruler after another would cancel the debts. And they gave very explicit reason for it: if we don't cancel the debts, we're not going to be able to field an army, we're not going to be able to collect taxes, because the oligarchy is going to take over. They were very explicit, with references to the Bible, references to the jubilee year. So you had Christianity survive in the Byzantine Empire. But in the West it ended in Margaret Thatcher. And Father Coughlin.
"Tribes: He was the '30s figure here in the States.
"Michael: Yes: anti-Semite, right-wing, pro-war, anti-labor. So the irony is that you have the people who call themselves fundamentalist Christians being against everything that Jesus was fighting for, and everything that original Christianity was all about."
Hudson says debt forgiveness was one of the central tenets of Judaism: " ... if you take the Bible literally, it's the fight in almost all of the early books of the Old Testament, the Jewish Bible, all about the fight over indebtedness and debt cancellation. "
Looks like I'll be purchasing Hudson's book as he's essentially unveiling a whole new, potentially revolutionary, historical interpretation.@ karlof1 with the Michale Hudson link....thanks!!james , May 1, 2018 10:30:01 PM | 96
Here is the quote that I really like from that interview
Michael: No. You asked what is the fight about? The fight is whether the state will be taken over, essentially to be an extension of Wall Street if you do not have government planning. Every economy is planned. Ever since the Neolithic (era), you've had to have (a form of) planning. If you don't have a public authority doing the planning, then the financial authority becomes the planners. So globalism is in the financial interest –Wall Street and the City of London, doing the planning, not governments. They will do the planning in their own interest. So neoliberalism is the fight of finance to subdue society at large,and to make the bankers and creditors today in the position that the landlords were under feudalism.
karlof1, please email me as I would like to read the book as well and maybe we can share a copy.
And yes, it is relevant to Netanyahoo and his ongoing passel of lies because humanity has been told and been living these lives for centuries...it is time to stop this shit and grow up/evolve@13 / 78 karlof1... thanks very much for the links to michael hudson, alastair crooke and the bruno maraces articles...WJ | May 1, 2018 10:48:58 PM | 100
they were all good for different reasons, but although hudson is being criticized for glossing over some of his talking points, i think the main thrust of his article is very worthwhile for others to read! the quote to end his article is quite good "The question is, who do you want to run the economy? The 1% and the financial sector, or the 99% through politics? The fight has to be in the political sphere, because there's no other sphere that the financial interests cannot crush you on."
it seems to me that the usa has worked hard to bad mouth or get rid of government and the concept of government being involved in anything.. of course everything has to be run by a 'private corp' - ie corporations must run everything.. they call them oligarchs when talking about russia, lol - but they are corporations when they are in the usa.. slight rant..
another quote i especially liked from hudson.. " They call themselves free marketers, but they realize that you cannot have neoliberalism unless you're willing to murder and assassinate everyone who promotes an alternative ." that sounds about right...
@ 84 juliania.. aside from your comments on hudsons characterization of st paul "the anti-Semite Cyril of Alexandria" further down hudson basically does the same with father coughlin - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coughlin.. he gets the anti-semite tag as well.. i don't know much about either characters, so it's mostly greek to me, but i do find some of hudsons views especially appealing - debt forgiveness being central to the whole article as i read it...
it is interesting my own view on how money is so central to the world and how often times I am incapable of avoiding the observation of the disproportionate number of Jewish people in banking.. I guess that makes me anti-semite too, but i don't think of myself that way.. I think the obsession with money is killing the planet.. I don't care who is responsible for keeping it going, it is killing us...WJ , May 1, 2018 8:23:40 PM | 88
Just so long as you remember that most of the strongest and most moving condemnations of greed and money in the ancient and (today) western world are also Jewish--i.e. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, the Gospels, Letter of James, etc.
The history of Jewish banking after the fall or Rome is inextricable from cultural anti-judaism of Christian west and east and de facto marginalization/ghettoization of Jews from most aspects of social life. The Jewish lending of money on interest to gentiles was both necessary for early mercantilist trade and yet usury was prohibited by the church. So Jewish money lenders were essential to and yet ostracized within European economies for centuries.
Now Christianity has itself long given up on the tradition teaching against usury of course.Juliana @84,
I too greatly admire the work of Hudson but he consistently errs and oversimplifies whenever discussing the beliefs of and the development of beliefs among preNicene followers of the way (as Acts puts is) or Christians (as they came to be known in Antioch within roughly eight or nine decades after Jesus' death.) Palestinian Judaism in the time of Jesus was much more variegated than scholars even twenty years ago had recognized. The gradual reception and interpretation of the Dead Sea Scrolls in tandem with renewed research into Phili of Alexandria, the Essenes, the so-called Sons of Zadok, contemporary Galilean zealot movements styles after the earlier Maccabean resistance, the apocalyptism of post exilic texts like Daniel and (presumably) parts of Enoch--all paint a picture of a highly diverse group of alternatives to the state-Church once known as Second Temple Judaism that has been mistaken as undisputed Jewish "orthodoxy" since the advent of historical criticism.
The Gospel of John, for example, which dates from betweeen 80-120 and is the record of a much earlier oral tradition, is already explicitly binitarian, and possibly already trinitarian depending on how one understands the relationship between the Spirit or Advocate and the Son. (Most ante-Nicene Christians understood the Spirit to be *Christ's* own spirit in distributed form, and they did so by appeal to a well-developed but still largely under recognized strand in Jewish angelology.)
The "theological" development of Christianity occurred much sooner that it has been thought because it emerged from an already highly theologized strand or strands of Jewish teaching that, like Christianity itself, privileged the Abrahamic covenant over the Mosaic Law, the testament of grace over that of works, and the universal scope of revelation and salvation as opposed to any political or ethnic reading of the "Kingdom."
None of these groups were part of the ruling class of Judaean priests and levites and their hangers on the Pharisees.
In John, for instance most of the references to what in English is translated as "the Jews" are in Greek clearly references to "the Judaeans"--and especially to the ruling elite among the southern tribe in bed with the Romans.
So the anti-Judaism/Semiti of John's Gispel largely rests on a mistranslation. In any event, everything is much more complex than Hudson makes it out to be. Christian economic radicalism is alive and well in the thought of Gregory of Nysa and Basil the Great, who also happened to be Cappadocian fathers highly influential in the development of "orthodox" Trinitarianism in the fourth century.
I still think that Hudson's big picture critique of the direction later Christianity took is helpful and necessary, but this doesn't change the fact that he simplifies the origins, development, and arguably devolution of this movement whenever he tries to get specific. It is a worthwhile danger given the quality of his work in historical economics, but still one has to be aware of.
May 01, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
After seven years of utter devastation and bloodletting, a consensus has emerged among all the belligerents of the Syrian war to de-escalate the conflict, except Israel which wants to further escalate the conflict because it has been the only beneficiary of the carnage in Syria.Over the years, Israel has not only provided medical aid and material support to the militant groups battling the Syrian government – particularly to various factions of the Free Syria Army (FSA) and al-Qaeda's Syrian affiliate al-Nusra Front in Daraa and Quneitra bordering the Israel-occupied Golan Heights – but Israel's air force has virtually played the role of the air force of the Syrian jihadists and has conducted more than 100 airstrikes in Syria and Lebanon during the seven-year conflict.
Washington's interest in the Syrian proxy war is mainly about ensuring Israel's regional security. The United States Defense Intelligence Agency's declassified report of 2012 clearly spelled out the imminent rise of a Salafist principality in northeastern Syria (Raqqa and Deir al-Zor) in the event of an outbreak of a civil war in Syria.
Under pressure from the Zionist lobby in Washington, however, the Obama administration deliberately suppressed the report and also overlooked the view in general that a proxy war in Syria will give birth to radical Islamic jihadists.
The hawks in Washington were fully aware of the consequences of their actions in Syria, but they kept pursuing the ill-fated policy of nurturing militants in the training camps located in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan to weaken the anti-Zionist Syrian government.
The single biggest threat to Israel's regional security was posed by the Shi'a resistance axis, which is comprised of Iran, the Assad administration in Syria and their Lebanon-based surrogate, Hezbollah. During the course of 2006 Lebanon War, Hezbollah fired hundreds of rockets into northern Israel and Israel's defense community realized for the first time the nature of threat that Hezbollah and its patrons posed to Israel's regional security.
Those were only unguided rockets but it was a wakeup call for Israel's military strategists that what will happen if Iran passed the guided missile technology to Hezbollah whose area of operations lies very close to the northern borders of Israel.
In a momentous announcement at an event in Ohio on March 29, however, Donald Trump said, "We're knocking the hell out of ISIS. We'll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon. Let the other people take care of it now."
What lends credence to the statement that the Trump administration will soon be pulling 2,000 US troops out of Syria – mostly Special Forces assisting the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces – is that President Trump has recently sacked the National Security Advisor Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster.
McMaster represented the institutional logic of the deep state in the Trump administration and was instrumental in advising Donald Trump to escalate the conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria. He had advised President Trump to increase the number of US troops in Afghanistan from 8,400 to 15,000. And in Syria, he was in favor of the Pentagon's policy of training and arming 30,000 Kurdish border guards to patrol Syria's northern border with Turkey.
Both the decisions have spectacularly backfired on the Trump administration. The decision to train and arm 30,000 Kurdish border guards had infuriated the Erdogan administration to the extent that Turkey mounted Operation Olive Branch in the Kurdish-held enclave of Afrin in Syria's northwest on January 20.
After capturing Afrin on March 18, the Turkish armed forces and their Free Syria Army proxies have now cast their eyes further east on Manbij, where the US Special Forces are closely cooperating with the Kurdish YPG militia, in line with the long-held Turkish military doctrine of denying the Kurds any Syrian territory west of River Euphrates.
It bears mentioning that unlike dyed-in-the-wool globalists and "liberal interventionists," like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who cannot look past beyond the tunnel vision of political establishments, it appears that the protectionist Donald Trump not only follows news from conservative mainstream outlets, like the Fox News, but he has also been familiar with alternative news perspectives, such as Breitbart's, no matter how racist and xenophobic.
Thus, Donald Trump is fully aware that the conflict in Syria is a proxy war initiated by the Western political establishments and their regional Middle Eastern allies against the Syrian government. He is also mindful of the fact that militants have been funded, trained and armed in the training camps located in Turkey's border regions to the north of Syria and in Jordan's border regions to the south of Syria.
According to the last year's March 31 article for the New York Times by Michael Gordon, the US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley and the recently sacked Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had stated on the record that defeating the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq was the top priority of the Trump administration and the fate of Bashar al-Assad was of least concern to the new administration.
Under the previous Obama administration, the evident policy in Syria was regime change. The Trump administration, however, looks at the crisis in Syria from an entirely different perspective because Donald Trump regards Islamic jihadists as a much bigger threat to the security of the US than Barack Obama.
In order to allay the concerns of Washington's traditional allies in the Middle East, the Trump administration conducted a cruise missile strike on al-Shayrat airfield in Homs governorate on April 6 last year after the alleged chemical weapons attack in Khan Sheikhoun. But that isolated incident was nothing more than a show of force to bring home the point that the newly elected Donald Trump is an assertive and powerful president.
More significantly, Karen De Young and Liz Sly made another startling revelation in the last year's March 4 article for the Washington Post: "Trump has said repeatedly that the US and Russia should cooperate against the Islamic State, and he has indicated that the future of Russia-backed Assad is of less concern to him."
Mindful of the Trump administration's lack of commitment in the Syrian proxy war, Israel's air force conducted an airstrike on Tiyas (T4) airbase in Homs on April 9 in which seven Iranian military personnel were killed. The Israeli airstrike took place after the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma on April 7 in order to convince the reluctant Trump administration that it can order another strike in Syria without the fear of reprisal from Assad's backer Russia.
Despite scant evidence as to the use of chemical weapons or the party responsible for it, Donald Trump, under pressure from Israel's lobby in Washington, eventually ordered another cruise missiles strike in Syria on April 14 in collaboration with Theresa May's government in the UK and Emmanuel Macron's administration in France.
What defies explanation for the April 14 strikes against a scientific research facility in the Barzeh district of Damascus and two alleged chemical weapons storage facilities in Homs is the fact that Donald Trump had already announced that the process of withdrawal of US troops from Syria must begin before the midterm US elections slated for November. If the Trump administration is to retain the Republican majority in the Congress, it will have to show something tangible to its voters, particularly in Syria.
The fact that out of 105 total cruise missiles deployed in the April 14 strikes in Syria, 85 were launched by the US, 12 by France and 8 by the UK aircrafts shows that the strikes were once again nothing more than a show of force by a "powerful and assertive" US president who regards the interests of his European allies as his own, particularly when he has given a May 12 deadline to his European allies to "improve and strengthen" the Iran nuclear deal, otherwise he has threatened to walk out of the pact in order to please Israel's lobby in Washington.
Finally, the Trump administration will eventually realize at its own risk that placating the Zionist lobby is unlikely if not impossible because Israel has conducted another missile strike in Aleppo and Hama on Sunday (April 29) in which 26 people, including many Iranians, have been killed and 60 others wounded.
According to NBC , the blast at the Brigade 47 base in Hama which serves as a warehouse for surface-to-air missiles was so severe that it caused 2.6 magnitude earthquake and shockwaves were felt as far away as Lebanon and Turkey. This seems like a last-ditch attempt by Israel to further escalate the conflict and to force the Trump administration to abandon its plans of withdrawing US troops from Syria.
Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions, neocolonialism and petro-imperialism .
Apr 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.orgNetanyahoo To Again Cry Wolf - But Something Bigger Is Up (Updated)
U.S. President Trump wants to end the nuclear agreement (pdf) with Iran and wants to eliminated Iranian forces in Syria which support the Syrian government. Something is being prepared to make that happen.
Last week General Joseph Votel, commander of CENTCOM - the U.S. military command for the Middle East, was in Israel. It was the first ever visit of a CENTCOM commander to Israel which usually works with the European command EUCOM.
Yesterday former CIA director and now Secretary of State Pompeo visited Israel. A few hours later Israel bombed two ammunition depots in Syria which are supposedly related to Iran. This was a clear attempt to provoke Iran into some reaction.
The Israeli defense minister Lieberman just visited Washington DC and only today came back to Israel.
Now the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahoo loudly announced that he will hold a press conference to present a "huge amount of new and dramatic information on the Iranian nuclear program". He will allege that Iran cheats on the nuclear agreement (JCPOA).
Netanyahoo is a notorious liar and warmonger. In September 2002 he lied (vid) to the U.S. congress:There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons – no question whatsoever"
Only yesterday he promoted a false story that claimed Arabs in Israel had disrupted a minuted of silence for some people killed in a flash flood.
The IAEA says that Iran is in full compliance with the JCPOA. If there were any serious intelligence about any Iranian deviation from the nuclear agreement it would be presented to the IAEA and the six signature powers of the agreement. The IAEA would investigate and report back. If Iran cheated it would be put back under serious international sanctions. That Netanyahoo wants to present something publicly makes it very likely that he has nothing of relevance.
We hear that the documents he is said to present were compiled by one Christopher Steele and assembled with the help of one Sergej Skripal and his MI6 handler [redacted]. They will show that Iran attempts to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger .
This new comedy stunt by Netanyahoo is tightly coordinated with the Trump administration. Trump's national security advisor John Bolton has worked with the Zionists since early 2000 to push for a war on Iran:During multiple trips to Israel, Bolton had unannounced meetings, including with the head of Mossad, Meir Dagan, without the usual reporting cable to the secretary of state and other relevant offices. Judging from that report on an early Bolton visit, those meetings clearly dealt with a joint strategy on how to bring about political conditions for an eventual U.S. strike against Iran.
Behind Trump, Netanyahoo and Bolton is one financier, the militant Zionist and casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. He financed Trump's and Netanyahoo's election campaigns and the various think tanks that create anti-Iranian propaganda and paid Bolton.
Trump wants to leave the nuclear agreement but the other signers, China, Russia, the UK, France and Germany want to keep it up. Just leaving the JCPOA without cause will increase doubt over any agreement the U.S. wants to make on other issues. The allegations Netanyahoo will put forward, no matter how ridiculous they may be, could give Trump some excuse to put new sanctions on Iran without actually leaving the agreement.
But even that does not explain all the recent meetings and visits by the various Israeli and U.S. officials. French soldiers and mercenaries from the UAE have entered north-east-Syria. What for? The Saudis are on board with any operation against Iran.
Something big is up and we do not know yet what it might be.
That was lame. Netanyahoo just finished his show (vid). He claimed that Israel got access to an Iranian archive of its former nuclear program dating from 1999 to 2003. In 2007 a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate found that Iran stopped all nuclear weapon research in 2003 after the U.S. had destroyed Iran's then arch-enemy Iraq. In 2011 the IAEA reported in detail of Iran's former "structured program". It agreed that it had stopped in 2003.
All that Netanyahoo now claims to have acquired is old and known stuff. He refers to an AMAD plan Iran had as if that was some new intelligence. But the IAEA documented AMAD and its development in 2011 (PDF, Annex, page 5). He uses the archive documents of known former programs to declare that Iran has cheated and is not trustworthy. He says that gives Trump reason to disavow the nuclear agreement the U.S. and others had signed with Iran. That is bullshit.
I had expected better from him. Some well forged documents or something more dramatic. This was just nonsense.
My feeling is that this was a diversion from an upcoming military(?) operation against Iran or its assets in Lebanon, Syria or Iraq.
Fantome , Apr 30, 2018 1:18:54 PM | 1Absolutely correct b. Something's cooking and it won't take long for the world to find out what it was.BX , Apr 30, 2018 1:20:34 PM | 2
Also, when responding to the Iranian threats to re-start their nuclear program, Mr Trump appears to have an answer pretty resolute i.e "They won't be starting anything, you can bank on that"
One more thing I like to add. If Mr Trump withdraws US from the deal which is also endorsed by the UNSC, US will loose to IRAN in the war that follows-up.Well, what's up is war. Syria and Iran are still missing in the trophy collection.spudski , Apr 30, 2018 1:25:09 PM | 3Right now Netanyahu on CNN - Iran lied. Claims Israel has lots of stolen files.Fantome , Apr 30, 2018 1:27:11 PM | 4Already happeningjohn wilson , Apr 30, 2018 1:32:07 PM | 5
Now, I'll make sure I link this MoA article everywhere in the comments.OH no! not the yellow cake saga again. Well, if they can get away with the Syrian chemical weapons attack that the white helmets can fix with a hose pipe, then anything goes. It looks as though the Skripal affair has lots more secrets to reveal. This story just keeps on giving and giving, although if you looked for it in MSM you wouldn't find anything on it. I don't understand why the missile defense system doesn't appear to activate for the Iranian contingent in Syria. Is it because this was a surprise attack and the Syrians?Russians were caught off guard, or are the Iranians left to fend for themselves as far as air bombardment is concerned? I get the feeling that the West is probing and poking the bear a bit at a time with a stick to get a reaction. They may well be sorry what they wish for.fastfreddy , Apr 30, 2018 1:36:25 PM | 6Doesn't look like fake anti-establishment, swamp-drainer, poseur Trump has given himself ANY leeway...Anonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 1:36:55 PM | 7
with which he might counter or to move away from the numerous neocon nut cases hell-bent for WW3 whom he has permanently invited to his war cabinet golden shower party.Netanyahu is probably the most dangerous leader in this world, the raw lying and propaganda, its heinous. Not to mention this sick lunatic in Israel have some 300 nukes already themselves, IN SECRET!Jayhawk2018 , Apr 30, 2018 1:37:18 PM | 8
Now he have come up with fake documents, trying to justify a war!
Same jewish state that whine about antisemitism, this people are not sane...
Hopefully west dont accept this blatant sicko, because as usual, its not Israel that want to wage the war, no, the war must be fought by
goyim europeans and especially americans.
With ugly pack of morons as Trump, POmpeo, Bolton, it doesnt look good.
This war hysteria just come weeks after the illegal and dangerous bombing of Syria. Netanyahu clarly is a psychopath.What is going on with those s300s? Russia needs to give Syria/Iran the means to defend themselves from these repeated acts of Israeli aggression. It should not be so easy for Israel to take out Iranian forces.Christian Chuba , Apr 30, 2018 1:40:17 PM | 9The only way to kick the legs out of Iran in a manner that Israel cares about which would also hurt Assad would be to destroy Hezbollah. The only chance of doing that would be to go full war crime mode and use the most vicious thermobaric or possibly tactical nuclear weapons.LJ Smith , Apr 30, 2018 1:40:54 PM | 11
If we did that or enabled the Israelis to do that then we will have reached total depravity. At this point I believe the U.S. public is okay with bombing anyone as long as U.S. lives are not lost. If the Israelis do it we cheer, if we do it then it shows the rest of the world who is boss.This can all be easily followed all the way back to before the Iranian nuclear deal and a policy paper out of Brookings on how to set up Iran for war. Basically, it states make a deal with Iran then prove that although the West did its best, Iran broke the deal in whatever manner. Appears they have all the actors lined up. Now it begins. The war of words then war. Like we haven't seen this before.Anonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 1:48:43 PM | 12I'd missed this: US-led jets bombed pro-Assad forces advancing on Deir Ezzor: Report http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-jets-bomb-pro-government-fighters-syria-operation-1276052674 International law anyone? Its dead in the west.fastfreddy , Apr 30, 2018 1:48:46 PM | 13Nuttyyahoo is dangerous BECAUSE he is thoroughly enabled by the FUKUS, but especially the US in EVERY way - politically, monetarily, morally, and and he is promoted on every television network and mainstream media outlet.ben , Apr 30, 2018 1:52:18 PM | 14
Trump has become increasingly dangerous because he has surrounded himself with Pompeo, Bolton, Nikki Haley, Nuttyyahoo...Holy jumping f***, the "yellow cake" BS again. You'd think these war mongering morons could be more inventive.Jared , Apr 30, 2018 1:54:26 PM | 15Where will it end? Russia allows it to continue. Then remains who? Pakistan? Are we profitting? US has become monster.Peter AU 1 , Apr 30, 2018 2:03:51 PM | 16"That was lame."fastfreddy , Apr 30, 2018 2:03:57 PM | 17
US/UK/Israel are not even trying for convincing narratives now. Sounds like F-35 was used to hit the ammo dumps in Syria. Maybe the zionists figure they have F35 bugs ironed out and its time to put it to work against Iran.Nikki Haley aka Nimrata Randhawa, is obviously a mental lightweight and a "yes man" for positive reinforcement & public relations/messaging purposes.Tannenhouser , Apr 30, 2018 2:13:18 PM | 18
The others are genuinely depraved, lunatic warmongers whom maintain the ability to string together sentences.
Wonder where the Kagans are in all this. Cheering from the sidelines? Seems they'd be invited.Didn't an American Green Beret from IIRC a nuke snoop/radiological team just die reecently in Niger?Cyrus , Apr 30, 2018 2:20:01 PM | 20Actually Iran has a long-time investment in uranium mines in Namibia, from the Shah's time, and Ahmadinejad even visited Niger in Apr 2013 while that country was looking to diversify its uranium sales away from the French Areva. There's nothing "secret" about any of this, uranium is a fuel for reactors.Hoarsewhisperer , Apr 30, 2018 2:20:13 PM | 21...Cyrus , Apr 30, 2018 2:25:01 PM | 22
What I like about this story is that, even though smearing Iran doesn't make any sense, narratives that don't make sense are 'normal' for that bloodthirsty experiment in social engineering known as "Israel". One wonders whether, if the "Israelis" are serious about attacking Iran, then shouldn't they be encouraged to give it a try, just to see what happens?
If they're not worried about blowback from Iran and Hezbollah, why should anyone else lose any sleep over it?
When Medvedev was President of Russia he said in an interview (with Zacharia) on a US network that ab attack on Iran would create an "unimaginable refugee catastrophe". Ironically (or Russian-ly), he didn't say for whom it would be catastrophic...Also, there was actually never any evidence of a nuclear weapons research program prior to 2003 either. The IAEA has specifically gone on record stating in 2009 that it has "no concrete proof that this is or has been a nuclear weapons program in Iran". Gareth Porter has written more about the 2003 allegations and Israel's later attempts to undermine the NIE by insisting that there was evidence of "continued" nuclear weapons work. The worst that the IAEA could ever say it actually found in Iran, were "fragmented and incomplete feasibility studies" that were "relevant to" nukes -- none of which is in any way a violation of the NPT which actually ENCOURAGES the sharing of technology "relevant to" nuclear weapons including data from nuclear test explosions.karlof1 , Apr 30, 2018 2:26:38 PM | 23Wow! The anti-corruption probe into Nuttyyahoo's activities must be coming close to arresting him; so, to avoid arrest, he must start an actual war of aggression. Only problem is the Zionists like their Outlaw allies are incapable of actually defeating anyone they might attack.Breadonwaters , Apr 30, 2018 2:34:35 PM | 25
What the Zionists are scared to death of is becoming irrelevant; their Airstrip 1 existence no longer of any value to the Imperialist Empires that created the Zionist state for their own geopolitical machinations. Is there any real reason to militarily attack the Zionists beyond reclaiming Golan? If Lebanon becomes strong enough--I'd argue it's already--then a simple containment policy coupled with the international BDS movement will be more than enough to facilitate internal political change within the Apartheid State over time--containment will take several years to work as it did on South Africa. Zionist racism has destabilized itself. Talk about a state ripe for being Color Revolutionized. Those are the reasons for the easily seen and rebutted lies of a very desperate politico wanting very much to avoid prison for crimes he committed against his own nation, not the many War Crimes against others.doesn't make sense ...FUKUS does war on Iran, Iran closes the Gulf ...oil goes to 200/ barrel ....US does a superb imitation of a Dead Fly.Ort , Apr 30, 2018 2:36:07 PM | 26B.: I had expected better from him. Some well forged documents or something more dramatic. This was just nonsense.anon , Apr 30, 2018 2:36:12 PM | 27
This is another example of a trend I've been on about lately. You're quite right; the quality of the Western/ME hegemony's Big Lies is deteriorating markedly before our eyes. But only the minority who are willing and able to keep their eyes wide open seem to notice.
It's hard to tell if the proliferation of weak and incredible fabrications is based on the Big Liars' belief that the public is, or has become, so benighted and bamboozled that they'll swallow anything, or if it's an indication that they are running on empty. But, whether it's due to hubris or degenerate incompetence, it indeed looks as if they aren't even trying any more.
Then again, as you also point out, Bibi's anticlimactic histrionics are on a par with his comical September, 2012 performance at the UN, where he produced that cartoon drawing of a "bomb" in order to flog the typically mendacious and hysterical claim that the noble, harmless State of Israel was in imminent danger of destruction from the "Iranian bomb".
It's one thing when zealous Hasbarists, amateur or professional, troll/spam Internet comments boards with their rigidly fatuous, fantastic, Zionist Israel-serving talking points. One expects unsophisticated, fully-indoctrinated True Believers to spew rote talking points and dogma that insult the intelligence of anyone outside the Zionist Hive Mind.
But the fact that Israel's leaders and authorities shamelessly rely on such childish props to sell their genocidal policies and actions suggests both hubris and abiding contempt for the rest of the world.
It's hard to believe that Bibi and his allies and supporters don't know that they're insulting the rest of the world's intelligence. I think there's a word for this. Chutzpah, maybe?https://www.bitchute.com/video/IF7ZwfM4tQQK/Don Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 2:48:38 PM | 29
This is an absolutely stunning breaking interview of the Syrian independent member of parliament Fares Shehabi by the BBC hardtalk program. The MSM typically try to aggressively browbeat non-western interviewees that they disagree with. Unfortunately, most of the interviewees either get cowed or they get emotional and angry.
Fares Shehabi instead is factually and rationally aggressive, fact by fact, counter-argument by counter-argument, not allowing the BBC interviewer to shut him up. It is a model of how to deal with the MSM.
The MSM have already managed to get the interview wiped off youtube. but it is still available here
download it and upload it and torrent it everywhere you can so that they cannot wipe it off the net.
crossposted@Peter AU 1 16spudski , Apr 30, 2018 2:54:45 PM | 30
Sounds like F-35 was used to hit the ammo dumps in Syria
What's your reason for saying this. We established at the previous threat that GBU-39 glide bombs were used. They are a stand-off weapon and I believe that the F-35 is incapable of carrying them.anon @ 27Anonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 2:55:47 PM | 31
The interview appears to be deleted from the second link also.spudski 30spudski , Apr 30, 2018 2:58:00 PM | 32
No I just watched its there. Scoll down a bit.Thanks very much, Anonymous @31.Sid2 , Apr 30, 2018 2:59:38 PM | 33"unhinged" = arrogance turns into stupidity? The latest in the continuing Net-job droning on and on "war with Iran" might not go as well as he expects, given resistance to withdrawal from the JCPOA. A more easily applied application of "arrogance turns into stupidity" is the White House Correspondents Dinner this weekend roasting Press Sec Sanders. James Woods' response did it nicely at "low class trash." More of this sort of thing will indeed be "a gift" to the Republicans in the upcoming elections.Fec , Apr 30, 2018 3:01:09 PM | 34
Indication of F-35I being used.
rs it seems is to skillfully debunk them, these are ironically two sides of the same coin of unsubstantiated hope of making any difference anymore.
Alaric , Apr 30, 2018 3:43:34 PM | 41Israel will not risk Jews so they will stick to launching air strikes from Lebanon. All of the characters will be happy to use another mercenary army of goys to attack the Syrian gov and it's allies. Especially attractive might be to use these to buttress the SDF to hold onto eastern Syria or to attack Turk aligned forces.Likklemore , Apr 30, 2018 3:48:57 PM | 42
Posted by: Alaric | Apr 30, 2018 3:43:34 PM | 41 /divb,meme , Apr 30, 2018 3:49:50 PM | 43
unfortunately the majority only read headlines. In a world where evidence matters not, details of Bibi Nuttuyahoo's claim 1999-2003 is a side show. Bibi is setting the stage for his managing director, D. J. Trump, to "honourably" withdraw from the JCPOA on May 12 and to pressure the other signatories.
There are somethings larger - I do hope someone (Russia or China) will grant Iran their nuclear umbrella. And Kim, do make a note to self. The Anglo-Zionists are deep in pretexts to coverup:
- the black swan flying under heavy wings with $230 trillion global debt must be brought down. Not nearly enough in the ESF.
- Revelations on the recent 100 missiles hoax to retaliate for the 'chemical attack' that was not. Can't disappear Robert Fisk's expose - he is widely read..
- Christoper Steele's Case on the dock wherein he will be deposed. Oh wait, where is he in hiding with the Skripals?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
@ 8, re Russia delivery of S-300s to Syria. Don't count on it as Israel's and Russia's militaries "have an arrangement to avoid aerial conflict over Syria." Last week Russia's Ambassador to Israel made that clear.Looks to me like Trump is groveling before the Saudis for keeping the petrodollar. Hence he is walking out of the Iran deal despite its geopolitical risk, and trying to show some fireworks in Syria. What's the half life of this show? More, or less than Trump's average ejaculation time?Don Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 4:08:50 PM | 49I've no doubt that for a lot of people the question of F-35 usage anywhere near a combat zone is a so-what issue, but for those of us who have struggled for years to bring some truth about this fault-filled much-delayed program through the fog of corruption, it's important to maintain that the current fleet of expensive pre-production F-35 prototypes is truly worthless.Anonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:09:58 PM | 50LikklemoreDon Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 4:13:42 PM | 51@ 8, re Russia delivery of S-300s to Syria. Don't count on it as Israel's and Russia's militaries "have an arrangement to avoid aerial conflict over Syria." Last week Russia's Ambassador to Israel made that clear.
Uh, that is the reason Russia should use S300. Then, there wouldnt be any "aerial conflict" over Syrian sovereign airspace to begin with.@ frances 48Don Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 4:15:24 PM | 52
US&Co . . will hit Iran before the football playoffs
And how might they "hit Iran?" Do you mean hit the country itself with a military attack?Israel has said that it will take out any S-300 in Syria, and that would include any nearby Russians.Fec , Apr 30, 2018 4:20:22 PM | 54@ 52 Don Baconimoverit , Apr 30, 2018 4:20:46 PM | 55
Apparently, Pantsirs have to be in place to protect the S-300s.
https://ejmagnier.com/2018/04/29/syria-russia-is-teaching-israel-the-naughty-boy-a-lesson-and-iran-is-watching/@ francesAnonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:32:44 PM | 56
I think the World Cup is playing a big role in the decision making as you have said. There is a lot at stake: investments already made and international exposure also. I can't wait for it to be finished so we can get back to war !! (sarc)Israel could start its assassination program, carry out sabotage, airstrikes, there is no limit to the sick regime and the sick western media acceptance of the same unhinged behavior by Israel.charles drake , Apr 30, 2018 4:38:45 PM | 58the hero of hebrew history above is a great man did obaama not give him 30 billion in war arms.Curtis , Apr 30, 2018 4:44:15 PM | 60
did germany not give him 5 free dolphin class submarines for samson option.
does german public funds pay compensation cover amounting to a trillion euros by the year 2070.
the man is a god he can drop and fire depleted uraniun ,drop dialed down nuke bombs kill president,primeminister sell usa top secret files to china and russia via operation talpiot can he not listen and blackmail the world.
who else can kill gaza semites by the 10s of thousands and then call critic anti-semite
this man benji is a king maker bow down for you are not fit to lick his precious fingersDoes NuttyYahoo's document collection include the plans for nuclear triggers that the CIA gave to them via Operation Merlin?karlof1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:45:37 PM | 61Et al--Laguerre , Apr 30, 2018 4:47:05 PM | 63
Russia began its Syria intervention with an S-400 deployed in Latakia and has introduced several more since, one being in Sept 2017 . Syria also has the BUK-M2E AA system and the Pantsir to go with its older and upgraded S-200 systems along with who knows what else. Just what was off loaded from Russian supply vessels under the cover of smoke last week (don't know if such veiling's continuing)? My guess is more AA systems of the type causing Zionists on both sides of Atlantic to freakout.
As for the Zionists attacking Iranian military bases, those Iran uses in Syria are joint-use with Syria regardless of what's said by Zionists; so, any such attack will need to be aimed at Iran proper. The consequences for the region would be horrible--particularly for Zionists and Saudis: Dimona would be leveled as would Saudi oil infrastructure. The fallout and other pollution would be appalling. If the Zionists want to keep their skin, they'll arrest Nutty before he gets his get-out-of-jail war started.
Zionists know they've lost and are contained and constrained, so they're moving into desperation mode. Too bad they lack the courage to put a pistol to their head and pull the trigger.I have trouble in believing that Trump will really attack Iran, just because of some new fake evidence from Netanyahu. N's been trying this forever. The basic point is that Trump's electorate don't want real war, with American deaths. So far, it's been like that, 102 missiles following 59 Tomahawks, and no effect.Anonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:58:29 PM | 64Laguerresomebody , Apr 30, 2018 5:00:07 PM | 65
Trump is dumb enough, Pompeo, Bolton, Trump, I mean you cant get worse, these are the most sick hawks and Trump have already showed that he could attack states illegally Syria, with no proof whatsoever. Stop hoping on Trump.Posted by: TG | Apr 30, 2018 3:11:12 PM | 35Robert D , Apr 30, 2018 5:12:43 PM | 68
Israel is in a position to attack, but not to defend. Israel's problem is not Iran but the Palestinians. John Helmer seems to think that Russia has decided on electronic warfare , that would be reason for panic as Israel's (and US) stuff is completely dependent on electronics.Its absolutely disgusting to see comments on social media majorities uncritically belive Netanyahu.Laguerre , Apr 30, 2018 5:16:15 PM | 69"Trump is dumb enough," yes but not to the degree where he has to justify American dead.
lysias , Apr 30, 2018 5:43:03 PM | 73There were a number of reasons for the Balfour Declaration, but one of the major ones was defense of the Suez Canal, vital for communications to India. The Turks had already attacked the canal twice by 1917. The Brits wanted a local group on the spot that would help to defend the canal. A Jewish settlement filled the bill.lysias , Apr 30, 2018 5:47:03 PM | 74
Posted by: lysias | Apr 30, 2018 5:43:03 PM | 73 /divAnd in 1956 they did precisely that. But by that time the British Empire was too far gone to be able to make proper use of that support.Bakerpete , Apr 30, 2018 5:48:45 PM | 75@Cyrus | Apr 30, 2018 2:20:01 PM | 20Perimtr , Apr 30, 2018 5:53:21 PM | 77
As background knowledge that most overlook, Iran is one of the top sources for uranium ore, unfortunately it is contaminated with molybdenum making it almost useless for high grading. That is a primary reason for their investment in uranium in Africa.Russia's non-intervention in the attack last night will only encourage further attacks.bevin , Apr 30, 2018 7:13:34 PM | 86There is nothing new about Netanyahu's nonsense-as everyone seems to realise: the only justification for his party and his particular brand of fascism is the belief that there can be no peace for Jewish people generally, and Israelis in particular until all potential opponents have been wiped out or terrorised into slavery. And he has managed to convince most Israelis of this-something which means that in moral and political, and probably clinical terms too, they are insane- beyond the reach of reason.timbers , Apr 30, 2018 7:33:08 PM | 87
What is new and makes the situation very dangerous is that the US is going along with this for the ride. It has run out of ideas on how to deal with the gathering storm of consequences from eighty years of arrogance and careless neglect of the inevitable fall out from its self indulgent policies. And Trump, under constant pressure from the idiots running the Deep State, has no conception of the implications of the little games that he is playing and encouraging others (see Netanyahu above) to play. In his mind he is starring in an extempore version of the Godfather.
Way down at the bottom of things worth mentioning is the fact that the UK government is in an even bigger crisis. It is clearly doomed unless the world ends first, which is something it is happy to consider. May and her allies (who include the Blairite Labour party and almost all the political class including the SNP and the Liberals) will (as the recent attacks in Syria showed) go along with Trump whatever happens, which means that the other 'eyes' the White Commonwealth of Canada, Australia etc will do the same.
This is the problem with empires in decline, they become suicidal. And having reconciled themselves with death they lose any inhibitions.
Poor old Putin just doesn't understand that: for years it has been clearer and clearer that Russia and China were rational, legalistic and diplomatic while the 'west' reverted to its barbaric ways, defying rules, breaking treaties, laughing at international law, drunken berserkers running amok employing the weapons that they have been accumulating for decades because fearing that the end is near they fear nothing else. The future holds no hope for them.
Putin who sees only the reality that the US remains both enviably rich and powerful cannot understand how unstable and dangerous it has become.
As to China, nothing surprises its leadership any more which is why it spends all day lifting weights and eating high protein foods, ready to defend itself and studiously avoiding involvement.I'm still in shook Putin didn't place 300s in Syria long, long ago. He really can be behind the curve at times. How could have thought the Empire would not grow more brazen in aggression?JohninMK , Apr 30, 2018 7:38:16 PM | 88Here is a well thought out thread that analyses Bibi's claims. Including that Israel probably hacked into the IAEA systems to get some of the data, in particular a photo of the 'new' storage site.fairleft , Apr 30, 2018 8:05:02 PM | 89
https://twitter.com/yarbatman/status/991064102314369025Excellent bevin @86.Don Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 8:30:39 PM | 93
Here is former Sweden foreign minister Carl Bildt, in a tweet immediately after Netanyahu's remarks: "Nothing really new in @netanyahu Iran speech. Confirms that Iran closed down nuclear weapons program in 2003. Continued technology efforts. In principle all of this well known. No allegation that Iran cheats on 2015 nuclear deal."@bevin 86Yeah, Right , Apr 30, 2018 8:33:06 PM | 94
the US is going along with this for the ride
No, for the money. The simple fact is that AIPAC and Israel have an iron grip on each and every member of the US Congress. It's been established that Israel rules, and Congressmembers get "contributions" and trips to Israel and other perks. On the other hand, if any Congress member who gives a slight little anti-Israel (i.e. anti-Semitic) peep will become an ex-Congressmember. It's happened, with highly-financed opposition to a deviant's transgression at the next biannual election. One example is Cynthia McKinney (links broken.@52 I don't understand that argument, Don. The Russians can unload any S-300 delivery at Tartus. There is zero chance that the Israelis will bomb them while they remain inside a Russian military base.AriusArmenian , Apr 30, 2018 8:59:52 PM | 100
And those missiles can stay there while the Russians train up the Syrians in their use. Again, attacking while they remain inside Tartus is a no-go. And the S-300's are road-mobile. They can be driven out of Tartus to their eventual operational deployment, which means that they leave the protection of Tartus only when they are capable of defending themselves.
Or, in short: Israeli plans are predicated on taking out those missiles before they can be made operational. But they can be made operational while they are still inside a Russian military base protected by S-400 defences, and by the time they leave that protection the Syrians are already able to shoot down any attackers.It is hard to lose money on a bet that the US and its Anglosphere and EU vassals will double down on stupid. The US heaps one disaster on top of another, it causes the suffering and death of millions, and Americans don't shed a tear.
Apr 30, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Stormy Daniels' legal team - led by lawyer Michael Avenatti - must be getting bored since a federal judge in Los Angeles ordered a 90-day delay of her lawsuit against President Trump and his former personal attorney Mike Cohen (who has promised to plead the fifth during the proceedings). Because Stormy has filed another defamation lawsuit, this time exclusively against President Trump, as Reuters reports.The lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in New York on Monday, seeks damages from Trump for a tweet he sent earlier this month where he criticized a composite sketch that, Daniels said, depicted a man who had threatened her in 2011. He reportedly demanded that she stay quiet about her sexual encounter with Trump. That would've been around the time she gave an interview about her affair with Trump to In Touch magazine which wasn't published until recently.
Her previous lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles, sought to have her released from an NDA she signed shortly before the 2016 vote where she also accepted a $130,000 "hush money" payment from Cohen."A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!," Trump said.
According to the filing, cited by the Associate Press and Reuters, the tweet was "false and defamatory" arguing that Trump knew what he was saying out Daniels' claim was false and also disparaging.
The lawsuit also claims Daniels has been exposed to death threats and other threats of "physical violence."
Daniels, whose given name is Stephanie Clifford, is seeking a jury trial and unspecified damages.
"We intend on teaching Mr. Trump that you cannot simply make things up about someone and disseminate them without serious consequences," Avenatti said.
As the Associated Press points out, Daniels, aided by Avenatti, has sought to keep her case in the public eye. She revealed the sketch that Trump mocked during an appearance on the View earlier this month. Trump is facing another defamation lawsuit in New York, this one filed by Summer Zervos, a former "The Apprentice" contestant who says Trump made unwanted sexual contact with her in 2007. She sued him after Trump dismissed her claims. 0
Slippery Slope -> JimmyJones Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:23 Permalinkbobbbny -> Bitchface-KILLAH Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:24 Permalink
When does her 15 minutes end?beepbop -> bobbbny Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:25 Permalink
Just like herpes she won't go away.TheWholeYearInn -> beepbop Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:29 Permalink
The LAWSUITS will keep on coming
until Trump agrees to Satanyahoo's ULTIMATUM
of destroying SYRIA and IRAN.Ghost of Porky -> TheWholeYearInn Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:33 Permalink
" Now, that your tastes at this time should incline towards the juvenile is understandable; but for you to marry that boy would be a disaster. Because there's two kinds of women. There are two kinds of women and you, as we well know, are not the first kind. You, my dear, are a slut. "
~KomarovskyShitonya Serfs -> Ghost of Porky Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:34 Permalink
Stormy's parents are Trump supporters and Stormy hates them.
This is all a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.Bitchface-KILLAH -> Stan522 Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:27 Permalink
"you cannot simply make things up about someone and disseminate them without serious consequences"
#MeTootmosley Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:22 Permalink
Monica Lewinsky... good family, intern... major credibility problems according to MSM.
Stormy Daniels... washed up porno actress... MSM "sure we'll roll with that"ZH FNG Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:26 Permalink
She literally sketched her old boyfriend.
That will happen when you are describing what someone who doesn't exist looks like. You picture someone you know and make them look like that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy9Z-Tg6ufUjmack Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:26 Permalink
On an earlier Stormy story, someone posted these words of wisdom about intimacy:
A gentleman never talks,
And a whore never shuts up.sister tika Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:31 Permalink
"We intend on teaching Mr. Trump that you cannot simply make things up about someone and disseminate them without serious consequences," Avenatti said.
oh the irony.Mzhen Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:31 Permalink
This cow makes me nauseous. She's a pathetic, has-been punch whose only motivation is (more) money.Fox-Scully Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:28 Permalink
Communication purportedly from Stormy to a friend, where she again denied the sex ever happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbtS8LdTUfI&t=336sStevious Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:34 Permalink
"We intend on teaching THE PRESS that you cannot simply make things up about someone and disseminate them without serious consequences," Avenatti said.
Now it is correct.JoeTurner Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:39 Permalink
To prove damages under defamation first someone must believe the defamatory content and second, more importantly, damage must have been done.
Damage what, to the reputation of a stripper?wally_12 Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:40 Permalink
Who's paying this filthy whore ? Where are the "journalists" to follow the money ?NYC80 Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:47 Permalink
Sold out performance at the strip club in Detroit. Trying to squeeze out as much as possible before her boobs and butt sag lower.Hikikomori Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:49 Permalink
It has to be really, really hard to defame a porn star.SmittyinLA Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:55 Permalink
Interesting that the Great White Hope of the Democrats in 2018 is a blackmailing prostitute. On the other hand, probably better than Hillary....Al Huxley Mon, 04/30/2018 - 14:56 Permalink
Damages? What damages? Her income has no doubt spiked.
No case, no damages, nobody givesashit.
That's why they're called gold digging whores.
Apr 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
With just days left until the May 1 deadline when a temporary trade waiver expires and the US steel and aluminum tariffs kick in, and after last-ditch attempts first by Emmanuel Macron and then Angela Merkel to win exemptions for Europe fell on deaf ears, the European Union is warning about the costs of an imminent trade war with the US while bracing for one to erupt in just three days after the White House signaled it will reject the bloc's demand for an unconditional waiver from metals-import tariffs .
"A trade war is a losing game for everybody," Belgian Finance Minister Johan Van Overtveldt told reporters in Sofia where Europe's finance ministers have gathered. " We should stay cool when we're thinking about reactions but the basic point is that nobody wins in a trade war so we try to avoid it at all costs. "
Well, Trump disagrees which is why his administration has given Europe, Canada and other allies an option: accept quotas in exchange for an exemption from the steel and aluminum tariffs that kick on Tuesday, when the temporary waiver expires. "We are asking of everyone: quotas if not tariffs," Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said on Friday. This, as Bloomberg points out , puts the EU in the difficult position of either succumbing to U.S. demands that could breach international commerce rules, or face punitive tariffs.
Forcing governments to limit shipments of goods violates World Trade Organization rules, which prohibit so-called voluntary export restraints. The demand is also contrary to the entire trade philosophy of the 28-nation bloc, which is founded on the principle of the free movement of goods.
Adding to the confusion, while WTO rules foresee the possibility of countries taking emergency "safeguard" measures involving import quotas for specific goods, such steps are rare, must be temporary and can be legally challenged. The EU is demanding a permanent, unconditional waiver from the U.S. tariffs.
Meanwhile, amid the impotent EU bluster, so far only South Korea has been formally spared from the duties, after reaching a deal last month to revise its bilateral free-trade agreement with the U.S.
Europe, on the other hand, refuses to reach a compromise, and according to a EU official, "Trump's demands to curb steel and aluminum exports to 90 percent of the level of the previous two years are unacceptable." The question then is whether Europe's retaliatory move would be painful enough to deter Trump and lift the sanctions: the official said the EU's response would depend on the level of the quotas after which the punitive tariffs would kick in; meanwhile the European Commission continues to "stress the bloc's consistent call for an unconditional, permanent exclusion from the American metal levies."
"In the short run it might help them solve their trade balance but in the long run it will worsen trade conditions," Bulgarian Finance Minister Vladislav Goranov said in Sofia. "The tools they're using to make America great again might result in certain mistakes because free world trade has proven to be the best solution for the development of the world so far."
Around the time of his meeting, French President Emmanuel Macron made it clear that the EU is not afraid of an escalating trade war and will not be intimidated, saying " we won't talk about anything while there's a gun pointed at our head. "
He may change his opinion once Trump fires the first bullet.
Adding to Europe's disappointment, during her visit to the White House on Friday, Angela Merkel said she discussed trade disputes with Trump and that she failed to win a public commitment to halt the tariffs.
Meanwhile, Merkel's new bffs over in France are also hunkering down in preparation for a lengthy conflict. French economy minister Bruone Le Maire told his fellow European bureaucrats Sofia during a discussion on taxation: "One thing I learned from my week in the U.S. with President Macron: The Americans will only respect a show of strength."
Coming from the French, that observation is as accurate as it is delightfully ironic.
And now the real question is who has the most to lose from the imminent Transatlantic trade war, and will surrender first.
Apr 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
With the still largely ignored Saudi slaughter in Yemen now in its fourth year, RT's In The Now has resurrected a forgotten clip from a 2016 CNN interview with Senator Rand Paul, which is currently going viral.
In a piece of cable news history that rivals Madeleine Albright's infamous words during a 1996 60 Minutes appearance where she calmly and coldly proclaimed of 500,000 dead Iraqi children that "the price is worth it," CNN's Wolf Blitzer railed against Senator Paul's opposition to a proposed $1.1 billion US arms sale to Saudi Arabia by arguing that slaughter of Yemeni civilians was worth it so long as it benefits US jobs and defense contractors.
At the time of the 2016 CNN interview , Saudi Arabia with the help of its regional and Western allies -- notably the U.S. and Britain -- had been bombing Yemen for a year-and-a-half, and as the United Nations noted , the Saudi coalition had been responsible for the majority of the war's (at that point) 10,000 mostly civilian deaths.
At that time the war was still in its early phases, but now multiple years into the Saudi-led bombing campaign which began in March 2015, the U.N. reports at least "5,000 children dead or hurt and 400,000 malnourished."
... ... ...Senator Paul began the interview by outlining the rising civilian death toll and massive refugee crisis that the U.S. continued facilitating due to deep military assistance to the Saudis :
There are now millions of displaced people in Yemen. They're refugees. So we supply the Saudis with arms, they create havoc and refugees in Yemen. Then what's the answer? Then we're going to take the Yemeni refugees in the United States? Maybe we ought to quit arming both sides of this war.
Paul then narrowed in on the Pentagon's role in the crisis: "We are refueling the Saudi bombers that are dropping the bombs. It is said that thousands of civilians have died in Yemen because of this."
CNN's Blitzer responded, "So for you this is a moral issue. Because you know, there's a lot of jobs at stake. Certainly if a lot of these defense contractors stop selling war planes, other sophisticated equipment to Saudi Arabia, there's going to be a significant loss of jobs, of revenue here in the United States. That's secondary from your standpoint?"
Paul countered, "Well not only is it a moral question, its a constitutional question." And noted that Obama had partnered with the Saudi attack on Yemen without Congressional approval: "Our founding fathers very directly and specifically did not give the president the power to go to war. They gave it to Congress. So Congress needs to step up and this is what I'm doing."
* * *
For further context of what the world knew at the time the CNN interview took place, we can look no further than the United Nations and other international monitoring groups.
A year after Blitzer's statements, Foreign Policy published a bombshell report based on possession of a leaked 41-page draft UN document, which found Saudi Arabia and its partner coalition allies in Yemen (among them the United States) of being guilty of horrific war crimes, including the bombing of dozens of schools, hospitals, and civilian infrastructure.
The U.N. study focused on child and civilian deaths during the first two years of the Saudi coalition bombing campaign - precisely the time frame during which the CNN Wolf Blitzer and Rand Paul interview took place.
Foreign Policy reported :
"The killing and maiming of children remained the most prevalent violation" of children's rights in Yemen , according to the 41-page draft report obtained by Foreign Policy.
The chief author of the confidential draft report, Virginia Gamba, the U.N. chief's special representative for children abused in war time, informed top U.N. officials Monday, that she intends to recommend the Saudi-led coalition be added to a list a countries and entities that kill and maim children , according to a well-placed source.
The UN report further identified that air attacks "were the cause of over half of all child casualties, with at least 349 children killed and 333 children injured" during the designated period of time studied, and documented that, "the U.N. verified a total of 1,953 youngsters killed and injured in Yemen in 2015 -- a six-fold increase compared with 2014" - with the majority of these deaths being the result of Saudi and coalition air power.
Also according AP reporting at the time : "It said nearly three-quarters of attacks on schools and hospitals -- 38 of 52 -- were also carried out by the coalition."
But again, Wolf Blitzer's first thought was those poor defense contractors:
...Because you know, there's a lot of jobs at stake. Certainly if a lot of these defense contractors stop selling war planes, other sophisticated equipment to Saudi Arabia, there's going to be a significant loss of jobs, of revenue here in the United States.
* * *
This trip down memory lane elicited suitable responses on Twitter:
... ... ...
beepbop -> JacksNight Sat, 04/28/2018 - 22:03 PermalinkJacksNight -> beepbop Sat, 04/28/2018 - 22:08 Permalink
Hey Wolfie, ALL Wars are evil . Period.D503 -> JacksNight Sat, 04/28/2018 - 22:17 Permalink
All Wars Are Bankers' Wars
Honestly, with all these drug addicts, pedos, government dependents, and fraudulent finance and advertising pieces of shit at home, I'd really like to see some infighting here. No need to sell abroad.
Apr 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
by Tyler Durden Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:45 9 SHARES
With the release of the House Intelligence Committee's report finding no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign, Congressional Republicans have seemingly dealt a death blow to the "Russian collusion" narrative which was already hurtling toward irrelevance. Indeed, the special counsel himself has publicly stated that he has "pivoted" toward investigating financial crimes and allegations of obstruction of justice.
But with President Trump threatening to take a more "hands on" role at the Department of Justice, Mueller has found himself in a bind. How can he continue to justify the probe if the original premise has been found to be completely invalid?
Fortunately, Mueller received some badly needed assistance on Friday from a major Russian opposition figure: former oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky . Somehow, an organization called Dossier, which was established and financed by Khodorkovsky - a former oil tycoon and longtime nemesis of Russian President Vladimir Putin who turned into one of Russia's most vocal dissidents - managed to get its hands on emails stolen from the inbox of Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, the same lawyer who arranged the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. after promising through an intermediary to supply the Trump campaign with "dirt" on Trump's erstwhile rival, Hillary Clinton.
The emails reveal that Veselnitskaya worked closely with the Russian Ministry of Justice to help thwart a US Department of Justice probe into allegedly ill-gotten money being invested by corrupt Russian oligarchs in New York City real estate. And according to the New York Times , which was obtained the emails from Dossier, the communications undercut Veselnitskaya's claims of impartiality.
That said, the communications revealed in the emails took place years before Veselnitskaya set foot in Trump Tower. What's more alarming than the emails claims is the notion that Russian opposition figures are stepping up to independently assist Mueller and the Democrats in keeping the "Russia collusion" narrative alive is certainly...interesting.
Veselnitskaya acknowledged her work for the Russian government in an interview with NBC News set to air Friday.
Shown copies of the emails by Richard Engel of NBC News, Ms. Veselnitskaya acknowledged that "many things included here are from my documents, my personal documents." She told the Russian news agency Interfax on Wednesday that her email accounts were hacked this year by people determined to discredit her, and that she would report the hack to Russian authorities.
The exchanges document Mr. Chaika's response to a Justice Department request in 2014 for help with its civil fraud case against a real estate firm, Prevezon Holdings Ltd., and its owner, Denis P. Katsyv, a well-connected Russian businessman.
Federal prosecutors say Ms. Veselnitskaya was the driving force on Mr. Katsyv's defense team, a description she has echoed in court filings. In a declaration to the court, she identified herself as a lawyer in private practice, representing Mr. Katsyv and his firm.
The Justice Department prosecutors charged Mr. Katsyv's firm in 2013 with using real estate purchases in New York to launder a portion of the profits from a tax scheme in Russia. They were seeking Russian bank, tax and court records, the type of documents that typically form the crux of civil money-laundering cases. The Justice Department asked the Russian government to keep the matter confidential, "except as is necessary to execute this request," according to court documents. Russia and the United States have a mutual legal assistance treaty governing law-enforcement requests.
According to the Times , the leaked documents refute Veselnitskaya's claim that she was acting in a "private capacity" when she initiated contact with the Trump campaign, even though the activities detailed in the documents took place years earlier.
Ms. Veselnitskaya had long insisted that she met the president's son, son-in-law and campaign chairman in a private capacity, not as a representative of the Russian government.
"I operate independently of any governmental bodies," she wrote in a November statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I have no relationship with Mr. Chaika, his representatives and his institutions other than those related to my professional functions as a lawyer."
But while the Times details the contents of the documents in detail, it failed to highlight an obvious irony: that in exposing alleged machinations by the Russian government to interfere in the US election, it used the same alleged strategy pursued by shadowy Russian hackers and Wikileaks, the two biggest boogeymen in the ongoing Russian collusion saga.
This isn't the first time a Russian opposition figure has sought to aid Mueller. Earlier this year, Aleksei Navalny released videos that he said included evidence that Oleg Deripaska - who has since been targeted by US sanctions - attempted to meddle in the US political process.
And despite President Trump's insistence that everybody should "get over" the collusion narrative now that the Intel Committee report has been released, it appears his foreign enemies have other plans.
The question now is: Will Trump respond to the leaked emails, or is Trump convinced that his latest bombing raid on Syria plus the sanctions targeting "Putin ally" Oleg Deripaska will be sufficient to demonstrate to Mueller that he is not in bed with the Kremlin. A parallel question is whether this is the start of a coordinated campaign by Russian dissidents to weaken President Vladimir Putin using anti-Trump US intermediaries, and what will Putin's reaction be.
junction -> ExPat2018 Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:52 Permalink
Foreigners money laundering ill-gotten gains in New York City real estate? Incredible and unbelievable according to the US Department of Justice. As long as these foreigners buy from approved sellers of real estate.
I Am Jack's Ma -> junction Sat, 04/28/2018 - 17:02 PermalinkDemandSider -> junction Sat, 04/28/2018 - 17:03 Permalink
The meeting with Veselnitskaya looks like it was part of the Brennan/Clapper/Clinton set up to try to create 'collusion' where there was none.
But lest we forget, there was also no Russian 'hack.'
Shouldn't the real scandal be
1. efforts by obama, clinton, fbi, doj, and cia to overturn the election via fraud and perjury and leaks to a select few establishment agitprop rags, and
2. the US/UK/Saudi/Qatari/Turk/Israeli support for Al Qaeda and IS?
I think so, which is yet more reason why I think Mueller needs to be made to narrow his focus, and be given some date by which to finish - at least a month before November.jmack Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:48 Permalink
That's what our banker dominated government wants. Sure, real estate becomes too expensive for for the non parasitic working poor, but it keeps their dollar high for more pointless war spending.
Nothing kills a narrative faster than the nutjobs coming out to push the narrative...
Apr 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
by Tyler Durden Sat, 04/28/2018 - 13:50 193 SHARES
The House Intelligence Committee's just-released report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election reveals in a footnote that an ongoing, private investigation into Trump-Russia claims is being funded with $50 million supplied by George Soros and a group of 7-10 wealthy donors from California and New York.
This effort was originally revealed in February and reported on by The Federalist , after a series of leaked text messages between Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) and lobbyist Adam Waldman suggested that Daniel J. Jones - an ex-FBI investigator and former Feinstein staffer, was "intimately involved with ongoing efforts to retroactively validate a series of salacious and unverified memos published by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent, and Fusion GPS."
In short, Jones is working with Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele to continue their investigation into Donald Trump, using a $50 million war chest just revealed by the House Intel Committee report.
In a bizarre twist Waldman, the lobbyist, notably represents Kremlin-linked Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, head of Russian aluminum giant Rusal and who was the target of Trump's recent sanctions, as well as Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov. He met with Jones on March 16, 2017 according to the Daily Caller.
Jones, meanwhile, runs the Penn Quarter Group - a "research and investigative advisory" firm whose website was registered in April of 2016, days before Steele delivered his first in a series of Trump-Russia memos to Fusion GPS. Jones also began tweeting out articles suggesting illicit ties between the Trump campaign and Russia as early as 2017.
Steele's work during the 2016 election culminated in the salacious and unverified 35-page "Steele dossier" used to obtain a FISA warrant against then-President Trump (which, as we reported on Friday, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper leaked the details to CNN 's Jake Tapper prior to the seemingly coordinated publication by BuzzFeed ).
The recently released House Intel Report notes that in March 2017, Jones told the FBI that he was working with Steele and Fusion GPS, with funding to the tune of $50 million.
"In late March 2017, Jones met with FBI regarding PQG, which he described as 'exposing foreign influence in Western election,'" reads the House Intel report. "[Redacted] told FBI that PQG was being funded by 7 to 10 wealthy donors located primarily in New York and California, who provided approximately $50 million ."
"[Redacted] further stated that PQG had secured the services of Steele, his associate [redacted], and Fusion GPS to continue exposing Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election," reads the report, which adds that Jones " planned to share the information he obtained with policymakers and with the press ."
As the Daily Caller 's Chuck Ross notes, Jones "also offered to provide PQG's entire holdings to the FBI" according to the report, citing a "FD-302" transcript of the interview he gave to the FBI.
Of note, during Congressional testimony last year when Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) asked Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, if he was still being paid for work related to the dossier , Simpson refused to answer . And while the dossier came under fire for " salacious and unverified " claims, a January 8 New York Times profile of Glenn Simpson confirmed that dossier-related work continues.
Sean Davis of The Federalist reported in February that Jones' name was mentioned in a list of individuals from a January 25 Congressional letter from Senators Grassley and Graham to various Democratic party leaders who were likely involved in Fusion GPS's 2016 efforts. The letter sought all communications between the Democrats and a list of 40 individuals or entities, of which Jones is one.
Some of those communications - at least according to the encrypted text messages between Warner and Waldman, (and leaked to Fox News) , discuss efforts by Warner to secure a testimony from Steele.
"I spoke w Steele," Waldman wrote on April 25, 2017. "He repeated the same position which is that he wants to be helpful but is fearful of the triumvirate of cost, time suck and reputation."
"He asked me what your concern was about a letter first and I explained it but he would still like as a first protective step from you and [Sen. Richard] Burr asking him and his partner to assist w the investigation by answering questions," Waldman added . "He [Steele] said he will also speak w Dan Jones whom he says is talking to you ."
"I pointed out there is no privilege in that discussion although Dan [Jones] is a good guy and very trustworthy guy. I encouraged him again to engage with you for the sake of the truth and of vindication of the dossier," he wrote. - Adam Waldman to Mark Warner
Meanwhile, Federal disclosures required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act show that Waldman collected nearly $1.1 million from Deripaska in 2016 an d 2017 . Some questions:
- Why would Waldman, a Russian oligarch's foreign agent, be the official cutout for both a U.S. senator and Christopher Steele?
- Why would he recommend Daniel Jones - a former top Feinstein aide who worked for the FBI - as a point of contact and an information broker?
And now Jones has a $50 million war chest - from a group of mysterious "7 to 10" donors - to continue the grande Trump-Russia witch hunt with Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS - coordinated in part by a guy (Waldman) who represents Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov. Seems somewhat collusive, no?
Apr 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Via Middle East Monitor,
US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley is America's most popular politician according to a study by Quinnipiac University, CNN reported yesterday.
Haley is viewed positively by some 63 per cent of US voters, while only 39 per cent gave their approval of US President Donald Trump. Haley's popularity also stretched to both sides of the political spectrum, with 75 per cent of Republicans, 55 per cent of Democrats and 63 per cent of Independents supporting the former South Carolina governor. She was only exceeded by former president Barack Obama, who was still held in high regard by some 66 per cent of voters.
The UN envoy has taken strong stands in favour of Israel, particularly in the aftermath of the US' recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital in December. When the UN General Assembly voted to condemn the Trump administration's decision, Haley slammed the global forum as ungrateful for US contributions to the organisation.
"No vote in the UN will make any difference to that [the decision]. But this vote will make a difference to how the Americans see the UN. This vote will be remembered," she concluded, echoing her previous comments that the delegation would be taking names of those who voted against the recognition.
Last month, Haley gave another unrestrained speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Policy Conference, where she again condemned the UN for its alleged anti-Israel bias.
"In the real world, Israel is a strong country with a strong military," she said. "But at the UN, it's a different story. Israel does get bullied there."
Haley was met with thunderous applause as she argued that the UN had "long undermined peace by encouraging an illusion that Israel will simply go away." But Israel, she stressed, "is not going away. When the world recognises that, then peace becomes possible."
She also responded to the criticism that the US shows favouritism for Israel: "There's nothing wrong with showing favouritism towards an ally, that's what being an ally is all about."
The UN envoy's speech was noted as the most enthusiastically received by the thousands of attendees at the event, as she received multiple standing ovations during her speech and shouts of "we love you" from the crowd.
Haley has also taken a strong stance over the conflict in Syria, threatening to strike the Assad regime during the bombardment of Eastern Ghouta last month. The Russian delegation condemned her comments, stating that "such thunderous and irresponsible statements by the American envoy cause resentment and great anxiety."
SoilMyselfRotten -> Stuck on Zero Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:42 Permalinktoady -> SoilMyselfRotten Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:50 Permalink
How about a poll that really matters. Let's see how popular this war mongering scag is with her peers at the U.N.(and Kool-aid drinking nations don't count)CuttingEdge -> toady Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:54 Permalink
It's really very simple; Sluts are kewl!
There is likely a correlation between the percentage of the polled who gave her the nod, and this woman herself.
Lack of a fully functional brain, for starters. Smart dresser though. That rig the French granny was wearing the other day? Eek.
She is dire, but looking on the bright side, it could have been a Clinton appointee instead. Who would have been automatically crooked, and paid to play (for the high level jobs in every department, of course).
serotonindumptruck -> The First Rule • Sat, 04/28/2018 - 16:38 Permalink
For all those who thought the anorexic Samantha (Skeletor) Power was a horrific warmonger, the Deep State hereby doubles down and offers up the neocon dot-head Nikki Haley.
"Haley, whose birth name is Nimrata Randhawa..."https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/story-of-nikki-haley-the-indi
Nimrata Randhawa doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.
Would she be a former state governor and current US ambassador if she hadn't conveniently changed her name?
Apr 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
STP -> Creative_Destruct Fri, 04/27/2018 - 16:19 PermalinkSTP -> STP Fri, 04/27/2018 - 16:24 Permalink
Jim Comey DOES get to arbitrarily judge what is and what is not classified! As the head of the FBI, he clearly has the role of 'Originating Authority' on determining classification of ANY document. What it says is, that if there's ANY doubt, whether it is classified or not, it shall be SAFEGUARDED at the higher level of classification. And the ultimate authority, is the President of the United States, if the Originator is Comey. So Comey took it upon himself to declassify, classified documents without the permission of the President of the United States, who happens to be his boss.
(c) If there is reasonable doubt about the need to classify information, it shall be safeguarded as if it were classified pending a determination by an original classification authority, who shall make this determination within thirty (30) days. If there is reasonable doubt about the appropriate level of classification, it shall be safeguarded at the higher level of classification pending a determination by an original classification authority , who shall make this determination within thirty (30) days.
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12356.htmlBeowulf55 -> nope-1004 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 12:07 Permalink
I'll add this as well. And this is the source, BTW:
Executive Order 12356--National security information
Source: The provisions of Executive Order 12356 of Apr. 2, 1982, appear at 47 FR 14874 and 15557, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 166, unless otherwise noted.
10) other categories of information that are related to the national security and that require protection against unauthorized disclosure as determined by the President or by agency heads or other officials who have been delegated original classification authority by the President . Any determination made under this subsection shall be reported promptly to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office .
- (b) Information that is determined to concern one or more of the categories in Section 1.3(a ) shall be classified when an original classification authority also determines that its unauthorized disclosure, either by itself or in the context of other information, reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security.
- (c) Unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information, the identity of a confidential foreign source, or intelligence sources or methods is presumed to cause damage to the national security.
- (d) Information classified in accordance with Section 1.3 shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unofficial publication or inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure in the United States or abroad of identical or similar information. [!!!!!!]Omen IV -> Beowulf55 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 14:37 Permalink
He's both! Liars are always incredibly naive and mentally lacking.
And why? You dismiss the fact that he, Comey, is a narcissistic sociopath and that is who they are: a liar and mentally lacking.Omen IV -> Beowulf55 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 14:37 Permalink
" Comey's semantic absurdity"
Comey follows Humpty Dumpty's rules: "A word means exactly what i choose it to mean - no more no less"BennyBoy -> nope-1004 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 12:29 Permalink
" Comey's semantic absurdity"
Comey follows Humpty Dumpty's rules: "A word means exactly what i choose it to mean - no more no less"JLee2027 -> nope-1004 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 13:31 Permalink
About as explosive as explosive diarrheaMrAToZ -> nope-1004 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 17:42 Permalink
They get so twisted, they believe their own lies are true...that's basically a broken mind.BabaLooey -> BaBaBouy Fri, 04/27/2018 - 11:43 Permalink
Comey is no different than any of those low lifes you used to see get busted on Cops. He's a confidence man. A crack head, high on his own power. He's worse in fact because he betrayed his fellow Americans en masse.
What nails him is over confidence. Obama has it, Clinton has it. They all think that they they're winners at the table and that it's gonna go on forever. They are the worse type because they think they deserve it. There is not a gram of humility in the lot. Prisons are full of these guys.
Interestingly enough, all these these players use the same excuses those addicts with smack in the center console use as they were getting cuffed.
"What? We were just talkin"
"I had no idea that was there"
"I don't remember"
"Some guy told me it was okay"
"I don't know"
"The other guy started it"
"That's my personal stuff. You got no right"
"Those aren't mine"
"I'm not me I'm my younger brother" (nod to Ike Turner for that one)
It's the sheer weight of these tired old answers that makes it so obvious that Comey is scum. He has an answer for everything. Put them all together and you get a figure eight. He's a punk in the first order and a henchman of a crime family. I'm hoping he ends up somebody's punk when this is over.El Oregonian -> BaBaBouy Fri, 04/27/2018 - 13:57 Permalink
Fucking DIE Comey you prick.
Save us all from your shit - fucking asshole.Beowulf55 -> Yukon Cornholius Fri, 04/27/2018 - 12:04 Permalink
The political flesh has taken on a nice "Swampy-Taste" to it.
There are lies, and there are damned lies... and there's Comey..Yukon Cornholius -> Beowulf55 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 12:30 Permalink
Hey Cornholius, When you say "these pigs are as dirty as they get" are you talking about Jeff "Reefer Madness" Sessions? Because, if you are, I will agree with you.Bigly -> Beowulf55 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 16:24 Permalink
I'm talking about all the fucknuts who steal the fruits of your labor and claim to be "serving the public". Sessions is definitely one of those pigs. Taxpayers enable and support his behaviour.Rex Andrus -> Yukon Cornholius Fri, 04/27/2018 - 13:06 Permalink
Guys, not so fast. Mr. Magoo is not as dim as he looks: https://bigleaguepolitics.com/heres-jeff-sessions-might-playing-4-d-chess/
Just like Flynn taking that hit so his testimony of ALL the illegalities he witnessed is now legally documented.
Not all is brilliant, but they do have a PLAN.Yukon Cornholius -> Rex Andrus Fri, 04/27/2018 - 13:09 Permalink
Court? Just who do you think is protecting them? Try harder.Rex Andrus -> Yukon Cornholius Fri, 04/27/2018 - 13:55 Permalink
Certainly not We the People and the Common Law.Yukon Cornholius -> Rex Andrus Fri, 04/27/2018 - 14:16 Permalink
This is a constitutional republic. They like "democracy" because they can claim their crimes legitimate as "mandates". Their actions are unconstitutional. That is the law. Be nice if the next time the military conducts exercises in a domestic population center the local militia takes them all prisoner. Train for this.
https://media.8ch.net/file_store/98d979c48bab4bb119b86d5500a4c6279f15f7Rex Andrus -> Yukon Cornholius Fri, 04/27/2018 - 16:53 Permalink
Maybe ideologically it is a constitutional republic, but since March 9, 1933 when FDR signed the Emergency Banking Act the United States has been a private institution managed by foreign investors.
"Since March 9, 1933 The United States has been in a state of Declared National Emergency ... Under the powers delegated by these statutes the President may: seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, order military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, restrict travel, and in a plethora of ways control the lives of American citizens. ... A majority of the people in the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For forty years, freedoms and governmental procedure guaranteed by the Constitution have in varying degrees been abridged by laws brought into force by national emergency." In Reg. US Senate report No. 93-549 dated 11/19/73Yukon Cornholius -> Rex Andrus Fri, 04/27/2018 - 18:30 Permalink
All laws that are unconstitutional are null and void.TheWholeYearInn -> FireBrander Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:51 Permalink
Indeed. I have been living under Lawful Rebellion (article 61 of the Magna Carta 1215 ) for some time now.FireBrander -> TheWholeYearInn Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:55 Permalink
- - Another day Comey out on the interview tour
- - Another day Mueller still has a job
- - Another day Sessions still has a job
- - Another [FRI] day Trump thinking hard about what his weekend tweetstormy will rage on about
In summary ~ Another DAY IN THE LIFE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usNsCeOV4GM
Hey ~ but at least now we all know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall.stant -> J S Bach Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:55 Permalink
Why Trump allows this, I can't figure out...either it's part of a bigger plan, he's a dumb-ass, or he's being forced to allow this shit-show to go into it's second season.I Am Jack's Ma -> hedgeless_horseman Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:36 Permalink
they had a banana republic to savecat-foodcafe -> hedgeless_horseman Fri, 04/27/2018 - 13:14 Permalink
Clapper and Brennan are perjurers, so it seems is Comey. Lynch tanked the prosecution by not reminding FBI that its up to the DOJ, not FBI, to decide to prosecute or not ((how has that gotten lost in all this))... its crooks all the way down to the dark corners of the Shadow State, where drug sales, murder, and terror are the red blood cells of the beast.
And of course Hillary... decades of lies, murders, theft, and the deliberate arming of terrorists in Syria, per her emails, to 'help Israel.'
These people aren't merely criminals, but domestic terrorists and traitors.
Trump and Sessions' failure to indict these people merits your attention regardless of what you think of Trump these days.
The lack of prosecutions means a DOJ afraid of what dark secrets may be revealed in the harsh light of investigation and prosecution.
We would likely, even as cynics, absolutely marvel at the thoroughness of Washington's corruption if we saw it.
Maybe we'd think about treating DC as a zio/globalist occupied territory that presents a clear and present danger to the several States.WileyCoyote -> BetterRalph Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:39 Permalink
Will spell all this out for everyone:
Strzok and Page are sacrificial pigs who have apparently only convicted themselves of gross stupidity. There is no evidence of crimes being committed in emails. That is why both are still employed. No evidence either one was having an affair, either. Going to lunch is not a crime.
The real action is who and what else is being concealed from the world.......
FBI are all a bunch of depraved FUCKS.
If FBI secrets were to come out for everyone to see, every criminal prosecution in which FBI Fucks were involved could be dismissed, overturned, reversed, or withdrawn from Fed Court. Gov does not have enough $$$$$$ to pay the damages.
So we all get fucked and FBI cunts stay employed.
Sso corrupt it is UNIMAGINABLE !!!!
Close down the FBI !!!! End the fucking contest. Do it NOW !!!Catullus Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:34 Permalink
A narcissistic pathological liar on display. My opinion as an armchair psychologist!lolygager Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:36 Permalink
Did his crack legal team tell him to shut the fuck up? He's basically cross examining himself in a public forum.
The Clinton email thing is still amazing. It's de jure illegal to handle the information the way they did regardless of intent. No interview was necessary. No immunity to an unnecessary interview needed to happen either. This is a miscarriage at its most benign.
Only a boob would believe this "aw schucks" nonesense.L Cornelius Sulla Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:53 Permalink
It is amazing he ran the FBI. He is completely delusional. Has no sense of the rule of law or how to apply it. Has no sense of how the law applies to him. He cannot see the consequences of his actions on people or how they would interpret it. Complete narcissist that lacks any empathy. Truly a psychopath.enough of this Fri, 04/27/2018 - 10:54 Permalink
The level of absurdity of the former head of the nation's purportedly premiere law enforcement agency giving unlimited interviews to promote a tell-all book on still active investigations in which he was involved is so high that it would it wouldn't even be fodder for satire. Sanctimonious "Cardinal" Comey has become a caricature of himself. He is either bringing shame and disgrace to the FBI that he purportedly loves, or conclusively demonstrating that it is more politically corrupt than under Hoover; but without the competency it displayed under Hooveresque directors. People like Comey, McCabe, Strzok and Page sent scores of people to prison, ruining untold lives. How many of these people would have been found guilty if even a fraction of this information had been available to defense attorneys as exculpatory evidence? Manafort's lawyers are going to have a field day with all of this (at least in the DC case where Judge Berman Jackson - a former defense lawyer and ostensibly fair jurist - is presiding; I pity Manafort's lawyers in front of Judge Ellis in Alexandria). Every time that Comey opens his mouth, he is making multiple inconsistent statements of varying degrees. His narcissism and greed are so monumental that he doesn't even see the damage that he did, is and will continue to do to his credibility. I do, however, have to end by commending him for appearing on Fox, though I think that it was more his inability to turn down a forum for self-promotion than out of any particular bravery.Robert Trip Fri, 04/27/2018 - 11:14 Permalink
Comey said, "it was unlikely to end in a case that the prosecutors at DOJ would bring."
That doesn't mean the hundred-plus FBI agents who actually worked the case didn't believe Clinton should be prosecuted. Comey betrayed FBI agents by not supporting them. Instead, he sided with politicize prosecutors, including Attorney General Lynch, who weren't going to indict Clinton no matter what the evidence showed. Comey is a limpid coward and a disgrace to law enforcement officers throughout the land.arby63 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 11:26 Permalink
Does Bezos have Comey's book "Riding My High Horse" at number one on Amazon, like he did with Clinton's book "What The Fuck Happened?" even though it had only sold 62 copies?adr Fri, 04/27/2018 - 11:40 Permalink
I truly do not understand any of this. Is this guy so full of himself that he thinks all of these interviews will somehow exonerate him?
What's the method to this madness? He digs a deeper hole every time he opens his mouth. I seriously doubt if everyone is laughing.tedstr Fri, 04/27/2018 - 12:08 Permalink
Classified is classified, unless you work for a Clinton.
SO if you put classified information in your book, it is no longer classified??????
Shit, a whole lot of ex CIA guys need to write books. How about, "Well we knew that the most murderous and despicable Nazi was in Argentina all along and lived there for 30 years after WWII but we never went and got him, because he really didn't do most of the things we claimed he did."Honest Sam Fri, 04/27/2018 - 14:48 Permalink
forget the dossier. forget that she destroyed evidence. forget that she fleeced world leaders for her little foundation. forget the outrageous speaking fees of her disgraced ex president husband. forget the meeting on the tarmac with the AG. forget that her campaign was laundering contributions.
SHE SET UP A FUCKING ILLEGAL EMAIL SERVER IN HER HOME AND REDIRECTED GOVERNMENT TOP SECRET EMAIL TO THAT SERVER IN AN ATTEMPT TO HIDE ALL HER CRIMES.
God these people are dirtier than a small time local politician. Jail em all.Winston Smith 2009 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 15:23 Permalink
I have learned that there is a gaping deep and wide crevasse between a 'fact' and a 'truth'.
A 'truth' is, e.g., That tall oak out there is a tree.
A 'fact' is, that depending on where you are standing, you can attest to seeing less than a half of a tree, (unless you have developed the ability to see around bends).
So when someone like the weasel Comey is says something is a fact, you have every reason to doubt that he is telling you a truth.
I have a larcenous heart. I regret that I did not get into government, seeing how much money can be made and how risk free the jobs are. Few---- compared to the many millions who have literally gotten away with murder, gathered immense fortunes, and awesome behind the scenes power that is invisible----have ever been arrested let alone accused, prosecuted and sent to jail. You can count them on your fingers and toes.
So I have no objections to people buying his pack of lies and him making some serious money on the advances, the book, and the eventual movie, starring George Clooney as the hero, Comey.
The Department of "Justice", lost its way long ago. To persist in calling it the DOJ when it is nothing of the sort, just another disreputable, bureaucratic fuckup of a government agency, is a total lie.UndergroundGym Fri, 04/27/2018 - 16:25 Permalink
Comey lies in the interview exposed plus the new Peter Strzok and Lisa Page emails. Even what must be a very tiny percentage of their emails during the covered time span have some very revealing contents which the censors missed:
https://soundcloud.com/dan-bongino/ep-708-explosive-new-textsRex Andrus Fri, 04/27/2018 - 16:47 Permalink
Interestingly, Comey said Republicans financed the Steele dossier before Democrats. What if he's telling the truth? Trump is an Independent with an "R" next to his name-Trump isn't their "Boy". Many Lifer Republicans in fact are leaving office including House Speaker Ryan. If a Republican is responsible for financing the dossier, my guess for one is Senator John McCain. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-mccain-associate-subpoenaagcw86 Fri, 04/27/2018 - 18:34 Permalink
Comey the hatchet man https://media.8ch.net/file_store/91745f98ae856a94463f635adea80a2d159baa
You're going to lose more than just fall guys, motherfuckers. It's open season on no go zones.American Snipper Fri, 04/27/2018 - 20:38 Permalink
Comey will have a bright future if they bring back "The Liar's Club" to TV.Petrodollar Sy Fri, 04/27/2018 - 21:59 Permalink
I could not watch more than 25% of the first video without projectile vomiting. This fucker should be shot for treason, as all the rest of the swamp leaders. The one sailor went to jail for accidentally releasing a pic in an engine room, and Petras went to prison for so much less.
It's time to water the tree of Liberty with the blood of traitors to the Republic...
What an evil, brilliant bastard.
Apr 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) turned CNN commentator James Clapper not only leaked information related to the infamous "Steele dossier" to CNN's Jake Tapper while Clapper was in office - it appears he also lied about it to Congress, under oath.
Clapper was one of the "two national security officials" cited in CNN's repor t -published minutes after Buzzfeed released the full Steele dossier .
The revelation that Clapper was responsible for leaking details of both the dossier and briefings to two presidents on the matter is significant, because former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director James Comey wrote in one of four memos that he leaked that the briefing of Trump on salacious and unverified allegations from the dossier was necessary because "CNN had them and were looking for a news hook." - The Federalist
So Comey said that Trump needed to be briefed on the Dossier's allegations since CNN "had them" - because James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence at the time, provided that information to the same network he now works for .
And who's idea was it to brief Trump on the dossier? JAMES CLAPPER - according to former FBI Director James Comey's memos:
"I said there was something that Clapper wanted me to speak to the [president-elect] about alone or in a very small group ," Comey wrote.
The revelations detailing Clapper's leak to CNN can be found in a 253-page report by the House Intelligence Committee majority released on Friday - which also found " no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded, coordinated, or conspired with the Russian government."
As Sean Davis of The Federalist bluntly states: " Clapper leaked details of a dossier briefing given to then-President-elect Donald Trump to CNN's Jake Tapper, lied to Congress about the leak, and was rewarded with a CNN contract a few months later ."
From Clapper's Congressional testimony:
MR. ROONEY: Did you discuss the dossier or any other intelligence related to Russia hacking of the 2016 election with journalists?
MR. CLAPPER: No.
Clapper later changed his tune after he was confronted about his communications with Tapper:
"Clapper subsequently acknowledged discussing the 'dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper,' and admitted that he might have spoken with other journalists about the same topic," the report reads. "Clapper's discussion with Tapper took place in early January 2017, around the time IC leaders briefed President Obama and President-elect Trump, on 'the Christopher Steele information,' a two-page summary of which was 'enclosed in' the highly-classified version of the ICA," or intelligence community assessment.As Jack Posobiec adds , " To be clear: CNN's Jake Tapper participated in a leak of highly classified information from James Clapper and knowingly participated in a cover-up of it that has gone on for months, during which time CNN hired Clapper as a paid contributor ."
The Daily Caller' s Chuck Ross notes that Clapper also denied speaking to the media in a March conversation with CNN's Don Lemon.
And let's not forget, Jake Tapper has been participating in the lie .
Indeed it is Don - as The Federalist' s Mollie Hemmingway wrote in January - Comey's account of Trump's briefing on the dossier suggested that it was a setup from the beginning - and that it was only done in order to legitimize the story and justify leaking the unverified and salacious details to journalists.
Let's bring it home with Mollie Hemmingway's summary from January which hits the nail on the head:
So Comey, at Clapper's expressed behest, told Trump that CNN was "looking for a news hook" to publish dossier allegations. He said this in the briefing of Trump that almost immediately leaked to CNN, which provided them the very news hook they sought and needed.
This briefing, and the leaking of it, legitimized the dossier, which touched off the Russia hysteria. That hysteria led to a full-fledged media freakout. During the freakout, Comey deliberately refused to say in public what he acknowledged repeatedly in private -- that the President of the United States was not under investigation. He even noted in his memos that he told the president at least three times that he was not under investigation. Comey's refusal to admit publicly what he kept telling people privately led to his firing. - The Federalist
We look forward to James Clapper talking his way out of this on CNN during carefully scripted conversations with fellow talking heads. Tags
Apr 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,
When globalists speak publicly about a "new world order" they are speaking about something very specific and rather sacred in their little cult of elitism. It is not simply the notion that civilization shifts or changes abruptly on its own; rather, it is their name for a directed and engineered vision - a world built according to their rules, not a world that evolved naturally according to necessity.
There are other names for this engineered vision, including the "global economic reset," or the more general and innocuous term "globalism," but the intention is the same.
The ultimate goal of the new world order as an ideology is total centralization of economic and governmental power into the hands of a select and unaccountable bureaucracy made up of international financiers. This is governance according the the dictates of Plato's Republic; a delusional fantasy world in which benevolent philosopher kings, supposedly smarter and more objective than the rest of us, rule from on high with scientific precision and wisdom. It is a world where administrators become gods.
Such precision and objectivity within human systems is not possible, of course . Human beings are far too susceptible to their own biases and personal desires to be given totalitarian power over others. The results will always be destruction and disaster. Then, add to this the fact that the kinds of people who often pursue such power are predominantly narcissistic sociopaths and psychopaths. If a governmental structure of high level centralization is allowed to form, it opens a door for these mentally and spiritually broken people to play out their twisted motives on a global stage.
It is important to remember that sociopaths are prone to fabricating all kinds of high minded ideals to provide cover for their actions. That is to say, they will adopt a host of seemingly noble causes to rationalize their scramble for power, but in the end these "humanitarians" only care about imposing their will on as many people as possible while feeding off them for as long as time allows.
There are many false promises, misrepresentations and fraudulent conceptions surrounding the narrative of globalism. Some of them are rather clever and subversive and are difficult to pick out in the deliberately created fog. The schemes involved in implementing globalism are designed to confuse the masses with crisis until they end up ASKING for more centralization and less freedom.
Let's examine some of the most common propaganda methods and arguments behind the push for globalization and a "new world order"
Con #1: Globalism Is About "Free Markets"
A common pro-globalism meme is the idea that globalization is not really centralization, but decentralization. This plays primarily to the economic side of global governance, which in my view is the most important because without economic centralization political centralization is not possible.
Free markets according to Adam Smith, a pioneer of the philosophy, are supposed to provide open paths for anyone with superior ideas and ingenuity to pursue those ideas without interference from government or government aided institutions. What we have today under globalism are NOT free markets. Instead, globalism has supplied unfettered power to international corporations which cannot exist without government charter and government financial aid.
The corporate model is completely counter to Adam Smith's original premise of free market trade. Large corporations receive unfair legal protection under limited liability as well as outright legislative protection from civil consequences (Monsanto is a perfect example of this). They also receive immense taxpayer funded welfare through bailouts and other sources when they fail to manage their business responsibly. All this while small businesses and entrepreneurs are impeded at every turn by taxation and legal obstacles.
In terms of international trade being "free trade," this is not really the case either. Only massive corporations supported by governments are able to exploit the advantages of international manufacturing and labor sources in a way that ensures long term success. Meanwhile economic models that promote true decentralization and localism become impractical because real competition is never allowed. The world has not enjoyed free markets in at least a century. What we have today is something entirely different.
Con #2: Globalism Is About A "Multipolar World"
This is a relatively new disinformation tactic that I attribute directly to the success of the liberty movement and alternative economists. As the public becomes more educated on the dangers of economic centralization and more specifically the dangers of central banks, the globalists are attempting to shift the narrative to muddy the waters.
For example, the liberty movement has railed against the existence of the Federal Reserve and fiat dollar hegemony to the point that our information campaign has been breaking into mainstream thought. The problem is that globalism is not about the dollar, U.S. hegemony or the so-called "deep state," which in my view is a distraction from the bigger issue at hand.
The fact is, globalist institutions and central banks permeate almost every corner of the world. Nations like Russia and China are just as heavily tied to the IMF and the Bank for International Settlements and international financial centers like Goldman Sachs as any western government.
Part of the plan for the new world order, as has been openly admitted by globalists and globalist publications, is the decline of the U.S. and the dollar system to make way for one world financial governance through the IMF as well as the Special Drawing Rights basket as a mechanism for the world reserve currency. The globalists WANT a less dominant U.S. and a more involved East, while the East continues to call for more control of the global economy by the IMF. This concept unfortunately flies over the heads of most economists, even in the liberty movement.
So, the great lie being promoted now is that the fall of the U.S. and the dollar is a "good thing" because it will result in "decentralization," a "multi-polar" world order and the "death" of globalism. However, what is really happening is that as the U.S. falls globalist edifices like the IMF and the BIS rise. We are moving from centralization to super-centralization. Globalists have pulled a bait and switch in order to trick the liberty movement into supporting the success of the East (which is actually also globalist controlled) and a philosophy which basically amounts to a re-branding of the new world order as some kind of decentralized paradise.
Con #3: Nationalism Is The Source Of War, And Globalism Will End It
If there's one thing globalists have a love/hate relationship with, it's humanity's natural tribal instincts. On the one hand, they like tribalism because in some cases tribalism can be turned into zealotry, and zealots are easy to exploit and manipulate. Wars between nations (tribes) can be instigated if the tribal instinct is weighted with artificial fears and threats.
On the other hand, tribalism lends itself to natural decentralization of societies because tribalism in its best form is the development of many groups organized around a variety of ideas and principles and projects. This makes the establishment of a "one world ideology" very difficult, if not impossible. The first inclination of human beings is to discriminate against ideas and people they see as destructive and counter to their prosperity. Globalists therefore have to convince a majority of people that the very tribalism that has fueled our social evolution and some of the greatest ideas in history is actually the source of our eventual doom.
Nationalism served the globalists to a point, but now they need to get rid of it entirely. This requires considerable crisis blamed on nationalism and "populist" ideals. Engineered war, whether kinetic or economic, is the best method to scapegoat tribalism. Every tragedy from now on must eventually be attributed to ideas of separation and logical discrimination against negative ideologies. The solution of globalism will then be offered; a one world system in which all separation is deemed "evil."
Con #4: Globalism Is Natural And Inevitable
As mentioned earlier, globalists cannot have their "new world order" unless they can convince the masses to ask for it. Trying to implement such a system by force alone would end in failure, because revolution is the natural end result of tyranny. Therefore, the new world order has to be introduced as if it had been formed by coincidence or by providence. Any hint that the public is being conned into accepting global centralization would trigger widespread resistance.
This is why globalism is always presented in the mainstream media as a natural extension of civilization's higher achievement. Even though it was the dangerous interdependency of globalism that helped fuel the economic crisis of 2008 and continues to escalate that crisis to this day, more globalism is continually promoted as the solution to the problem. It is spoken of with reverence in mainstream economic publications and political discussions. It receives almost religious praise in the halls of academia. Globalism is socioeconomic ambrosia -- the food of deities. It is the fountain of youth. It is a new Eden.
Obviously, this adoration for globalism is nonsense. There is no evidence whatsoever that globalism is a positive force for humanity, let alone a natural one. There is far more evidence that globalism is a poisonous ideology that can only ever gain a foothold through trickery and through false flags.
We live in an era that represents an ultimate crossroads for civilization; a time of great uncertainty. Will we seek truth in the trials we face, and thus the ability to create our own solutions? Or, will we take a seemingly easier road by embracing whatever solutions are handed to us by the establishment? Make no mistake -- the globalists already have a solution prepackaged for us. They have been acclimating and conditioning the public to accept it for decades now. That solution will not bring what it promises. It will not bring peace, but eternal war. It will not bring togetherness, but isolation. It will not bring understanding, but ignorance.
When globalists eventually try to sell us on a full-blown new world order, they will pull out every conceivable image of heaven on Earth, but they will do this only after creating a tangible and ever present hell.
* * *
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here . We greatly appreciate your patronage.
Apr 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Several of the parties being sued by the DNC have expressed their excitement over the discovery process , by which they may get their hands on even more evidence which might incriminate or exonerate various actors. President Trump, Roger Stone, and Wikileaks (which is countersuing the DNC) have all noted that they're looking forward to checking out the controversial "DNC Servers" which were allegedly hacked by Russia .In response to the DNC lawsuit, Trump tweeted that it could be good news that " we will now counter for the DNC Server that they refused to give to the FBI," along with the "Debbie Wasserman Schultz Servers and Documents ."
Just heard the Campaign was sued by the Obstructionist Democrats. This can be good news in that we will now counter for the DNC Server that they refused to give to the FBI, the Debbie Wasserman Schultz Servers and Documents held by the Pakistani mystery man and Clinton Emails.-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 20, 2018
The Trump campaign also says the lawsuit will provide an opportunity to " explore the DNC's now-secret records ."
And as we reported on Monday, WikiLeaks is counter-suing the DNC - setting up a donation fund and noting "We've never lost a publishing case and discovery is going to be amazing fun."
The Democrats are suing @WikiLeaks and @JulianAssange for revealing how the DNC rigged the Democratic primaries. Help us counter-sue. We've never lost a publishing case and discovery is going to be amazing fun: https://t.co/E1QbYJL4bB
More options: https://t.co/MsNZhrTzTL pic.twitter.com/VbPp7FTNq3-- WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 20, 2018
DNC chair Tom Perez defended the lawsuit as "necessary," telling Meet the Press that they had to file before the statue of limitations ran out, and that "it's hard to put a price tag on preserving democracy."
David Pepper, chair of the Ohio Democratic Party is totally cool with the DNC lawsuit. "I don't think it hurts," said Pepper. "If you have credible claims, you have a responsibility to pursue legal action. I think you have a day or two where [the suit] is the story, but that's different from your overall message."
" I wouldn't have our candidates spending the fall talking about Russia or the suit or anything like that ," Pepper said.
"They should be focused on health care, education, student debt. We shouldn't divert the message from those topics to talk about Russia. "
And yet, that's exactly what's going to happen as the DNC lawsuit plays out in the six months and change before midterms.
Apr 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Ex-Clinton 'Ethics' Aide Resigns After Taped Tirade At Cops You May Shut The Fk Up! Zero Hedge
NoDebt -> J S Bach Wed, 04/25/2018 - 18:30 Permalink
She obviously learned from the best.
Apr 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
In February, 16 of 20 major cities experienced home price growth of 5.4% or higher: double the average wage growth. And then there was San Francisco ...
Apr 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Democrats in midwestern battleground states want the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to back off the Trump-Russia rhetoric, as state-level leaders worry it's turning off voters.
"The DNC is doing a good job of winning New York and California," said Mahoning, OH Democratic county party chair David Betras.
"I'm not saying it's not important -- of course it's important -- but do they honestly think that people that were just laid off another shift at the car plant in my home county give a shit about Russia when they don't have a frickin' job? "
Betras says that Trump and Russia is the "only piece they've been doing since 2016. [ Trump ] keeps talking about jobs and the economy, and we talk about Russia. "
The Democratic infighting comes on the heels of a multimillion-dollar lawsuit filed by the DNC against the Trump campaign, Wikileaks and several other parties including the Russian government, alleging an illegal conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 election in a "brazen attack on American Democracy."
Many midwestern Democrats, however, are rolling their eyes.
"I'm going to be honest; I don't understand why they're doing it," one Midwestern campaign strategist told BuzzFeed. "My sense was it was a move meant to gin up the donor base, not our voters. But it was the biggest news they've made in a while."
The strategist added "I wouldn't want to see something like this coming out of the DNC in October."
Another Midwest strategist said that the suit was "politically unhelpful" and that they havent seen "a single piece of data that says voters want Democrats to relitigate 2016. ... The only ones who want to do this are Democratic activists who are already voting Democratic."
Perhaps Midwestern Democrats aren't idiots, and realize that a two-year counterintelligence operation against Donald Trump which appears to have been a coordinated "insurance policy" against a Trump win, might not be so great for optics, considering that criminal referrals have been submitted to the DOJ for individuals involved in the alleged scheme to rig the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
Apr 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
The gloves are off in the multimillion-dollar lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) against the Trump campaign, Wikileaks and several other parties including the Russian government, alleging an illegal conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 election in a "brazen attack on American Democracy."
Many have suggested the lawsuit is a tactical error by the DNC, as it may expose or confirm claims against the organization - such as whether they rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders , the level of coordination between the DNC and the Clinton Campaign, and the details surrounding the funding of the "Steele dossier," paid for in part by both the Clinton campaign and the DNC .
The defendants - from President Trump, to Wikileaks - and now Roger Stone - are excited at the prospect of examining the DNC servers which cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike determined were victims of Russian hacking in advance of the 2016 elections. Notably, the DNC would not allow the FBI or anyone else to inspect said servers .
To that end, Stone's attorneys have slapped the DNC with a notification to preserve evidence related to the case with a "standard pre-discovery notice." Discovery is a pre-trial process by which one party can obtain evidence from the opposing party relevant to the case.
My lawyers and I will demand to examine the DNC's servers and expose them to real forensic analysis, not merely accepting the claims of the DNC's paid contractor , to finally extinguish this bogus Russian hacking claim, once and for all . My lawyers have served the DNC with standard pre-discovery notice directing the DNC of their obligation under law to preserve all possible evidence, including their servers, for ultimate inspection and exposure to critical review . As Julian Assange wrote on Twitter, via the WikiLeaks feed, " Discovery is going to be fun ." - Roger Stone
Stone notes that "Former CIA experts like Bill Binney and Ray McGovern examined the basic data available about the copying of DNC data and concluded that there is more forensic evidence that the material was downloaded to a portable drive , meaning it had to be someone with physical access to DNC computers ."
"Having made their computer systems the subject matter of multi-million dollar demands for judicial relief, the DNC has now exposed them to the discovery process ," writes Stone.
In February, New Zealand entrepreneur Kim Dotcom responded to a tweet by President Trump, claiming that "the DNC hack wasn't even a hack. It was an insider with a memory stick." Dotcom says he knows "who did it and why," adding "Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied."
Apr 24, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
marku52 , April 20, 2018 at 3:57 pmhemeantwell , April 20, 2018 at 4:59 pm
Stumbling and Mumbling has a good riff on this topic:
". Economics, for me, is not about armchair theorizing. It should begin with the facts, and especially the big ones. The facts are that share buy-backs do usually matter, so thought experiments that say otherwise are wrong from the off. Similarly, the fact that wage inflation has been low for years (pdf) is much more significant than any theorizing about Phillips curves."
The comments are good as well:
"That's a category error: you don't define "Economics", tenure committees define it, and they award tenure to people who have a long record of publishing "internally consistent" ("armchair theorizing") papers."
"I found myself sitting next to a very likable young middle-aged academic tenured at an elite British university, whom henceforth I will refer to as Doctor X and whose field is closely associated with this blog. Every year I publish papers in the top journals and they're pure shit." Doctor X, who by now had had a glass or two, felt bad about this, not least because "students these days are so idealistic and eager to learn; they're really wonderful." Furthermore Doctor X could and would like "to write serious papers but what would be the point?" "
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2018/04/facts-vs-hand-waving-in-economics.html#commentsApe , April 22, 2018 at 3:32 am
Yeah. I'm inclined to think the author needs to curb his enthusiasms and take up dejected drinking.
The nub of his presentation was a model in which consumers, due to cognitive limitations, were unable to fully examine every single product they purchased. The result was that regulations guaranteeing a certain standard of safety, quality and the like could improve competition by giving people more time to shop around instead of having to devote so much time to investigate specific products. Thus, regulation would improve markets and competition
This is Nobel-level work? It amounts to finding a way to pitch a product to anti-regulation dogmatists. I'm sure that you could find similar arguments being made during the Progressive era regulatory push. Only they would have been framed more as "people will have more time to shop around if they're not killed by previous ingestion of the product."Larry Motuz , April 22, 2018 at 4:34 pm
Dude – they aren't actually doing fancy math. Linear regression – like it's 1850!
Most of their important proofs are irrelevant crap with wholes. The math is mostly undergraduate math! The emperor has no clothes!
The problem isn't just math trickery – it's not even proper ingenuity.
Just read a Summer or Krugman paper – it's 70 pages of words, 3 graphs of imaginary numbers and stats 2 equations. That's not mathematization.Sound of the Suburbs , April 22, 2018 at 9:08 am
What I mean by 'mathemagics' is the misuse of mathematics –even simple mathematics -- to create the illusion that 'utility' or 'indifference curves' actually pertain to real concepts. In reality, they 'mathematize' gobbledygook passed off as coherent concepts. There is nothing so conceptually barren as 'utility' or 'indifference curve' analytics. The notion that one can derive any coherent 'demand' analysis for any one consumer that is individual human being (or life form of any kind) for any product, or that one can aggregate these up is mathematical junk.Sound of the Suburbs , April 22, 2018 at 9:09 am
The Classical Economists used the broader political economy rather than today's narrow economics.
The Washington Consensus dreamed of a world run by the laws of economics.
The laws of economics worked in China's favour and the Western economies got hollowed out.
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
Maximising profit required minimising wages.
The minimum wage is set when disposable income equals zero.
The minimum wage = taxes + the cost of living
China had it made and the West had tilted the playing field against itself.
The US eventually woke up the geopolitical consequences of a world governed by the laws of economics that had worked in China's favour.
Trump has just made things worse with his tax cuts.
If we reduce taxes on the wealthy they will create more jobs and wages.
If we reduce taxes on the wealthy they will create more jobs and wages in Asia where they can make more profit. They can then ship the stuff back here increasing Western trade deficits.Sound of the Suburbs , April 22, 2018 at 9:17 am
"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning. " Warren Buffet, 25 May 2005
Did your class think about the geopolitics?
I don't think so.
William White (BIS, OECD) is on board for the benefits of the broader political economy.
skippy , April 20, 2018 at 3:47 pm
Apr 24, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Economics conducted a curriculum review of 174 modules at 7 Russell Group universities -- rightly or wrongly considered the 'top' universities in the UK -- and we found that the uncritical acceptance of one type of economics begins with education. Under 10% of modules even mentioned anything other than mainstream or 'neoclassical' economics; in econometrics, over 90% of modules devoted more than two-thirds of their lectures to linear regression. Only 24% of exam questions required critical or independent thinking (i.e. were open-ended); this dropped to 8% if you only counted the compulsory macro and micro modules that form the core of economics education.
We have previously called this 'indoctrination', and while this may seem dramatic the dictionary definition of indoctrination is to "teach a person or set of people to accept a set of beliefs uncritically", which we think adequately characterises the results of the review, as well as our own experience and many widely used economics textbooks. Given this education, it is no wonder that economists remain wedded to the fundamental precepts of choice models and linear regression no matter where they turn their attention. By putting the method first, the implicit assumption becomes that answering a question using this framework is prima facie interesting, and critical evaluation of these tools against others is made unthinkable.
Jim Haygood , , April 20, 2018 at 11:01 am
For nearly thirty years after the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) became received gospel in the mid-1960s, the claim that stock prices exhibited momentum (which shouldn't be true in a perfectly efficient market) was roundly mocked by mainstream economists.
Then in 1993, Jegadeesh and Titman published a paper titled "Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency" in the Journal of Finance . Its evidence for a momentum effect was impossible to refute.
So economists bolted en masse to the opposite side of the boat. Today there are thousands of papers on momentum, often presenting some fairly trivial arithmetic that home-based amateurs have long used. But it's formulated into equations with Greek letters, and a [totally boring] statistical panel appears in the Appendix to prove some statistical significance.
A few professors actually exploited their discoveries to get rich. Cliff Asness, a U of Chicago PhD (but a practitioner, not a professor) offers some light-hearted commentary on his mentor Eugene Fama:
Of course the book The Fama Portfolio also contains contributions by other authors (or how the heck did I get in there?) that reflect, directly or indirectly, on Gene's work.
Being able to read Gene's originals and some of the major papers by others that explore his work in one volume is both a treat and incredibly useful (these contributors, unlike John Liew and myself, are themselves serious academic luminaries!).
OK, enough shilling. If you love finance and don't immediately pine for this book, I can't help you any further☺
Synoia , April 20, 2018 at 11:33 am
If it was only like the movie THX1138.
Where the police were call off their pursuit, when within a finger nail of – helping – their subject. Because the economic perimeters their models produced, with the help of computational machines, gave a ridged defined view of the operation. Seems the subject was operating outside the econometric perimeters due to mental illness – was a patient whom escaped at the time.
Alas we never get to see what he saw when he popped out on the surface, save a blinding orb.
In retrospect did they do the underground thingy to better control, could nature itself be a threat to the model, hence the need to control every aspect of environment for behavioral reasons.
Anywho I'll just leave this on my way to work:
"If we accept that we need fundamental reform, what should the new economics -- "de-conomics" as I'm calling it -- look like?
First, we need to accept that there is no such thing as "value-free" analysis of the economy. As I've explained, neoclassical economics pretends to be ethically neutral while smuggling in an individualistic, anti-social ethos " – Howard Reed
Chris , April 20, 2018 at 12:22 pm
Linear regression is economists' preferred empirical technique
That's really a powerful tool in a world which is chaotic.
The trouble with embracing chaos and catastrophe theory is the "chaos" part of predicting the future. But economists, being human and liking their paychecks, are not interested in any predictions which do not cater, or pander, to the needs of their bosses or paymasters.
Why, that might suggest the boss is wrong! Such heresy leads to a quick execution!
Fundamentally, economics is a religion, with priests, high priests, creed, dogma, punishment for heretics, and all the other trappings of a religion. But the pay is good, so Clive's rule for middle class jobs applies.
Disclaimer: My view of Religion is similar: Why?
1. You'll get your reward in the afterlife, after you are dead!
2. We know this is true, because we've never had a complaint.
Synoia , April 20, 2018 at 1:53 pm
Linear regression certainly is a powerful tool for examining linear distributions, but it essential to first confirm that the distribution is linear, and to remember that on occasion, samples drawn from random (unrelated) distributions can show a spurious correlation.
blennylips , April 20, 2018 at 2:40 pm
but it essential to first confirm that the distribution is linear
Very true, but how is this proven? In nature and economics are there any linear distributions? If so over what range?
I notice a preponderance of using straight lines instead of growth curves. I also notice chaos, or noise, in behaviors, coupled with a complete non-understanding of entropy.
In nature linear behavior is unlikely. If it were linear we'd see straight branches on trees, rainfall evenly distributed and the wind would always blow at constant speed, with predictable eddies.
I suppose a rock dropped would exhibit linear behaviors until it hits the ground, and at that point in time the "dropping rock" system become decidedly chaotic, from stuck in the mud, to bouncing in a random direction, to bursting into pieces, pieces who's destiny is completely uncertain.
― Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder
I've debated many economists who claim to specialize in risk and probability: when one takes them slightly outside their narrow focus, but within the discipline of probability, they fall apart, with the disconsolate face of a gym rat in front of a gangster hit man."
Nassim, I think covers all this better than anyone else. Would love to hear of similarly comprehensive works.
Fooled by Randomness covers problems with assumed linearity and normal distributions.
Apr 24, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Eustache De Saint Pierre , April 21, 2018 at 6:13 am
Lyapanov's work on the inherent instability of complex systems which was used as a basis of Chaos Theory, is enough in itself to relegate predictions based on a linear model when applied to the complex to be thrown into the dustbin of history.
LTCM L.P. Was I believe wiped out due to a combination of the 90's Asian & Russian crisis' ( karma in the case of the latter ? ). It would be impossible to discover which tiny flap of the butterfly's wings initiated the tipping point or to predict it beforehand.
But as long as it works for those driving it.
Apr 24, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Yves Smith, April 21, 2018 at 12:26 pm
Nudge was the title of a book by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein on how to manipulate people in their supposed best interest, like in cafeteria lines, to put whole fruit before desserts made with sugar.
See here for more detail:
blennylips , April 21, 2018 at 1:49 pmSynoia , April 21, 2018 at 11:25 am
If you liked Nudge , you'll love " cognitive infiltration ":
Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03
Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.
Keywords: conspiracy theories, social networks, informational cascades, group polarization
Is not this what discerning MIC's all do these days, via
FBIFB?JTMcPhee , April 21, 2018 at 12:40 pm
A nudge too far?
Constant and persistent nudging generally results in an angry backlash. Somewhere around when a person realizes "This is not where I wanted to be."oaf , April 21, 2018 at 1:52 pm
And of course we mopes have been "nudged" into pretty much that blind serfdom alluded to. Back in the Cave, with not much chance of dispelling the belief in and subjection to the shadows projected on the wall we are forced to faceTom_Doak , April 21, 2018 at 6:09 pm
manipulation is the sowing of a Karmic gardennone , April 21, 2018 at 10:01 pm
The classic nudge example is opting you into a 401(k) unless you opt out.
That's supposedly better for you but it is DEFINITELY better for the brokerage handling your account.Tyronius , April 22, 2018 at 12:21 am
I had to look it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudge_theory
I hadn't heard of it before.Anti-Schmoo , April 23, 2018 at 4:18 am
I rather detest the notion of someone or entity 'nudging' me in the direction of some behavior, especially in a paternalistic mode where the assumption is that they know better than I what I 'should' be doing or thinking.
On one level, isn't that a working definition of advertising? On another, it smacks of authoritarianism. Don't we have enough of this kind of thing already? Worse, what's the first reaction one naturally has when they realize they're being manipulated? Seems to be a strategy fraught with risk of getting exactly the wrong response.
If I'm to be encouraged to behave in a given way, show me the respect of offering a conscious, intelligent argument to do so on the merits, or kindly go (family blog) yourself!Anti-Schmoo , April 23, 2018 at 4:24 am
In economics, the single most important thing to understand is debt.
If you understand debt; you won't have any debt.
Debt and freedom are the antithisis of each other.
Without debt; nudges have no influence.
A follow up:
A very frank discussion of debt and freedom.
Apr 23, 2018 | americanaffairsjournal.org
From Neoliberalism The Movement That Dare Not Speak Its Name - American Affairs JournalWhile it is undeniable that neoliberals routinely disparage the state, both back then and now, it does not follow that they are politically libertarian or, as David Harvey would have it, that they are implacably opposed to state interventions in the economy and society. Harvey's error is distressing, since even Antonio Gramsci understood this: "Moreover, laissez-faire liberalism, too, must be introduced by law, through the intervention of political power: it is an act of will, not the spontaneous, automatic expression of economic facts." 6 From the 1940s onward, the distinguishing characteristic of neoliberal doctrines and practice is that they embrace this prospect of repurposing the strong state to impose their vision of a society properly open to the dominance of the market as they conceive it. Neoliberals from Friedrich Hayek to James Buchanan to Richard Posner to Alexander Rüstow (who invented the term Vitalpolitik , which became Foucault's "biopolitics") to Jacques Rueff, not to mention a plethora of figures after 1970, all explicitly proposed policies to strengthen the state. 7
Friedman's own trademark proposals, like putting the money supply on autopilot, or replacing public schools with vouchers, required an extremely strong state to enforce them. While neoliberal think tanks rile up the base with debt clocks and boogeyman statistics of ratios of government expenditure to GDP, neoliberal politicians organize a host of new state activities to fortify their markets. They extravagantly increase incarceration and policing of those whom they deem unfit for the marketplace. They expand both state and corporate power to exercise surveillance and manipulation of subject populations while dismantling judicial recourse to resist such encroachments. Neoliberals introduce new property rights (like intellectual property) to cement into place their extensions of market valuations to situations where they were absent. They strengthen international sanctions such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and investor-state dispute settlement schemes to circumvent and neutralize national social legislation they dislike. They bail out and subsidize private banking systems at the cost of many multiples of existing national income. And they define corporations as legal persons in order to facilitate the buying of elections.
The blue-sky writings of neoliberals with regard to the state are, if anything, even more daunting. In the imaginary constitution proposed in Hayek's Law, Legislation and Liberty , he suggests that politicians be rendered more powerful : in the imagined upper legislative house, Hayek stipulates, only men of substantial property over age forty-five would be eligible to vote or be elected; no political parties would be allowed; and each member would stand for a hefty fifteen-year term. 8 This illustrates the larger neoliberal predisposition to be very leery of democracy, and thus to stymie public participation through the concentration of political power in fewer hands. James Buchanan proposed something very similar. 9 This is just about as far from libertarianism as one could get, short of brute dictatorship.
So here is the answer to my first question: people think the label "neoliberalism" is an awful neologism because the neoliberals have been so good at covering their tracks, obscuring what they stand for, and denying the level of coherence which they have achieved in their long march to legitimacy. Back when some of these proposals were just a gleam in Hayek's eye, they did explicitly use the term "neoliberalism" to describe the project that, back then, did not yet exist -- even Milton Friedman used it in print! 10 But once their program looked like it would start to jell, and subsequently start reshaping both the state and the market more to their liking, they abruptly abjured any reference to that label, and sometime in the later 1950s, following the lead of Hayek, they began to call themselves "classical liberals." This attempt at rebranding was an utter travesty because, as they moved from reconceptualization of one area of human experience to another, the resulting doctrines contradicted classical liberalism point by point, and term by term. It might be worthwhile for us who come after to insist upon the relevance of things that put the neo- in neoliberalism.
What's New about Neoliberalism?
In a nutshell, classical liberalism imagined a night watchman state that would set the boundaries for the natural growth of the market, like a shepherd tending his flock. Markets were born, not made. The principles of good governance and liberty would be dictated by natural rights of individual humans, or perhaps by the prudent accretion of tradition. People needed to be nurtured first to find themselves, in order to act as legitimate citizens in liberal society. Society would be protected from the disruptive character of the market by something like John Stuart Mill's "harm principle": colloquially, the freedom of my fist stops at the freedom of your face. The neoliberals were having none of that, and explicitly said so.
Far from trying to preserve society against the unintended consequences of the operations of markets, as democratic liberalism sought to do, neoliberal doctrine instead set out actively to dismantle those aspects of society which might resist the purportedly inexorable logic of "catallactics," and to reshape it in the market's image. For neoliberals, freedom and the market would be treated as identical. Their rallying cry was to remove the foundation of liberty from natural rights or tradition, and reposition it upon an entirely novel theory concerning what a market was, or should be. They could not acknowledge individual natural rights, because they sought to tutor the masses to become the agent the market would be most likely to deem successful. The market no longer gave you what you wanted; you had to capitulate to what the market wanted. All areas of life could be better configured to behave as if they were more market-like. Gary Becker, for example, a member of the Mont Pèlerin Society, proposed a market-based approach to allow for a socially optimal level of crime, and advocated a revolutionary extension of marginal calculus to include the "shadow costs" and benefits associated with "children, prestige or esteem, health, altruism, envy, and pleasure of the senses." Becker even proposed an economic model of the "dating market," one consequence of which was the proposition that polygamy for successful, wealthy men could be politically rationalized. And voilà! The Sunday New York Times produced an article saying just that, as if it were real news. Classical liberals like Mill or Michael Oakeshott would be spinning in their graves. 11
The intellectual content of neoliberalism is something that warrants sustained discussion, but this can only happen once critical historians can admit they are no longer basing their evaluations on the isolated writings of a single author. There is no convenient crib sheet describing what the modern neoliberal thought collective (for brevity, NTC) actually believes. Nevertheless, neoliberalism does have certain themes that are regularly sounded in emanations from the NTC:
- (1) "Free" markets do not occur naturally. They must be actively constructed through political organizing.
- (2) "The market" is an information processor, and the most efficient one possible -- more efficient than any government or any single human ever could be. Truth can only be validated by the market.
- (3) Market society is, and therefore should be, the natural and inexorable state of humankind.
- (4) The political goal of neoliberals is not to destroy the state, but to take control of it, and to redefine its structure and function, in order to create and maintain the market-friendly culture.
- (5) There is no contradiction between public/politics/citizen and private/market/entrepreneur-consumer -- because the latter does and should eclipse the former.
- (6) The most important virtue -- more important than justice, or anything else -- is freedom, defined "negatively" as "freedom to choose," and most importantly, defined as the freedom to acquiesce to the imperatives of the market.
- (7) Capital has a natural right to flow freely across national boundaries.
- (8) Inequality -- of resources, income, wealth, and even political rights -- is a good thing ; it prompts productivity, because people envy the rich and emulate them; people who complain about inequality are either sore losers or old fogies, who need to get hip to the way things work nowadays.
- (9) Corporations can do no wrong -- by definition. Competition will take care of all problems, including any tendency to monopoly.
- (10) The market, engineered and promoted by neoliberal experts, can always provide solutions to problems seemingly caused by the market in the first place: there's always "an app for that."
- (11) There is no difference between is and should be : "free" markets both should be (normatively) and are (positively) the most efficient economic system, and the most just way of doing politics, and the most empirically true description of human behavior, and the most ethical and moral way to live -- which in turn explains, and justifies, why their versions of "free" markets should be and, as neoliberals build more and more power, increasingly are universal. 12
No wonder outsiders are dazed and confused. The neoliberal revolutionaries, contemptuous of tradition, conjured a fake tradition to mask their true intentions. They did this while explicitly abjuring the label of "conservative." But there is one more reason that outsiders tend to think it a mistake to posit an effective intellectual formation called "neoliberalism." Nowadays we doubt that ideas, and particularly political ideas, are the product of the concerted efforts of some thought collective stretching over generations, engaging in critique and reconstruction, fine-tuning and elaborating doctrine, while keeping focused upon problems of implementation and feasibility. Indeed, that doubt is evidence of neoliberal preconceptions having seeped into all of our thought processes. Yet that is an exact description of how neoliberalism developed, in the manner (as I insist on calling it) of a thought collective: sanctioned members are encouraged to innovate and embellish in small ways, but an excess of doctrinal heresy gets one expelled from participation. Central dogmas are not codified or dictated by any single prophet; no one delivers the Tablets down from the "Mont"; and you cannot adequately understand neoliberalism solely by reading Hayek or Milton Friedman, for that matter. While we can locate its origins in 1947, it has undergone much revision since then, and is still a hydra-headed Gorgon to this very day.
Apr 22, 2018 | www.unz.com
Steve Gittelson , April 19, 2018 at 2:43 am GMTPCR's latest is really good. I love it when he gets to ripping, and doesn't stop for 2000+ words or so. It reads a lot better than Toynbee, fersher.
The working class, designated by Hillary Clinton as "the Trump deplorables," is now the victimizer, not the victim. Marxism has been stood on its head.
The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers.
The ruling elite favors a "conversation on race," because the ruling elite know it can only result in accusations that will further divide society. Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues," in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history with fake history.
Steve Gittelson , April 19, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMTJust a bit more real truth from PCR. Carry on
All of America, indeed of the entire West, lives in The Matrix, a concocted [and false] reality. Western peoples are so propagandized, so brainwashed, that they have no understanding that their disunity was created in order to make them impotent in the face of a rapacious ruling class, a class whose arrogance and hubris has the world on the brink of nuclear Armageddon.
History as it actually happened is disappearing as those who tell the truth are dismissed as misogynists, racists, homophobes, Putin agents, terrorist sympathizers, anti-Semites, and conspiracy theorists. Liberals who complained mightily of McCarthyism now practice it ten-fold.
The United States with its brainwashed and incompetent population -- indeed, the entirety of the Western populations are incompetent -- and with its absence of intelligent leadership has no chance against Russia and China, two massive countries arising from their overthrow of police states as the West descends into a gestapo state. The West is over and done with. Nothing remains of the West but the lies used to control the people. All hope is elsewhere.
Apr 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
After waiting eight months for the DOJ to turn over the "electronic communication" (EC) - the document which the FBI used to launch the original counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) told Fox News that upon review - the EC reveals that no intelligence was used to launch the probe .
Nunes also touched on the fact that Hillary Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal pushed anti-Trump memos to the Obama State Department , written by Clinton "hatchet man" Cody Shearer and passed to Jonathan Winer, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.Nunes noted that no intelligence was shared with the U.S. from any of the members of the "Five Eyes" agreement - that being Canada, the UK, Australia , New Zealand and the USA.
" We now know that there was no official intelligence that was used to start this investigation. We know that Sidney Blumenthal and others were pushing information into the State Department . So we're trying to piece all that together and that's why we continue to look at the State Department ," Nunes told Maria Bartiromo on "Sunday Morning Futures."
" We are not supposed to spy on each other's citizens, and it's worked well ," he said. "And it continues to work well. And we know it's working well because there was no intelligence that passed through the Five Eyes channels to our government . And that's why we had to see that original communication ."
This is relevant because the FBI says that the Trump investigation was kicked off after Australian diplomat Alexander Downer told the FBI that Trump campaign associate George Papadopoulos drunkenly admitted in a London pub that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. The New York Times reported last December that " Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts , according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians' role."
This was clearly not true according to the EC, which states that no intelligence passed through Five Eyes official channels.
Many have also raised questions over the fact that Alexander Downer, the source of the intelligence which launched the Trump investigation (and not through official channels) is absolutely a friend of the Clintons .
According to information provided by Australian policeman-turned investigative journalist, Michael Smith - the Clinton Foundation received some $88 million from Australian taxpayers between 2006 and 2014, reaching its peak in 2012-2013 - which was coincidentally (we're sure) Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard's last year in office. Smith names several key figures in his complaints of malfeasance, including Bill and Hillary Clinton and Alexander Downer .
The materials Smith gave to the FBI concern the MOU between the Clinton Foundation's HIV/AIDs Initiative (CHAI) and the Australian government.
Smith claims the foundation received a " $25M financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception " as a result of actions by Bill Clinton and Downer, who was then Australia's minister of foreign affairs.
Also included in the Smith materials are evidence he believes shows " corrupt October 2006 backdating of false tender advertisements purporting to advertise the availability of a $15 million contract to provide HIV/AIDS services in Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Australian government after an agreement was already in place to pay the Clinton Foundation and/or associates."- Lifezette
And during the various Russia probes, Congressional investigators weren't told about Downer's connection to the Clinton Foundation .State Department in the Crosshairs
"Republicans say they are concerned the new information means nearly all of the early evidence the FBI used to justify its election-year probe of Trump came from sources supportive of the Clintons, including the controversial Steele dossier," reports The Hill .
"The Clintons' tentacles go everywhere. So, that's why it's important," said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) chairman of a House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee. " We continue to get new information every week it seems that sort of underscores the fact that the FBI hasn't been square with us. "
Nunes then told Fox' s Maria Bartiromo that the House Intel Committee is now honing in on the State Department due to signs of "major irregularities " in how the alleged Papadopoulos comments reached U.S. intelligence agencies.
"We know a little bit about that because of what some of the State Department officials themselves have said about that," Nunes said, adding that "We have to make sure that our agencies talk and they work out problems. We have to make sure that they don't spy on either Americans citizens or that we're not spying on British citizens."
Still, Nunes doesn't know whether former secretary of state, and then-Democratic challenger to Trump in the election, was pulling the strings of the investigation launched against her political opponent. However, he said it is known that two long-time Clinton associates – including Sidney Blumenthal – were "actively" giving information to the State Department, which "was somehow making its way to the FBI." - Fox Business
Meanwhile, as we reported in February , a former official in President Obama's State Department has confirmed a claim by the Senate Judiciary Committee, that former British spy Christopher Steele and Hillary Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal gave him intelligence reports claiming that President Trump had been compromised by the Russians.
Jonathan Winer, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, confirmed the Judiciary Committee's claims in an op-ed for the Washington Post titled "Devin Nunes is investigating me: Here's the Truth."
"While talking about that hacking, Blumenthal and I discussed Steele's reports. He showed me notes gathered by a journalist I did not know, Cody Shearer, that alleged the Russians had compromising information on Trump of a sexual and financial nature," writes Winer.
In September 2016, Steele and I met in Washington and discussed the information now known as the "dossier." Steele's sources suggested that the Kremlin not only had been behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign but also had compromised Trump and developed ties with his associates and campaign.
Winer's op-ed corroborates the series of events outlined in a criminal referral for Steele issued by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), which asks the DOJ to investigate Steele for allegedly lying to the FBI about his contacts with the media.
Winer then gave Steele various anti-Trump memos from Clinton operative Sidney Blumenthal, which originated with Clinton "hatchet man" Cody Shearer . Winer claims he didn't think Steele would share the Clinton-sourced information with anyone else in the government.Comey Memos
" But I learned later that Steele did share them -- with the FBI, after the FBI asked him to provide everything he had on allegations relating to Trump, his campaign and Russian interference in U.S. elections ," Winer writes.
Nunes then said that the release of the Comey memos was significant in that they would seem to exonerate President Trump of collusion.
The mainstream media and the dems have been running around talking about collusion, collusion, collusion. when they realized there was no collusion, they moved on to obstruction of justice, obstruction of justice, obstruction of justice.
" Once you read all of the Comey memos, it becomes Exhibit A in the defense that there was no obstruction of justice ."
The Chairman also noted that the Comey memos reveal Trump actually wanted his campaign investigated, telling Bartiromo " when you have the President of the US saying "Look, investigate all of my people. If anyone in my campaign was colluding with the Russians, I wanna know and they need to be brought to justice, " Adding "Something of that nature is in the Comey memos."
Nunes also pointed out that Comey and Andrew McCabe are probably both in quite a bit of trouble:
Nunes: When you match up Mr. Comey's memos with what's in his book, with the interviews that he's giving I think he's got a lot of problems coming in the future as it relates to what the IG is looking at into his behavior during the Clinton email investigation.
Bartiromo: What kind of problems? We know that the IG has recommended criminal charges against his former deputy Andrew McCabe.
Nunes: " His lawyer has said no, Mr. Comey is lying - is essentially what Mr. McCabe is saying , that Comey did give him the right to go to the press... Clearly the IG believed Mr. Comey that he did not give Mr. McCabe the ability to go to the press .
Nunes then went into Comey's conduct - positing that the former FBI Director "laundered" classified memos to a friend, who leaked them to the New York Times - and that others may have received them as well .
The memos that he wrote - the seven memos that he wrote on President Trump, noting that Comey hadn't written memos on anyone else - four of them were classified. He decided to then launder them to a friend, who leaked them to the New York Times . If those memos contained classified information, he purposely did that, he purposely leaked them to get a Special Counsel started after he was fired. He leaked pieces of these, so we need to figure out exactly what is it he leaked. Who did he give these memos to? Was it just the friend that leaked them to the New York Times, or were there others? I believe there were others , I believe these Comey memos were actually given to several people - that contained classified information. The irony is - the very thing that Mr. Comey cleared Mrs. Clinton of .
All of that said - whether or not the noose is actually tightening around anyone's neck is up to the DOJ, as they can simply ignore the various criminal referrals made against McCabe and others. What can't be denied, at this point, is that both the Mueller investigation and the original counterintelligence investigation launched against Donald Trump and his campaign - and the complicit narrative-shaping performed by the MSM - appear to have been a highly coordinated effort to prevent Hillary Clinton from losing the White House.
Trump advisors Joe diGenova and Alan Dershowitz discussed just Hannity Saturday - with Dershowitz somehow coming to the conclusion that the entirety of the ongoing against Trump are nothing more than coincidence.
Cognitive Dissonance Sun, 04/22/2018 - 16:31 Permalink
A wonderful example of how strong the programming is within us is the fact we must constantly tell ourselves the matrix is an illusion.
The primary purpose of 'official' propaganda is to compel those who oppose it to constantly assert that the propaganda is false.
The secondary purpose is to let everyone know if you want employment within the matrix you're going to need to sing the same tune, regardless how ridiculous it might be.
This is the official tune. Now sing you motherfuckers....sing for your supper.
Apr 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Ann Wright via ConsortiumNews.com,
The celebrated White Helmets of Oscar fame appeared to have made their own feature film in Duma on the night of the alleged chemical attack...
At the center of the controversy over an alleged chemical attack in the Damascus suburb of Duma on April 7 are the White Helmets, a self-described rescue operation about whom an Oscar-winning documentary was made.
Reporter and author Max Blumenthal has tracked the role of the White Helmets in the Syrian conflict. He reported that the White Helmets were created in Turkey by James Le Mesurier, a former British MI5 agent. The group has received at least $55 million from the British Foreign Office and $23 million from the U.S. Agency for International Development as well as millions from the Kingdom of Qatar, which has backed a variety of extremist groups in Syria including Al Qaeda.
Blumenthal writes, "When Defense Secretary James Mattis cited 'social media' in place of scientific evidence of a chemical attack in Duma, he was referring to video shot by members of the White Helmets. Similarly, when State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert sought to explain why the US bombed Syria before inspectors from the OPCW could produce a report from the ground, she claimed , 'We have our own intelligence.' With little else to offer, she was likely referring to social media material published by members of the White Helmets. "
The reference to social media as evidence in the most serious decision a leader can make -- to engage in an act of war -- is part of a disturbing trend. Then Secretary of State John Kerry pointed to "social media" as evidence of the Syrian government's guilt in a 2013 chemical attack in the same Damascus suburb. But as Robert Parry, the late founder and editor of this site, pointed out in numerous reports, Syrian government guilt was far from a sure thing.
Rather than wait for the arrival of a team of experts from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to assess whether chemicals had even used in this latest incident, Trump gave the order to bomb.Gas!
The possible role of the White Helmets in the latest alleged chemical attack was first revealed by veteran Middle East reporter Robert Fisk, writing for The Independent . In "The Search for Truth in the Rubble of Douma-And One Doctor's Doubts Over the Chemical Attacks," Fisk reported that he tracked down 58-year-old Syrian doctor Assim Rahaibani.
A White Helmet (Photo: whitehelmets.org)l
The doctor told Fisk that he learned from fellow physicians who were on duty at the clinic the night of the attack. Rahaibani said patients were brought in by "jihadi gunmen of Jaish el-Islam [the Army of Islam]" in Duma and that the patients appeared to be "overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm."
Rahaibani told Fisk, "I was with my family in the basement of my home three hundred metres from here on the night but all the doctors know what happened. There was a lot of shelling [by government forces] and aircraft were always over Duma at night – but on this night, there was wind and huge dust clouds began to come into the basements and cellars where people lived. People began to arrive here suffering from hypoxia, oxygen loss."
"Then someone at the door, a 'White Helmet,' shouted 'Gas!', and a panic began. People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia – not gas poisoning."
Fisk writes that, " There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had 'never believed in' gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups. These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other's people's homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town. I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian – yes, Russian – rockets and burned-out cars."
Significantly, Fisk reported that locals told him that White Helmets left with jihadists bused out of Duma in a deal made with the Syrian government and Russia, which provided security for the transfer.Other Reports
Other reporters have corroborated what Fisk found. Reporter Pearson Sharp of One America News, a conservative Christian TV network and supporter of President Trump, interviewed doctors and witnesses at the clinic. They also said there was no chemical attack and that strangers came into the clinic and shouted "Gas!" and filmed the reaction.
RT's Arabic service also tracked down an 11-year old boy filmed in the "attack," and found him in completely good health and able to answer questions of the RT reporter. He told her he was with his mother when they were urged to enter the clinic. "We were outside," the boy said, and they told all of us to go into the hospital. I was immediately taken upstairs, and they started pouring water on me."
* * *
Ann Wright served 29 years in the US Army/Army Reserves and retired as a Colonel. She was also a US diplomat and was in US Embassies in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia. She resigned from the US government in March 2003 in opposition to the lies the Bush administration was stating as the rationale for the invasion, occupation and destruction of Iraq. She is the co-author of "Dissent: Voices of Conscience." Tags Politics
Slippery Slope -> BaBaBouy Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:51 Permalinkhouse biscuit -> Slippery Slope Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:53 Permalink
Terrorists with White Helmets.Government nee -> house biscuit Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:59 Permalink
It just goes to show how little They respect your intelligence "I got it, I got it: we'll use white hats.....the dumb fucks will never know..."JohninMK -> Government nee Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:05 Permalink
White helmet = CIA freelancer. Shoot to kill (tyranny).BorraChoom -> JohninMK Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:48 Permalink
OPCW have completed their first sampling. Now we wait.blindfaith -> shovelhead Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:24 Permalink
The director of the OPCW, Ahmet Uzumcu, a former career diplomat with the Turk foreign ministry – a former Turk ambassador to the Zionist Apartheid State (7-28-1999 to 6-30-2002). He was also, amazingly, Turkey's former representative to NATO. Being a Turk with qualifications like this would make anyone suspect that his credibility was fragile to nil.BorraChoom -> blindfaith Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:41 Permalink
Money wise you are correct. Almost 100 million dollars....what the hell are they eating filet, Russian Caviar, and drinking Cyrstal Champagne?Butifldrm -> BaBaBouy Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:14 Permalink
US still paying White Helmets despite $200mn-aid freeze for Syria recovery, State Dept. confirms | 20 April 2018blindfaith -> Butifldrm Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:21 Permalink
This shit just keeps getting deeper, and so many questions to ask, but the main question is why would Trump ever believe any intelligence agency was telling him the truth? The last time I looked, it was the intelligence agencies that lied, leaked, and this time set Trump up.Quantify -> Butifldrm Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:55 Permalink
Since his son in law enjoys parties out on the Hampton with George Soros, perhaps ol' George can fill him in and carry the "facts" back to Trump....first hand. CNN waits.johnnycanuck -> Butifldrm Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:59 Permalink
Trump is doing what he can. They are just kicking the nests to keep the bees and hornets stinging each other.trgfunds -> BaBaBouy Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:29 Permalink
Trump is a huckster, and is all in for anything related to scamming Americans and anyone else who would believe what he says or does. It has nothing to do with 'Intelligence'.Vilfredo Pareto -> trgfunds Sun, 04/22/2018 - 20:39 Permalink
LOL apparently the only "victims" are small children who are perfectly dressed! "CALL MACY'S WE NEED MORE KID MODELS ASAP"toady Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:47 Permalink
I noticed on the previous alleged gas attack the oppo seemed to look for the whitest kids possible. I guess they couldn't find enough this time, but dress them up nice for the cameras lol.johnnycanuck -> toady Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:48 Permalink
Ha! That's what I was saying before the tomahawk strike... is there a way to target the white helmets first? Save us from their lies in the future.... I guess we'll be forced to leave that heavy lifting to Assad and Putin.chunga Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:49 Permalink
"jihadi gunmen of Jaish el-Islam [the Army of Islam]" Galloway posed a question to the British Government and people that deserves an answer from the likes of their PM. 'Why are we supporting a group that calls itself the Army of Islam?'VWAndy -> chunga Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:20 Permalink
This and the Skripal poison story have been met by a great deal of skepticism.chunga -> VWAndy Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:30 Permalink
Well maybe because they stink on ice and everyone thats pulled their head out of their ass noticed. Even taken at face values both of these stories and many others defy basic logic.VWAndy -> chunga Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:35 Permalink
The lack of any reasonable motives followed by fake supporting evidence is about as basic as it gets.VWAndy Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:52 Permalink
Demonstrably false by their own statements no less.I am Groot Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:53 Permalink
Team fiat is very well funded.Government nee -> I am Groot Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:01 Permalink
White helmets = Stormtroopers = Disney = Crisis actors. Nuff said. Expect David Hogg to be protesting guns in Syria any day now.hongdo Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:55 Permalink
Hogg stays in the rear, waiting for someone packing' the gear.chunga -> hongdo Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:10 Permalink
18 intelligence agencies counting social media. Used to be called open source. It's free and seems to have more influence than the other expensive 17.
It must of been bitter for a combat "Mad Dog" to have to rely on social media pansies instead of his tough guy intel crew.shovelhead -> hongdo Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:19 Permalink
That's especially embarrassing since, if this was a staged fake event, the official experts fell for it or more likely pretending they fell for it. I'm not sure but MSM might still be pretending to fall for it*.
A good journalist would be there finding out about the "White Helmets" for example, who is in charge and by what authority they have being there.
* long list of pretenders includes congress and the dotard.spoonful Sun, 04/22/2018 - 18:56 Permalink
Lol. tough guy intel crew. Ok, we saw it on you tube...Bombs away. That's a wrap.JohninMK -> spoonful Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:07 Permalink
The possible role of the White Helmets in the latest alleged chemical attack was first revealed by veteran Middle East reporter Robert Fisk, writing for The Independent . Actually, Vanessa Beely reported it almost a week before the honorable Mr. Fisk
http://tapnewswire.com/2018/04/ukc-vanessa-douma-false-flag/thisandthat -> JohninMK Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:26 Permalink
Yes but the Indy is owned by a Russian!VWAndy -> spoonful Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:13 Permalink
"They took our rags!"thisandthat -> VWAndy Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:28 Permalink
Its all good. Nice to see other people can see right thru the bs.Crash N. Burn Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:07 Permalink
"They preemptively arrived at the scene."WTFUD -> Crash N. Burn Sun, 04/22/2018 - 19:22 Permalink
Posted this in a thread yesterday:
Emails reveal White Helmets tried to lobby ex-Pink Floyd frontman Roger Waters
"Rogers did not respond to either email, according to journalist Max Blumenthal, who obtained the messages. Instead of giving the stage to the White Helmets during his Barcelona concert, Waters denounced the organization.
"The White Helmets is a fake organization that exists only to create propaganda for jihadists and terrorists.""
RW, despite his Jewish Heritage, has loooooong been outspoken against Israeli fuckery in Syria, Palestine, Lebanon etc etc
Not to the same scale/degree as Norm Finkelstein, but he's an intellectual and does it for a living; not that RW's isn't real smart.
Fact is, due to his music he can reach so many more ordinary people. Shows you how fucking dumb Clooney & his White Helmets are approaching Waters, oblivious to the fact he's been calling out Zionists/Others for decades.
We need more great people like him in the struggle.
Apr 20, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org
An unusual triple alliance is emerging from the Syrian war, one that could alter the balance of power in the Middle East, unhinge the NATO alliance, and complicate the Trump administration's designs on Iran. It might also lead to yet another double cross of one of the region's largest ethnic groups, the Kurds.
However, the "troika alliance" -- Turkey, Russia and Iran -- consists of three countries that don't much like one another, have different goals, and whose policies are driven by a combination of geo-global goals and internal politics. In short, "fragile and complicated" doesn't even begin to describe it.
How the triad might be affected by the joint U.S., French and British attack on Syria is unclear, but in the long run the alliance will likely survive the uptick of hostilities.
But common ground was what came out of the April 4 meeting between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Meeting in Ankara, the parties pledged to support the "territorial integrity" of Syria, find a diplomatic end to the war, and to begin a reconstruction of a Syria devastated by seven years of war. While Russia and Turkey explicitly backed the UN-sponsored talks in Geneva, Iran was quiet on that issue, preferring a regional solution without "foreign plans."
"Common ground," however, doesn't mean the members of the "troika" are on the same page.
Turkey's interests are both internal and external. The Turkish Army is currently conducting two military operations in northern Syria, Olive Branch and Euphrates Shield, aimed at driving the mainly Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) out of land that borders Turkey. But those operations are also deeply entwined with Turkish politics.
Erdogan's internal support has been eroded by a number of factors: exhaustion with the ongoing state of emergency imposed following the 2016 attempted coup, a shaky economy , and a precipitous fall in the value of the Turkish pound. Rather than waiting for 2019, Erdogan called for snap elections this past week and beating up on the Kurds is always popular with right-wing Turkish nationalists. Erdogan needs all the votes he can get to imlement his newly minted executive presidency that will give him virtually one-man rule.
To be part of the alliance, however, Erdogan has had to modify his goal of getting rid of Syrian President Bashar Assad and to agree -- at this point, anyhow -- to eventually withdraw from areas in northern Syria seized by the Turkish Army. Russia and Iran have called for turning over the regions conquered by the Turks to the Syrian Army.
Moscow's goals are to keep a foothold in the Middle East with its only base, Tartus, and to aid its long-time ally, Syria. The Russians are not deeply committed to Assad personally, but they want a friendly government in Damascus. They also want to destroy al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, which have caused Moscow considerable trouble in the Caucasus.
Russia also wouldn't mind driving a wedge between Ankara and NATO. After the U.S., Turkey has NATO's second largest army. NATO broke a 1989 agreement not to recruit former members of the Russian-dominated Warsaw Pact into NATO as a quid pro quo for the Soviets withdrawing from Eastern Europe. But since the Yugoslav War in 1999 the alliance has marched right up to the borders of Russia. The 2008 war with Georgia and 2014 seizure of the Crimea were largely a reaction to what Moscow sees as an encirclement strategy by its adversaries.
Turkey has been at odds with its NATO allies around a dispute between Greece and Cyprus over sea-based oil and gas resources , and it recently charged two Greek soldiers who violated the Turkish border with espionage. Erdogan is also angry that European Union countries refuse to extradite Turkish soldiers and civilians who he claims helped engineer the 2016 coup against him. While most NATO countries condemned Moscow for the recent attack on two Russians in Britain, the Turks pointedly did not .
Turkish relations with Russia have an economic side as well. Ankara want a natural gas pipeline from Russia, has broken ground on a $20 billion Russian nuclear reactor, and just shelled out $2.5 billion for Russia's S-400 anti-aircraft system.
The Russians do not support Erdogan's war on the Kurds and have lobbied for the inclusion of Kurdish delegations in negotiations over the future of Syria. But Moscow clearly gave the Turks a green light to attack the Kurdish city of Afrin last month, driving out the YPG that had liberated it from the Islamic State and Turkish-backed al-Qaeda groups. A number of Kurds charge that Moscow has betrayed them .
The question now is, will the Russians stand aside if the Turkish forces move further into Syria and attack the city of Manbij, where the Kurds are allied with U.S. and French forces? And will Erdogan's hostility to the Kurds lead to an armed clash among three NATO members?
Such a clash seems unlikely, although the Turks have been giving flamethrower speeches over the past several weeks. "Those who cooperate with terrorists organizations [the YPG] will be targeted by Turkey," says Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag said in a pointed reference to France's support for the Kurds. Threatening the French is one thing, picking a fight with the U.S. military quite another.
Of course, if President Trump pulls U.S. forces out of Syria, it will be tempting for Turkey to move in. While the "troika alliance" has agreed to Syrian "sovereignty," that won't stop Ankara from meddling in Kurdish affairs. The Turks are already appointing governors and mayors for the areas in Syria they have occupied.
Iran's major concern in Syria is maintaining a buffer between itself and a very aggressive alliance of the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia, which seems to be in the preliminary stages of planning a war against the second-largest country in the Middle East.
Iran is not at all the threat it has been pumped up to be. Its military is miniscule and talk of a so-called "Shiite crescent" -- Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon -- is pretty much a western invention (although the term was dreamed up by the King of Jordan).
Tehran has been weakened by crippling sanctions and faces the possibility that Washington will withdraw from the nuclear accord and re-impose yet more sanctions. The appointment of National Security Advisor John Bolton, who openly calls for regime change in Iran, has to have sent a chill down the spines of the Iranians. What Tehran needs most of all is allies who will shield it from the enmity of the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia. In this regard, Turkey and Russia could be helpful.
Iran has modified its original goals in Syria of a Shiite-dominated regime by agreeing to a "non-sectarian character" for a post-war Syria. Erdogan has also given up on his desire for a Sunni-dominated government in Damascus.
War with Iran would be catastrophic, an unwinnable conflict that could destabilize the Middle East even more than it is now. It would, however, drive up the price of oil, currently running at around $66 a barrel. Saudi Arabia needs to sell its oil for at least $100 a barrel, or it will very quickly run of money. The on-going quagmire of the Yemen war, the need to diversify the economy, and the growing clamor by young Saudis -- 70 percent of the population -- for jobs requires lots of money, and the current trends in oil pricing are not going to cover the bills.
War and oil make for odd bedfellows . While the Saudis are doing their best to overthrow the Assad regime and fuel the extremists fighting the Russians, Riyadh is wooing Moscow to sign onto to a long-term OPEC agreement to control oil supplies. That probably won't happen -- the Russians are fine with oil at $50 to $60 a barrel -- and are wary of agreements that would restrict their right to develop new oil and gas resources. The Saudi's jihad on the Iranians has a desperate edge to it, as well it might. The greatest threat to the Kingdom has always come from within.
The rocks and shoals that can wreck alliances in the Middle East are too numerous to count, and the "troika" is riven with contradictions and conflicting interests. But the war in Syria looks as if it is coming to some kind of resolution, and at this point Iran, Russia and Turkey seem to be the only actors who have a script that goes beyond lobbing cruise missiles at people.
Apr 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
The father of Imran Awan - a longtime IT aide from Pakistan who made "unauthorized access" to the House computer network - reportedly transferred a USB drive to the former head of a Pakistani intelligence agency , alleges the father's ex-business partner, Rashid Minhas.
Minhas told the Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF) - which traveled to Pakistan to interview those involved - that Haji Ashraf Awan, Imran Awan's father, had been giving information to Rehman Malik - former head of Pakistan's Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and current senator. Malik was appointed to Interior Minister in early 2008, only to step down in 2013 after he lost a Supreme Court hearing over holding dual UK citizenship.
Minhas told The Daily Caller News Foundation that Imran Awan's father, Haji Ashraf Awan, was giving data to Pakistani official Rehman Malik, and that Imran bragged he had the power to " change the U.S. president. "
Asked for how he knew this, he said that on one occasion in 2008 when a "USB [was] given to Rehman Malik by Imran's father, my brother Abdul Razzaq was with his father ." - DCNF
"After Imran's father deliver (sic) USB to Rehman Malik, four Pakistani [government intelligence] agents were with his father 24-hour on duty to protect him," he said - however Minhas did not say what was on the USB.
[insert: Foreign_Secretary_in_Pakistan_(4727720266).jpg ]
The House watchdog, Inspector General Michael Ptasienski, charged in September 30, 2016 that data was being siphoned off of the House Network by the Awans as recently as two months before the US presidential election.
The Awan family had virtually unlimited access to Democratic House members' computers, including classified information.
Nearly Imran's entire immediate family was on the House payroll working as IT aides to one-fifth of House Democrats , and he began working for the House in 2004. The inspector general, Michael Ptasienski, testified this month that " system administrators hold the 'keys to the kingdom' meaning they can create accounts, grant access, view, download, update, or delete almost any electronic information within an office. Because of this high-level access, a rogue system administrator could inflict considerable damage ." - DCNF
According to Minhas - "Imran Awan said to me directly these words: ' See how I control White House on my fingertip ' He say he can fire the prime minister or change the U.S. president," Minhas said. " Why the claiming big stuff, I [didn't] understand 'till now ."
" I was Imran father's partner in Pakistan, " Minhas said, in two land deals in Pakistan so big that they are often referred to as "towns." In 2009, both men were accused of fraud , and Haji was arrested but then released after Imran flew to Pakistan , "allegedly exerting pressure on the local police through the ministry as well as the department concerned," according to local news. Minhas and multiple alleged victims in Pakistan also told TheDCNF Imran exerted political influence in Pakistan to extricate his father from the case . - DCNF
Minhas is currently sitting in US federal prison for fraud, and the Daily Caller says they can not confirm whether Minhas' claims about the USB is true. That said, Minhas says that neither the DOJ nor the FBI ever interviewed him about the Awans , which is odd considering that he's available and connected to Imran Awan.
He is also one of many people with past relationships with the Awans who have said they believe they are aggressive opportunists who will do anything for money . And parts of Minhas's story correlate with observations elsewhere. Haji's wife, Samina Gilani -- Imran's stepmother -- said in court documents that Imran used his IT skills to wiretap her as a means of exerting pressure on her.
Haji would frequently boast that Imran's position gave him political leverage, numerous Pakistani residents told TheDCNF. " My son own White House in D.C. ," he would say, according to Minhas. " I am kingmaker ."
Senator Malik has denied any relationship with the parties reportedly involved, saying "I am hearing their names for the first time. I am in public and people always do name-dropping."
Imran Awan's attorney Chris Gowen says Minhas's claims are "completely and totally false."
The Awans were banned from the congressional network on Feb 2, 2017 by House Seargant-At-Arms, Paul Irving - after the IG report concluded that the Awans had been making "unauthorized access" to House servers. The Awans were logging in using Congressional members' personal usernames , as well as breaching servers for members they did not work for. After several members fired them, the Awans continued to access their data , says the IG.
The behavior mirrored a "classic method for insiders to exfiltrate data from an organization," and "steps are being taken [by the Awans] to conceal their activity," reads the report.
Shortly before the 2016 election, the House Democratic Caucus server was breached by Awan - who authorities believe secretly moved all the data of over 12 House members' offices onto the caucus server.
The server may have been " used for nefarious purposes and elevated the risk that individuals could be reading and/or removing information, " an IG presentation said. The Awans logged into it 27 times a day, far more than any other computer they administered .
Imran's most forceful advocate and longtime employer is Florida Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who led the DNC until she resigned following a hack that exposed committee emails. Wikileaks published those emails, and they show that DNC staff summoned Imran when they needed her password . - DCNF
Shortly after the IG report came out, the House Democratic Caucus server - which the Awans were funneling data onto, was physically stolen according to three government officials. During the same period of time, the Awans were shedding assets at a rapid pace.
In January 2017 they took out a loan intended for home improvement, falsely claimed a medical emergency in order to cash out their House retirement account, and wired $300,000 overseas , according to an FBI affidavit. - DCNF
The FBI arrested Imran Awan at Dulles Airport in July 2017 while trying to flee to Pakistan with a wiped cell phone and a resume that listed a Queens, NY address. Imran and his wife, Hina Alvi, were indicted last August on charges of bank fraud - which prosecutors contend was hastened after the Awans had likely learned that authorities were closing in on them for various other activities .
That said, neither Imran nor Hina have been charged over the unauthorized access concluded by the House's own Inspector General, after reviewing server logs. Three other suspects, Jamal and Abid Awan, and Rao Abbas, have faced no charges whatsoever.
Apr 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Eleven GOP members of Congress led by Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) have written a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Attorney John Huber, and FBI Director Christopher Wray - asking them to investigate former FBI Director James Comey, Hillary Clinton and others - including FBI lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page , for a laundry list of potential crimes surrounding the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Recall that Sessions paired special prosecutor John Huber with DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz - falling short of a second Special Counsel, but empowering Horowitz to fully investigate allegations of FBI FISA abuse with subpoena power and other methods he was formerly unable to utilize.
The GOP letter's primary focus appears to be James Comey, while the charges for all include obstruction, perjury, corruption, unauthorized removal of classified documents, contributions and donations by foreign nationals and other allegations.
The letter also demands that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein "be recused from any examination of FISA abuse ," and recommends that " neither U.S. Attorney John Huber nor a special counsel (if appointed) should report to Rosenstein. "
The letter refers the following individuals for the following conduct:
James Comey - obstruction , perjury , corruption , stealing public property or records , gathering transmitting or losing defense information , unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents, false statements .
- "Comey's decision not to seek charges against Clinton's misconduct s uggests improper investigative conduct , potentially motivated by a political agenda."
- The letter calls Comey out for leaking his confidential memos to the press. " In light of the fact that four of the seven memos were classified, it would appear that former Director Comey leaked classified information when sharing these memos... "
- Comey "circulated a draft statement" of the FBI's decision to exonerate Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information - a conclusion reached before the agency had interviewed key witnesses. "At that point, 17 interviews with potential witnesses had not taken place, including with Clinton and her chief of staff..."
- The letter also seeks clarification on "material inconsistencies between the description of the FBI's relationship with Mr. Steele that you [then FBI Director Comey] did provide in your briefing and information contained in Justice Department documents made available to the Committee only after the briefing."
Hillary Clinton - contributions and donations by foreign nationals
- "A lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid Washington firm Fusion GPS to conduct research that led to the Steele dossier..."
- "Accordingly, for disguising payments to Fusion GPS on mandatory disclosures to the Federal Election Commission, we refer Hillary Clinton to DOJ for potential violation(s) of 52 USC 30121 and 52 USC 30101"
Loretta Lynch - obstruction, corruption
- "We raise concerns regarding her decision to threaten with reprisal the former FBI informant who tried to come forward in 2016 with insight into the Uranium One deal ."
- Of note, this refers to longtime CIA and FBI undercover informant William D. Campbell , who came forward with evidence of bribery schemes involving Russian nuclear officials, an American trucking company, and efforts to route money to the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).
Andrew McCabe - false statements, perjury, obstruction
- "During the internal Hillary Clinton investigation, Mr. McCabe "lacked candor -- including under oath -- on multiple occasions," the letter reads. "That is a fireable offense, and Mr. Sessions said that career, apolotical employees at the F.B.I. and Justice Department agreed that Mr. McCabe should be fired."
- "The DOJ Office of the Inspector General recently released a February 2018 misconduct report... confirming four instances of McCabe's lack of candor, including three instances under oath, as well as the conclusion that McCabe's decision to confirm the existence of the Clinton Foundation Investigation through an anonymously sourced quite violated the FBI's and DOJ's media policy and constituted misconduct."
Peter Strzok and Lisa Page - obstruction, corruption,
- "We raise concerns regarding their interference in the Hillary Clinton investigation regarding her use of a personal email server."
- Referring to a Wall Street Journal article from January 22, 2018 - "The report provides the following alarming specifics, among others: " Mr. Strzok texts Ms. Page to tell her that, in fact, senior officials had decided to water down the reference to President Obama to 'another senior government official ." By the time Mr. Comey gave his public statement on July 5, both references - to Mr. Obama and to "another senior government official" had disappeared."
"Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI personnel connected to the compilation of documents on alleged links between Russia and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump known as the "Steele dossier."
- This section of the letter calls out Comey, McCabe, former acting AG Sally Yates, and former acting Deputy AG Dana Boente regarding the Steele dossier.
- " we raise concerns regarding the presentation of false and/or unverified information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in connection with the former Trump aide Carter Page"
- "Former and current DOJ and FBI leadership have confirmed to the Committee that unverified information from the Steele dossier comprised an essential part of the FISA applications related to Carter Page"
- "Accordingly we refer to DOJ all DOJ and FBI personnel responsible for signing the Carter Page warrant application that contained unverified and/or false information"
The criminal referrals for the group allegedly responsible for FISA abuse include: obstruction, deprivation of rights under color of law, corruption.
Read the full letter below...
Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is
Rob from Canada on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:06 pm UTCCount on an inverted yield curve and Treasury Department derivative losses in the trillions on interest rate swaps sold to Wall Street banks.guest on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:52 pm UTC
Wall Street banks have been buying surplus US government debt that the world doesn't want to finance huge budget deficits over the last 10 years and the Treasury Department sold them insurance protection against capital loses on that debt.
A lot of malinvestment in fracking and share buybacks with borrowed money has overleveraged corporations. Personal debt, corporate debt and government debt compared to GDP are at 1929 levels and a lot of that debt will be uncollectible.
The USA has kicked the financial can down the road for 10 years. It created a huge asset inflation bubble with borrowed money ie all malinvestment via interest rate suppression by the Fed that will blow up when the yield curve goes inverted signifying a financial panic is underway. That is the demand for short-term money(to borrow) is greater than the supply of money to short-term borrow.(to lend)
All I have to do is look at the SPX chart of the SP500 to know the US is FUKUS. The bull market that started in 2008 has started a head&shoulders topping pattern. In 2019 I expect 52-week lows to be hit and a bear market worse the 2008 financial crisis to be underway.People keep tossing out "The US economy is tanking, it is going to implode/explode/crumble sooner or later" etc., etc. Such beliefs may be soothing to hold but they do not rest on knowledge or economic literacy. Briefly, here is why.Simon Chow on April 16, 2018 , · at 12:57 pm UTC
Economies do not tank because of massive credit. Money Supply = M1 + M2 + M3, where M3 is the outstanding credit in the economy. The US M3 is huge because the economy itself is huge. Modern economies have moved away from paper notes and in future all money supply will essentially be M2 + M3. M2 (total outstanding bank deposits) and M3 are in turn fusing into one as credit card payments replace the practice of mailing out cheques.
Nor is high foreign indebtedness in itself a sign of future imminent collapse. Yes, it is worryingly high presently, but no it is not imminent that some sort of disaster will befall the US Treasury. No one forces the rest-of-the world to buy US treasuries, bonds, and stocks. Yet governments, corporations, and individuals from all over the world line-up to buy these. Ask yourselves why. The answer is: Money and Capital flows to low risk and high return zones. This is how it always has been, and this is how it always will be. Why do Alibaba and the other Chinese majors seek listing on American stock exchanges?
Yes, there are plenty of things wrong with the USA, and yes it may end up paying a dear price for its arrogance, aggression, and cruelty all over the world (not to talk of its collapsing morality, ethics and social cohesion at home) but there is nothing the matter with its economy. Those who wait for its supposedly "Ponzi scheme" to collapse will wait to eternity, I am afraid.@guest. I think your conclusion that the US economy is not tanking is blinkered. The US economy tanked in 2008 and would had crashed into a worse depression had not the Chinese held up the US economy (the Chinese also held up Europe by holding up the German economy). Alibaba is not the biggest Chinese company to list in the US. The biggest which is twice as profitable, twice the market capitalisation of Alibaba(more than USD500 billion) and listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, is Tencent.pogohere on April 16, 2018 , · at 8:12 pm UTC
The US economy and the US dollar was viewed as safe haven becuase there was no alternative. The US dollar and the US economy became a bubble because of the global demand for the US dollar resulting from there being no alternative. Besides the use of the USD is enforced by the US military.
But, if you have been following the latest economic development, that had changed. The US economy is no longer the biggest, certainly not the strongest. The US dollar is no longer indispensable. It's value is now perched on the edge of a sharp slippery slope due to US financial mismanagement and profligacy ala the late great USSR!
Its stupendous, useless, egoistic and hubristic military spending and other factors will push the US economy down that very slippery slope to oblivion.
But China will be waiting at the bottom of that slope to cushion the fall!SIGNS THAT THE US DEBT-FUELED ECONOMY MIGHT ACTUALLY COLLAPSERob from Canada on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:17 am UTC
An Awara Accounting Study on US Economy 2018:
Signs that the US Debt-Fueled Economy Might Actually Collapse
US debt-to-GDP to reach 140% by 2024
Net increase in debt could be as enormous as $10 to 15 trillion in just five years 2019 to 2024
Federal budget interest expenditure could reach $1.5 trillion by 2028, 25% of the total
There has been no real GDP growth since at least 2007
Growth of government debt has exceeded even nominal GDP growth multiple times each year since 2007
US reporting on national debt and inflation full of tricks
War budgets ripping open huge deficits
Skyrocketing social spending leaves no room for deficit cuts
Unfunded liabilities now a reality as Social Security and Medicare funds dry up
https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/signs-that-the-us-debt-fueled-economy-might-actually-collapse/No, it's not over Saker, but compared to 2007 victory is in sight.Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:29 am UTC
First, my opinion is that the Russia/China asymmetric attack on US dollar hegemony will create a second financial crisis next year, worse than the one in 2008.
Second, in my opinion, Russia and China are winning on the most important Grand Strategic/Moral level of warfare for global public opinion. The UN votes are illustrative of that moral victory. Also, Qatar, Turkey and the Philippines switching sides are examples of moral victory.
"Facts simply don't matter. And neither does logic. All that matters are perceptions!"
That's the perfect strategy to defeat yourself.
"Those who defeat others are strong, those who defeat themselves are mighty." Lao Tzu
Napolean marched into Russia in 1812 with lot's of allies but left several months later with none.
I agree with MK Bhadrakumar assessment of the strike on Syria over your assessment. It's a moral defeat for the F#$%ing stupidest, exceptional nation on the face of the earth.
http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2018/04/15/trump-opens-a-pandoras-box-in-middle-east/<>cdvision on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:32 pm UTC
Well, I'm not sure what old Lao was smoking on that day but if we replace the word "mighty" with "exceptional" then perhaps Trump fits the bill in a modern context.
Putin the Great vs Trump the Mighty (and Exceptional) who managed to defeat himself.Rob: my view exactly.Iris on April 15, 2018 , · at 7:24 pm UTC
Russia and China have stopped buying US Treasuries, in fact are selling down for gold. The deficit if 1.3T will be more costly to fund, and the debt impossible to service. And China with the petro-yuan has tolled the death knell. Added to that is the dysfunction of the US political system. The mid-terms will be very interesting. I doubt Trump will see out 1 term, never mind 2.
And yes, the so-called US allies are fair weather friend.Dear Saker;
Rob is right: the coming economic crisis will be nothing like 2007, or like any depression that occurred over the past century for that matter. It is the first time a cycle is ending with interest rates so low, so the trick of lowering them further cannot be used this time.
Even though hyperinflation is not happening because of globalised and cheap offer (Richard Duncan), Western economies are slowly collapsing under the burden of debt (Prof Steve Keen, Prof Michael Hudson).
The global Ponzi scheme will soon end, with major geopolitical consequence. The US, being given their history, will probably go to full blown war where this can bring most economic gains. The Chinese are fully aware of that, and are preparing for it All of their plans ( the OBOR initiative, the petro-yuan) depend on a strong Russia, The Chinese will not let Russia go down, their own survival depend on Russia.
All the best.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Current and former FBI agents are furious after former Director James Comey gave his first interview since President Trump fired him last year to ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday night, reports the Daily Beast - which was privy to a play-by-play flurry of text messages and other communications detailing their reactions.
Seven current or former FBI agents and officials spoke throughout and immediately after the broadcast. There was a lot of anger, frustration, and even more emojis -- featuring the thumbs-down, frowny face, middle finger, and a whole lot of green vomit faces .
One former FBI official sent a bourbon emoji as it began; another sent the beers cheers-ing emoji. The responses became increasingly angry and despondent as the hourlong interview played out. - Daily Beast
" Hoover is spinning in his grave ," said a former FBI official. " Making money from total failure ," in reference to Comey plugging his book, A Higher Loyalty .
Jana Winter of The Beast adds that when a promo aired between segments advertising Comey's upcoming appearance with The View , the official "grew angrier." " Good lord, what a self-serving self-centered jackass ," the official said. " True to form he thinks he's the smartest guy around ."
... ... ...
Comey was fired by President Trump on May 9, 2017, after which he leaked memos he claims document conversations with Trump to the New York Times, kicking off the special counsel investigation headed by Robert Mueller - whose team started out looking at Russian influence in the 2016 election, and is now investigating the President's alleged decade-old extramarital affairs with at least two women. Truly looking out for national security there Bob...
... ... ...
Prior to becoming the DNC's most wanted, Comey and his team notoriously let Hillary Clinton off the hook for her private server and mishandling of classified information - having begun drafting Clinton's exoneration before even interviewing her, something which appears to have been "forgotten" in his book.Oldguy05 -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:54 Permalinkhxc -> Oldguy05 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 21:57 Permalink
Cumey is nothing but a small man in a big car.Fish Gone Bad -> FireBrander Mon, 04/16/2018 - 19:43 Permalink
I would rather have RP if he had the charisma/gusto and also tactical genius of DT. However, I worry that Ron, as a guy that delivered babies and educated people on nonagression, as opposed to running a something-billion dollar cutthroat RE empire, might be more at risk of A) being unable to overcome political roadblocks and destabilization, and B) something bad happening to him.NoDebt -> Bitchface-KILLAH Mon, 04/16/2018 - 18:00 Permalink
I once saw this on a T-shirt: Those who think they are the smartest person in the room, really piss off those of us who are.
Comey is a narcissistic traitor .Bitchface-KILLAH -> NoDebt Mon, 04/16/2018 - 18:03 Permalink
Comey was always the most enigmatic figure to me in this sad, troubling series of events involving the FBI.
THE GOOD NEWS: Everyone hates him now. The Rs hate him, the Ds hate him. Who's Christmas party did he get invited to last year? I'm guessing the invitations were few. His own ego has turned him into plutonium. And he deserves even worse than that.JimmyJones -> Bitchface-KILLAH Mon, 04/16/2018 - 18:55 Permalink
Every agency has a Jim Comey in it... you know the guy. Their CV just has an implied "team skills and natural ability to get a deep brown nose" at the very top of it.FireBrander -> Bitchface-KILLAH Mon, 04/16/2018 - 19:41 Permalink
He really is a traitornmewn -> NoDebt Mon, 04/16/2018 - 18:19 Permalink
Comey reminds me of all the "executives" I've known that married the owners daughter prior to getting hired.
So, to review.
Comey was the FBI Director when warrants were issued to spy on Trump and his associates. Warrants gained in part or in whole by, false evidence (the Steele dossier) presented to a FISA court judge(s), gathered by, a foreign national former spy (Steele) who was in contact with his old Kremlin pals, who (Steele) was then paid by the DNC, Fusion GPS via Perkins Coie to give Hillary Rodham Clinton (affectionately known here as The Bitch of Benghazi) some distance from the fake "evidence".
Now besides Comey knowing the source of "the dossier" one of his deputies (McCabe) was at the same time "colluding" with a couple FBI agents (Strzok & Page) in a "counter-intel operation" (on the taxpayers dime) to gather dirt on candidate Trump. McCabe's wife (we might recall) got a sizable "donation" from Terry McAuliffe (another Klinton sleezebag) for her political run in Virginia.
And we haven't even touched on Comey's theft of government documents or his turning over those documents to his friend so the friend could turn them over to the Alinsky NYT's for the purposes of...getting his mentor Grand Inquisitor Mueller a gig as "special prosecutor" (as he admitted to under oath).
He should be arrested and sent to Gitmo.???ö? -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 18:27 Permalink
The First Rule -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 18:51 Permalink
Mueller's investigation is tainted with fruit of the poisonous tree and the entirety of seized evidence will be unceremoniously thrown out by a 5-4 US Supreme Court.Ajax-1 -> The First Rule Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:32 Permalink
There is only one thing keeping Comey out of Prison: Jeff Sessions. If we someday get a real AG, who is willing to man up and appoint a second special prosecutor, Comey is finished. But for the moment, Mr. Magoo is saving his ass.Hulk -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 19:04 Permalink
Don't hold your breath. The clock on the statute of limitations is ticking away. I wish someone could provide me with an honest rational as to why Trump hasn't fired Jeff Sessions.Boxed Merlot -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:02 Permalink
He is one stupid ass. ALways stuns me to hear him speak...Dilluminati -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:03 Permalink
...Comey was the FBI Director when...
And if he wasn't aware of every fact as stated, the whole enchilada is even more bogus than you have represented.
Shut it down.
jmo.GreatUncle -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:08 Permalink
https://translate.google.com/m/translate?client=ob&hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=en&Duc888 -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:17 Permalink
But ... but .. but this is the new normal.
We all need to take a leaf out of Comeys behavior ... that's the way to play this game.
Honesty and integrity no longer needed ... time for everybody to lie to the government.NumberNone -> nmewn Mon, 04/16/2018 - 20:25 Permalink
You left out the fact that he was instrumental in the formation of the Clinton Foundation.
Problem is that a sizable portion of the US population view Comey's actions in the 'if you could go back in time and kill baby Hitler...' perspective. Yes it's illegal, yes it's unconstitutional...but was trying to save the 'World' so it's justified.
I think you framed it similar...this is the same as injecting bleach into our veins in the hope in clears up a pimple on our nose.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
The Russian envoy to the chemical weapons watchdog group, OPCW, said that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) funded by the UK and US carried out the April 7 chemical attack in the Damascus, Syria suburb of Douma.
Russia's permanent representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Alexander Shulgin, said Russia has irrefutable evidence that there was no chemical weapons incident in Douma .
"Therefore, we have not just a "high degree of confidence ," as our Western partners claim, but we have incontrovertible evidence that there was no incident on April 7 in Douma and that all this was a planned provocation by the British intelligence services, probably, with the participation of their senior allies from Washington with the aim of misleading the international community and justifying aggression against Syria," he stated. - Sputnik
Shulgin added that the US, UK and France are not interested in conducting an objective investigation of the attack site. " They put the blame on the Syrian authorities in advance, without even waiting for the OPCW mission to begin to establish the possible facts of the use of chemical weapons in Syria ," he said.
The nine-member OPCW mission people has yet to deploy to the city of Douma according to the organization's Chief, citing pending security issues.
"The Team has not yet deployed to Douma. The Syrian and the Russian officials who participated in the preparatory meetings in Damascus have informed the FFM Team that there were still pending security issues to be worked out before any deployment could take place . In the meantime the Team was offered by the Syrian authorities that they could interview 22 witnesses who could be brought to Damascus ," OPCW Director-General Ahmet Uzumcu said as quoted by the organization.
The Russian Envoy says that the controversial " White Helmets " were one of the anti-Assad "pseudo-humanitarian NGOs" which staged the event. As Disobedient Media and others have reported, the White Helmets are funded in large part by the United States.
"The Syrian Civil Defense Force (aka the White Helmets) is funded in part by United States Agency for International Development (USAID) . Included here are two links showing contracts awarded by USAID to Chemonics International Inc. (DBA Chemonics). The first award was in the sum of $111.2 million and has a Period of Performance (POP) from January 2013 to June 2017. It states that the purpose of the award will be to use the funds for managing a " quick-response mechanism supporting activities that pursue a peaceful transition to a democratic and stable Syria ." The second was in the sum of $57.4 million and has a POP from August 2015 to August 2020. This award was designated to be used in the " Syria Regional Program II " which is a part of the Support Which Implements Fast Transitions IV (SWIFT IV) program." Via Disobedient Media
Moscow says they have confirmed that " these structures [NGOs] on a fee-based basis cooperate with the governments of the United States, the UK and some other countries ."
Russian experts who conducted the verification of reports on the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian city of the Douma, found participants of video filming, presented as evidence of the supposedly occurring chemotherapy, according to the Russian Envoy to OPCW . - Sputnik
"Everything has been developing according to the script that was prepared in Washington. There is no doubt that Americans are playing the 'first violin' in all of this . The United States, the United Kingdom, France and some other countries after the "fake" addition from the White Helmets and their ilk in Douma, immediately pounced upon the Syrian authorities with accusations," Shulgin said.
Meanwhile, the U.S. has alerted the OPCW that Russia "may have tampered" with the chemical attack site in Douma ...
"It is our understanding the Russians may have visited the attack site," U.S. Ambassador Kenneth Ward said at a meeting of the OPCW in The Hague on Monday.
" It is our concern that they may have tampered with it with the intent of thwarting the efforts of the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission to conduct an effective investigation ," he said. His comments at the closed-door meeting were obtained by Reuters .
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov shot back in a BBC interview, saying " I can guarantee that Russia has not tampered with the site ."
Earlier, Britain's delegation to the OPCW accused Russia and the Syrian government of preventing the international watchdog's inspectors from reaching Douma.
The inspectors aim to collect samples, interview witnesses and document evidence to determine whether banned toxic munitions were used, although they are not permitted to assign blame for the attack. - Reuters
"Unfettered access is essential," the British delegation said in a statement. "Russia and Syria must cooperate."
Moscow says the OPCW delay is due to the Western air strikes. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the British accusation that Russia was to blame for holding up the inspections was "groundless".
"We called for an objective investigation. This was at the very beginning after this information [of the attack] appeared. Therefore allegations of this towards Russia are groundless ," Peskov said.
On Friday we reported that Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said that Moscow has "irrefutable evidence" that the attack - which allegedly killed over 40 people, was staged with the help of a foreign secret service.
" We have irrefutable evidence that this was another staged event, and that the secret services of a certain state that is now at the forefront of a Russophobic campaign was involved in this staged event ," he said during a press conference according to AFP.
According to defense ministry spokesman, Major General Igor Konashenkov, the Kremlin has evidence that Britain was behind the attack.
Quoted by Reuters , he said: " We have... evidence that proves Britain was directly involved in organising this provocation ."
As RT further adds , the Russian Defense Ministry presented what it says is " proof that the reported chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged." It also accused the British government of pressuring the perpetrators to speed up the "provocation." During a briefing on Friday, the ministry showed interviews with two people, who, it said, are medical professionals working in the only hospital operating in Douma, a town near the Syrian capital, Damascus.
During a briefing on Friday, the ministry showed interviews with two people, who, it said, are medical professionals working in the only hospital operating in Douma, a town near the Syrian capital, Damascus.
During a briefing on Friday, the ministry showed interviews with two people, who, it said, are medical professionals working in the only hospital operating in Douma, a town near the Syrian capital, Damascus.
In the interviews released to the media, the two men reported how footage was shot of people dousing each other with water and treating children, which was claimed to show the aftermath of the April 7 chemical weapons attack. The patients shown in the video suffered from smoke poisoning and the water was poured on them by their relatives after a false claim that chemical weapons were used, the ministry said.
"Please, notice. These people do not hide their names. These are not some faceless claims on the social media by anonymous activists. They took part in taking that footage," said Konashenkov.
"The Russian Defense Ministry also has evidence that Britain had a direct involvement in arranging this provocation in Eastern Ghouta," the general added, referring to the neighborhood of which Douma is part. " We know for certain that between April 3 and April 6 the so-called White Helmets were seriously pressured from London to speed up the provocation that they were preparing ."
According to Konashenkov, the group, which was a primary source of photos and footage of the purported chemical attack, was informed of a large-scale artillery attack on Damascus planned by the Islamist group Army of Islam, which controlled Douma at the time. The White Helmets were ordered to arrange the provocation after retaliatory strikes by the Syrian government forces, which the shelling was certain to lead to, he said.
The UK rejected the accusations, with British UN Ambassador Karen Pierce calling them "grotesque," "a blatant lie" and "the worst piece of fake news we've yet seen from the Russian propaganda machine."
So when will Moscow release their evidence for the whole world to see? Or is it maybe waiting for the US to first release its own proof that Assad launched the attack?
If so, we'll be waiting for a long time.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Joiningupthedots Mon, 04/16/2018 - 14:50 Permalinktangent Mon, 04/16/2018 - 16:15 Permalink
The blast area of just ONE cruise missile is 150ft/2 = 7000m/2
How many hit this target allegedly? You can even see the matrix caused by the layering of the photo shopping software when you zoom right in (its not present on the first photo) Fucking amateur hour LMAO
There really is not even a conspiracy theorist out there who would suggest it was a Syrian government operation any way. Only batshit crazy raving lunatics have suggested it was the Syrian government. This is clearly the stupidest thing Trump has done. It makes the USA look like a bunch of circus freak losers. Very sad and shockingly insane. This is the stupidest piece of propaganda in modern history. The USA looks very, very bad. It looks like, from any reasonable perspective, that they are actively aiding terrorists on purpose. Wow. Interesting cosmetics. Interesting optics.
Its almost as if the USA government hates itself and actually wants a nuclear war where everyone dies. I think the only thing that should be considered is whether the nutty freaks in charge are actually humans. Humans are a great disappointment, so likely, yes, human beings really can be that mentally deficient. Trump really is such a level of mental retard that he hates himself and wants to be nuked, so he bombs Syria knowing full well they have nothing to do with it. He hates his career now and wants out.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Canadian Dirtlump -> Pearson365 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:40 Permalinkgatorengineer -> Canadian Dirtlump Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:52 Permalink
So the barrels of chlorine that we've seen multiple times that the West / Saudis have provided to the "rebels" are stored inertly?
How is that?
The calling card of this false flag is the simple fact that such a crude munition was used.
Gimme a break Walter White jr.Decoherence -> gatorengineer Mon, 04/16/2018 - 13:33 Permalink
chlorine gas is no big deal. Sarin is destroyed by fire.... There is a reason everyone stores these away from People. Not saying Orange is right, by any means in fact the opposite, but this story is a bit of a reach.RAT005 -> Decoherence Mon, 04/16/2018 - 14:51 Permalink
Not necessarily. There is no magic way to make this stuff go away. Incineration doesn't solve the problems of the metal containers. All of this stuff would be making its way into their environment, causing illness and death in the coming years. It takes decades to properly neutralize this stuff. Lighting it up with Tomahawks definitely isn't the best way, and without a doubt some of it would be immediately released into the surrounding area. However small or not so small that amount is:
I used to manage a small apartment complex swimming pool. Dry Chlorine was mixed into a 40gal concentrated tank and a small squirt was pumped into the filter circulation all day long. A newbee once lifted the top off the tank to have a look inside. Lucky I was there (telling him, don't do thattttttt) I about had to carry him out of the room. There would be reports all over that area if a few hundred gallons or more of Chlorine had been blasted into the air.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Dangerclose Mon, 04/16/2018 - 13:09 Permalink
I emailed the OPCW yesterday. I asked for the location of the Douma inspection team at precisely the time the research center was attacked. I heard that they were at the airport and only hours away from the site. I thought this would give credence to the theory that the site was attacked just so it would interfere with a proper inspection. They declined to release any info for the protection of their workers and the integrity of their work. I guess we will have to wait for the report.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
US officials and the presstitutes tell us that the illegal US missile attack on Syria destroyed chemical weapons sites where chlorine and sarin are stored/manufactured.This satellite image, taken Monday morning, shows the Barzah Research and Development Center in Damascus after it was struck by coalition forces.
If this were true, would not a lethal cloud have been released that would have taken the lives of far more people than claimed in the alleged Syrian chemical attack on Douma?
Would not the US missile attack be identical to a chemical weapons attack and thus place the US and its vassals in the same category as Washington is attempting to place Assad and Putin?
What about it, you chemical weapons experts?
Do chemical weapons only release their elements when they explode from intended use but not when they explode from being militarily attacked?
There is no evidence in Syria of chemical residue from the chemical weapons facilities allegedly destroyed by US missiles.
No dead victims.
No reports of hospitals treating Syrian casualties of the American chemical attack.
How can this be if such sites were actually hit?
When I was a Wall Street Journal editor newspapers had competent journalists to whom such a question would occur. But no more. Stephen Lendman takes the New York Times to task for its unprofessionalism . The NY Times is no longer a news source. It is a propaganda megaphone.
BennyBoy -> QueenDratpmurt Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:51 PermalinkEuroPox -> BennyBoy Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:54 Permalink
The OPCW said there was no chlorine and sarin there.
Remember when....March 31, 2005 - The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction reports that the intelligence community was "dead wrong" in its assessments of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities before the US invasion.SafelyGraze -> EuroPox Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:59 Permalink
That is the site that the Pentagon says was hit with 76 missiles!
19 JASSMs and 57 Tomahawks!
Does anybody believe them?JRobby -> SafelyGraze Mon, 04/16/2018 - 13:03 Permalink
the lendman article suggests that missiles deliberately targeted and destroyed non-chem-weapons sites that were being used to develop anti-cancer drugs.
that information is completely mistaken because otherwise the official reports would be incorrect.
nyt subscribersD503 -> JRobby Mon, 04/16/2018 - 13:19 Permalink
Good argument just because it sure DOESN'T look like a large scale chemical manufacturing site........
But it is destroyed.JimmyRainbow -> Klassenfeind Mon, 04/16/2018 - 13:10 Permalink
And on the left here you'll see our chemistry lab cleverly disguised as an office building. We have no need for any of the essential components such as reasonable delivery methods, power supply, storage tanks, pipes, etc. We're cutting edge, unlike all those American plants:
ever heard of the ship extra built to burn the nerve gas shit out on sea?
there is one, maybe just one worldwide
and if it were so natural and clean to just burn the shit, why the ship?
hundreds of tons nikki said.
a vial enough to kill a town. something always escapes.
additionally the rubble does not look burnt at all
another nice story: there is a phosgen producing site in germany,
phosgen is a weapon-gas but also used in fabrication of plastic.
the whole reactor is shielded by a few 1000 tons of alcohol because that neutralizes phosgen.
in densly populated germany no risk is taken
Apr 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
honestann Sun, 04/15/2018 - 21:58 Permalink
I suggest that Russia act as "marginal producer" and refuse to sell oil, gas or raw petroleum products for less than double the price of other suppliers.
All of a sudden... thing will change.
After the treatment Russia has gotten for the past year or more, they are more than justified to adopt this policy.
Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
spyware-free -> Pernicious Gol Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:47 PermalinkChupacabra-322 -> spyware-free Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:43 Permalink
What's going on?
"In late March, the U.S. State Department warned European corporations that they will likely face penalties if they participate in the construction of Russia's Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, on the grounds that "the project undermines energy security in Europe"
The Nord Stream 2 project and the denial of pipelines through Syria territory is what's eating at the zio-cons. This is power politics and Russia / China are too much of a threat.spyware-free -> Chupacabra-322 Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:52 Permalink
March, 14, 2017:
The Russian central bank opened its first overseas office in Beijing on March 14, marking a step forward in forging a Beijing-Moscow alliance to bypass the US dollar in the global monetary system, and to phase-in a gold-backed standard of trade.
Apr 3 2017 - Europe approves Nordstream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany
April 6 2017 - need to attack Syria.
Coincidentally, with a new government a gas pipelin can be run from Qatar to Europe and cut-off Russian gas revenue.
Nord Stream 2 Project Gets Green Light From EU
*Three Mediterranean EU countries and Israel agreed on Monday to continue pursuing the development of a gas pipeline ... EU countries and Israel ... April 3, 2017 ...*
EU, Israel agree to develop Eastern Mediterranean gas pipeline
The Optics of the Inter National Geo Political Crises would suggest that The Criminal Oligarch Cabal Bankster Intelligence Deep State Crime Syndicate are going "All In."
Brace YourSelves.....Chupacabra-322 -> spyware-free Sun, 04/15/2018 - 18:43 Permalink
The petroyuan project is the key. It will smash the petrodollar zio-world. Saddam Hussien thought of doing that in the 80's by consolidating Arab oil into a basket of currencies backed by gold. The problem for him was he was a disposable puppet and not able to defend that project. China and Russia are a different matter. It's driving the zios batty.
And, the Yuan is now in the IMF basket of SDR's. Ultimately, the Petro Dollar will meet its demise & it will be decided by which is the cleanest, dirtiest shirt to put on among the SDR's.