- The "Oh Shit" Guy That Wiped Hillary's Server With BleachBit Was Just Granted Immunity
Last week, after the FBI dropped their Friday before Labor Day weekend bomb on Hillary, we wrote about the various events leading up to the deletion of Hillary’s emails (full details here: “The “Oh Shit” Moment: Hillary Wiped Her Server With BleachBit Despite Subpoena“). At the end of that post we concluded that the “Undisclosed PRN Staff Member” managing Hillary’s servers on behalf of Platte River Networks had seemingly thrown himself under the bus by admitting to the FBI that he “was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton’s e-mail data on the PRN server” but then went ahead and deleted the emails anyway.
According to new info from the New York Times, that “Undisclosed PRN Staff Member” is Paul Combetta and apparently his brazen honesty during FBI interviews came only after receiving an immunity deal from the Justice Department.
For those who “do not recall” the specific timeline leading up to Combetta wiping Hillary’s server, here is a breif recap:
December 2014 / January 2015 – “Undisclosed Clinton staff member” instructs Combetta to remove archives of Clinton emails from PRN server but he forgets.
March 4, 2015 – Hillary receives subpoena from House Select Committee on Benghazi instructing her to preserve and deliver all emails from her personal servers.
March 25, 2015 – Combetta has a conference call with “President Clinton’s Staff.”
March 25 – 31, 2015 – Combetta has “oh shit” moment and realizes he forgot to wipe Hillary’s email archive from the PRN server back in December…which he promptly does using BleachBit.
February 18, 2016 – Combetta meets with FBI and denies knowing about the existense of the subpoena from the House Select Committee on Benghazi at the time he wiped Hillary’s server.
May 3, 2016 – Combetta has follow-up meeting with the FBI and admits that he “was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton’s e-mail data on the PRN server.”
And here are the details from the FBI Notes:
Given this fact pattern, we would be very curious to know exactly when Paul Combetta was granted immunity by the Justice Department. Perhaps that immunity was granted sometime after February 18, 2016, when Combetta had troubles recalling the issuance of a subpoena, but before May 3, 2016, when he seemed to recover from his unfortunate bout of amnesia. Just a guess.
Earlier this week, the chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent the following letter to Platte River Networks asking officials to appear before Congress to testify on how Hillary’s email account was set up and how the messages were deleted. That said, it’s now unclear whether this request for testimony will go anywhere given the new information that Combetta has been granted immunity.
But just in case, Hillary spokesman, Brian Fallon, wants you to know that Paul Combetta went totally rogue and made a unilateral decision to wipe Hillary’s emails without any input from anyone connected to the Hillary campaign. His decisions to committ several federal crimes were all his own.
Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said that the deletions by the specialist, who worked for a Colorado company called Platte River Networks, had already been “thoroughly examined by the F.B.I. prior to its decision to close out this case.”
“As the F.B.I.’s report notes,” Mr. Fallon said, “neither Hillary Clinton nor her attorneys had knowledge of the Platte River Network employee’s actions. It appears he acted on his own and against guidance given by both Clinton’s and Platte River’s attorneys to retain all data in compliance with a congressional preservation request.”
What more is there to say?
- "Anything & Everything Goes" – The Corrupt & Deranged Governance Of America
Authored by Robert Gore via Straight Line Logic,
The Burning Platform’s quote of the day sums it all up perfectly: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.” George Orwell
Contemporary governance embodies corruption within deranged systems resting on foundations of theft and fraud. Corruption makes reform impossible; derangement assures eventual collapse.
“Defense” spending is a misnomer. The US could defend itself at a small fraction of what it spends on its military and intelligence. The US government’s foreign intervention and maintenance of a confederated empire are actually a welfare and transfer payment program. Spending has become the point: maximizing the payoff to military and intelligence contractors, their think tanks and lobbying arms, captured politicians, and the vast bureaucracies. Winning wars doesn’t serve the interests of those beneficiaries, lengthy and inconclusive engagements do.
The war on terrorism is a mother lode. The enemy is whomever the government deems it to be, wherever the government chooses to fight it. The war itself creates more terrorism. Victory cannot be defined; the war will go on as long as the current ideology remains in place. It enriches the military-intelligence-industrial complex, but a war-without-end welfare program is clearly deranged, a fitting target of satire. It will continue indefinitely because its beneficiaries have far more incentive and resources to promote their interests than the rest of us have in promoting peace.
Politicians use other people’s money to line their own pockets and buy votes; recipients accept the largess and become dependent on it. There is no limit to demands that the government fund “needs,” and no limit on the political willingness to meet those demands. It is testament to this lack of limits that the world’s richest countries cannot fund the demand for redistributive largess from their countries’ own resources. Aggregated, they have accumulated the largest debt load in history, far beyond their ability to repay it.
Mounting debt generates its own limit: insolvency. Demographics shaped by the transfer state compound the problem. Stealing the fruits of labor penalizes honest productivity and constricts opportunity. Faced with bleak prospects, many of the young opt out of the financial obligations of starting families, rearing children, or even supporting themselves. Birthrates have dropped far below replacement in most developed countries: fewer people to fund taxes and debt just as the number of putative beneficiaries skyrocket. Pension shortfalls around the world are the canary in this coal mine. The mathematics are inescapable. Present arrangements are unsustainable, but will continue until debt markets and taxpayers rebel.
They will face a counter-rebellion by dependency-warped recipients deprived of that which was never really theirs. Those who can but don’t honestly produce are both dishonest and unproductive. Faced with a cut-off, expect chaos and violence.
Debt and taxes fund governments and enslaves their constituents. They’re the foundation for the second most insidious racket: the banking complex. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 began the shift from real money (gold) to debt, enshrined the banking cartel, and was, through the establishment of the lender of last resort function, the first major step towards making taxpayers the guarantors of bank liabilities. Later, deposit insurance and Too Big To Fail (TBTF) sealed that guaranty.
Bankers have found heaven on earth, but their paradise has destroyed the economy. TBTF has removed capitalism’s most potent corrective: failure. Government debt issuance, central bank monetization, interest rate suppression, and random, whimsical, and absurd policies provide banks with middleman’s profits, inside information, access to cheap funding for speculation, and, as a particularly vicious policy—the war on cash—gathers steam, captive deposits. They destroy honest saving and investment and burden the economy with an increasingly onerous load of debt and taxes. Even governments and central banks, entities that can conjure their own debt and mandate its acceptance, will for all intents and purposes go broke if spending outruns revenues long enough.
The most insidious racket? While the banking camarilla is nothing to sneeze at, lawyers writing laws and regulations must be reckoned the Mt. Everest of rackets. They write, implement, interpret, and enforce the laws, augmenting their wealth and power every step of the way. Even the bankers ostensibly kowtow to the government (what happens behind the scenes is another matter). The repository of lawful coercive force, government inevitable becomes organized crime and the law nothing more than the means to corrupt ends. Write the law and write your own ticket.
Standards of honesty and integrity crumble in societies based on theft and fraud, replaced by a new standard. Coercive, redistributive “altruism” excuses all manner of corruption among the powerful and the servitude of those who either choose or are forced to produce. Bread, circuses, and moral degeneracy entertain and placate the masses. The bizarre becomes commonplace, but the populace grows sated with each new manifestation, always more “transgressive” (of standards that no longer exist) than the previous one, in progressively shorter spans of time.
Anything and everything goes. Only one standard remains that rouses virtually everyone—rich and poor, powerful and powerless—to righteous indignation: the more pervasive the corrupt derangement, the less acceptable it is to talk about it. In our own time, the obvious conclusion that the warfare and welfare states are morally and fiscally bankrupt, doomed to collapse, remains confined to the fringe.
Here’s a rewrite of the “Emperor’s New Clothes” in light of modern realities.
The child points out the Emperor’s nudity.
The Emperor’s beholden courtiers and the impoverished but thoroughly cowed townspeople immediately threaten and intimidate the child.
Naively stubborn, he repeats himself until someone claps a hand over his mouth.
The headline next day: “Child who Questioned Emperor’s Attire Found Dead in Field Outside of Town.”
Hillary Clinton wins support not despite her corruption and derangement, but because of it, especially among the establishment. Their rackets need a participant and patron. Donald Trump is hardly a naively honest child, but he has had the temerity to question a few rackets, notably immigration, trade, and the warfare state’s global empire. Questioning that last one—because it’s the largest and most lucrative—has provoked copious quantities of vehement vitriol.
Truth can awaken minds and rouse people to action, posing an obvious threat to the corrupt and deranged. Should Trump win the election, he will assuredly be presented with the same choice as the child in the story: get with the program or die. Odds are he folds, in which case those of us rooting for meaningful change will be left with the hope that the inevitable collapse occurs before we die.
- Descendants Of Slaves Owned By Georgetown University Want $1 Billion
Last week we noted that Georgetown University President, John DeGioia, announced plans to grant preferential admission consideration to descendants of slaves formerly owned and sold by the university in 1838 (see “Georgetown To Grant Admission Preference To Slave Descendants“). According to a report of a special “Working Group” of the university, two priests who served as president back in 1838 orchestrated the sale of 272 slaves netting the university $115,000 ($3mm in current dollars) which was used to pay off school debts. The “preference in admissions,” along with an official apology from President DeGioia, was part of the
school’s effort to “atone” for profiting from the sale of enslaved
people.As part of our note, we suggested that Georgetown should post their “bid” of “preference in admissions” to the official Reparations website so that an official market could be established (see “There Is Now A Marketplace For White People To Make Reparations Payments“). Now, less than a week later, we have an official “offer” from the descendants of the slaves formerly owned by Georgetown who want “preference in admission” plus a mere $1 billion. Up until now, the 15 point spread on the Ford term loan back in October 2008 was about the most egregious bid/ask gap we’d ever seen but this puts that market to shame.
Per the Washington Post, the descendants of the 272 slaves sold by Georgetown University have already raised $115,000 so they really only need help with the incremental $999,885,000.
The descendants proposed a $1 billion foundation and announced that they had raised $115,000 in seed money, an amount equivalent to the 1838 sales price for the 272 people Georgetown sold to pay off a debt. That amount is equivalent to about $3 million in today’s dollars.
“The foundation can only be a reality if we can establish a partnership with Georgetown University,” he said. “The foundation is our vision of an opportunity for us to have a partnership with Georgetown University that can take the history that we all now know about and turn it into a greater common good for Georgetown, the Jesuits, the Catholic Church, and humans overall.
He praised university leaders. “What Georgetown did was step out and away on an issue that has just dragged our whole country and society backward. They have stepped out in front and said, ‘We need to openly deal with this.’ I want to commend them for that. But we want to work with them on a greater vision that’s not dependent on the day-to-day educational mission of Georgetown, a separate foundation that we all have a role in. … We can take that, use it in a positive way to do much better for all of God’s wonderful humanity.”
That said, according to the website of the Georgetown University Investment Office the school’s total endowment is only about $1.5 billion. As such, we suspect that additional negotiations may be required to close the gap between Georgetown’s bid (apology + admission preference) and the current offer (apology + admission preference + $1,000,000,000) before an official settlement can be reached.
- One "Lifelong Socialist" Norwegian's Perspective On Trump
Authored by 'Ola Nordmann',
Despite Norwegian mainstream media and political establishment support for Hillary Clinton (They also supported Mark Rubio and Bernie Sanders when they were running), I would like to apologize for our politicians and voice my support for Trump. I believe that Americans need to think about what is at stake from lifelong socialists’ perspective. Despite what people read about Norway being the best place to live, it comes with a price. Everyone needs to mostly agree, not raising concern, even when feeling wronged. Going outside the line leads to ostracization. (It’s like being Amish in some ways.)
We are not that creative. We would like to think so, but compared to Minnesota, our American cousin (similar population, culture, and climate), we are far behind – left in the dust. Minnesota has many diverse and world class companies like 3M (Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing), Polaris (snowmobiles and motorcycles), and Medtronic (Innovative medical equipment). Our largest companies are mostly resource related: Statoil (state oil company), Telenor (our innovative phone company) and Yara (fertilizer). The government substantially owns many of them, not making them real companies that compete for their daily existence, like their Minnesota counterparts.
If you ever come to Norway, you will find around half the TV shows are American! We have Dr. Phil, NCIS, Cake Boss, Fast and Loud and so on. Our version of Cops and Storage Wars will put you to sleep. Recently, a major Norwegian media outlet launched a reality show, called Oslo S, about our central train station. The theme is bouncers and bums exchanging pleasantries – Yawn. Other shows come from Australia, Sweden and the UK. I wish we could be more American, in this regard, making our own entertainment to cover all the time slots, instead of importing it.
Our education system teaches conformity and compliance. It does not teach critical reasoning, questioning the system or exploring the media’s agenda. When you graduate, you will be unable to take charge and make a decision. (Good decisions always disappoint someone. Otherwise, the choice would not need arbitration in the first place) Instead, you will learn that everyone must be included, finding a compromise. This indoctrination process often leaves your team uncompetitive or product useless, falling short of market demands. It’s more important that everyone is happy than to remain profitable, which ensures long-term enterprise survival. The lack of confidence taught in our education system is crippling. This insecurity makes us somewhat socially retarded with foreigners. When we go abroad, we travel in groups, sticking to ourselves, not interacting with the locals. It may explain our unfriendly ranking.
Many well to do Norwegians acknowledge the systems shortcomings, opting for private education. Some even send their kids boarding schools in England and Ivy League universities in America. We have a hard time getting those kids to return home, leading us forward. Instead, they add to America’s vastness and achievements. Recently, private schools in Norway started to pick up.
Our Economy is equally as boring. After oil (65%), we sell fish and aluminum. Our Central Bank did such a wonderful job devaluing the currency, allowing the Chinese to buy our expensive water company. Many more of our unique companies are now vulnerable to foreign takeover.
Our technology sector will not save the economy after oil’s demise (at least not now). Although there are some interesting firms, doing cool stuff, they are no comparison to those in California, Boston or New York. We get good people, but America gets the best of the best, driven by a deeply human desire to succeed.
If we were truly innovative: we would have lured Elon Musk to Norway to make Tesla’s here (we are on a per-capita basis one of the world’s largest consumers of electric cars). It would have complimented our emission-free hydroelectric industry, which generates 99% of Norway’s power. We should have invested our oil fund money into becoming leaders in 3D metal and alloy printing. This technology would be an ideal complement to our small but highly skilled workforce, losing jobs in the oil industry. We could have been exporting commercial aircraft and car parts, made to order and on demand, diversifying the economy. Nevertheless, our leaders in the Central Bank and Politics learned to play it safe, avoiding risk and confrontation, all their life. They never learned that not taking risk is also a risk. We are experiencing that right now – the repercussions of doing nothing.
Our cultural basis comes from the Janteloven. Essentially if we see our neighbor with a new Cadillac, we get jealous, hastily concluding that he stole it instead of sacrificing to earn it. We will never openly express our distaste. We just hold it in and do something passive aggressive like reporting him to the tax office. When the American neighbor sees the luxury car, he gets motivated and works extra hard. Afterward, he buys a Bentley, one-upping the neighbor. Economies and innovation benefit from competition, not envy and passive-aggressive behavior mixed with feelings of inadequacy.
If you want to live in Norway, you have to be comfortable with complacency. Things are “great” because they don’t change, making life predictable. Norway is for those needing direction, protection, and an identity. It is for those who want to take it easy, seeking a steady routine, usually after they made it. For the outliers, ambitious and the hungry– those few who make the greatest contributions for posterity –America is your place.
In the American workplace, in general, respect is earned based on actions and not given. In Norway, we tell such anxious people to relax and not worry so much, subtly suppressing them. Americans, even if they don’t like you, will at least respect you if you’re productive.
I do not want to see America become Norway. First, it’s impossible. Our history and evolutionary paths are different. Second, the human species, as a whole, would cease to advance. We will never get the next iPhone, Tesla or action movie.
Below are my observations about Trump and why Americans, and the world for that matter, should consider him.
Trump is more Interesting than the Kardashians
The obnoxious family is popular here, polluting our airwaves daily. Trump is the first Presidential Candidate (based on observation) to get more press than them. People are talking about Trump, America and what’s wrong. Moreover, they are talking about “why.” Everyday people, who normally watch sports and reality shows, are having vigorous debates about real topics that affect their lives.
Trump made politics interesting to the entertainment drugged masses! His presidency would mean more democracy, not less. More people will start to pay attention to the government than Kim Kardashian’s backside. Everything usual will get disrupted. A new culture of calling things as you see it will rise (or return, depending on how long you have been around.
The media and public will scrutinize Trump’s every move. It will be interesting to know what he is up to. Everyone will be watching his speeches and commenting the day after. It will be far from routine. Democracy needs public participation. Good or bad: as the antics ensue, more outsiders will get energized and inspired, bringing new faces to politics.
Loathed by Billionaires, Goldman Sachs and Mainstream Media
I find it interesting that the very wealthy are suddenly vocal, vigorously opposing Donald J Trump’s presidency. Mark Cuban, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and George Soros have all made statements against “The Donald.” Buffet, Gates, and Soros are avid supporters of Hillary Clinton. Goldman Sachs top management are not allowed to donate to Trump’s campaign.
As an average seventy-something Norwegian farmer, looking at American from the outside, I find the vigorous billionaire opposition “interesting.” Moreover, this is amplified by CNN (which we get here in Norway as part of our standard cable package). CNN used to be fact based news only. Now they morphed into the Clinton News Network, attempting to shape public opinion, garnering support for globalism.
Perhaps the billionaire’s enterprises benefit from bloated government spending (this is speculation and worthy of investigation)? These Billionaires are so rich that the interest earned on their idle cash and investments amounts to tens of thousands of dollars per day. What do they have to lose either way? Why is this so important to them? Maybe it’s to their advantage that the ladder (better known as the American Dream), where people can ascend through the rungs, achieving different levels of success through hard work, is broken?
Don’t Americans find it strange, despite technological advancements and increased productivity, that medical care, education, and housing costs are rising. I thought technology was supposed to make things cheaper, easier and more abundant. Remember when people went from horse and buggy to the Ford Model T – what happened? (A middle mobile middle class was born). Based on what I read about American life, it seems like now, when there is a new technology or innovation to make life easier, things get worse. Jobs become less stable than decades earlier. People are working longer hours for less. The housing standard is now a cramped condo instead of a house with a yard. It appears a lot of people are on edge.
American’s need to ask themselves, reflecting back one generation (20 years), how billionaires have made their lives better? Billionaires have substantially increased their wealth in the past 20 years, have you?
American’s have a history of being rebellious, unpredictable, self-reliant and wild, rooting for the underdog. In this case, the underdog is Trump. The world needs this from you: not to become “European,” stuck in discussion while opportunity passes.
Government & Opportunity
Unlike Libertarians, I do believe the government has a role in the private sector, ensuring competition exists and industries, serving national interests, are secured. (It would be crazy if the American army bought guns and tanks made in China to save money.) It is important that America secures its’ ability to produce heavy machinery, rockets, automobiles, high-tech, food, and medicine. However, this doesn’t mean the government support monopolies.
In the past, the American government would break up monopolies to ensure competition which also pushed innovation. In the past, they broke up the railroad, oil, and telephone monopolies, leading to innovation in energy, transportation, and communications. Since the failed attempt to break up Microsoft, the US and many world governments seemed to have looked the other way while corporate conglomerates keep on growing. The unchecked growth leads to corruption and stagnation. These mega companies can exert influence over local, state and even national governments who inadvertently put all their eggs in one basket. Even worse, when the mega corporation gets in trouble, they extort governments to bail them out, at taxpayer expense, otherwise threatening a crisis or mass layoffs.
Hence, governments must act like icebreaker boats, breaking down the massive ice flows so all can pass through the channel, not only the big boats. This observation was especially true with the bank bailouts. When they got in trouble, the big bank CEO’s claimed the fallout would be on the order of a natural disaster. Although Americans have a history of resiliency, bouncing back stronger from disasters, the US Government bailed the failed banks out while the people, owning homes and banking products, lost out. (Many Norwegian towns lost a lot, believing in US Mortgage securities during the 2008 crisis). The government, supposedly elected by the people, should have let the banks fail and help the victims of the systematic and institutionalized fraud, keeping them in their homes.
The Glass–Steagall Act was enacted in 1933 after the 1929 stock market crash to separate investment and commercial banks. Hence, the act limited the size of the banks and therefore limited the risks to the market. In 1998, Bill Clinton stated that this act was no longer relevant, and Congress repealed it in 1999. Many argue that Glass-Steagall would have averted the 2008 financial crisis. When Trump proposed to reinstate the act, Wall Street jumped on him.
American’s should think long and hard about whose side Wall Street is on.
Right vs. Correct
The big problem in the World today is the lack of honesty: objective and fact based. Without proper facts, it’s difficult to make good decisions. Europe, Norway included, has embarked down the Political Correctness (PC) path. So much so that people waste a lot of time deciding how to say something in a polite and “correct” way, often sacrificing the truth. This behavior leads to bad decisions or none at all. Instead of listening to the raw content, meant to help reach a good decision, PC people focus on the tone and word choice, missing the main point altogether.
Often the liberals will call you a sexist, racist or narcissist, responding to a direct and logical challenge that questions a popular assumption or long held belief. In Norway, we mandate that corporate boards have a set percentage of women. In technical companies, it is difficult to find qualified women, so ones from outside the profession are assigned. Sacrificing needed knowledge and experience for “correctness,” often leads to sub-optimal performance. If there is a woman on the board of an innovative American company, it’s because she is qualified and not to fill a quota. She worked hard, putting in the hours, getting her to the top. (I recently saw a post where someone posted a list of company ranking them from highest to lowest regarding women on the board. When I asked them to post the margins compared to their global competitors, Someone rebuffed me as a sexist.)
Instead of doing quotas, the government should focus on recruiting more women into the profession and ensure all the barriers are removed. Anyone, regardless of gender or background, should be able to excel in the given profession based on merit. No one should be blocked because of race. In essence. all obstacles should be cleared from the roads so that everyone can get on the highway, reaching their full potential. The focus should be on getting access to those who don’t have it in the beginning and not forcing quotas at the end.
Recently, we had a situation in Norway where a Norwegian Bank employed the services of an Indian IT provider, bringing people onshore to build a payment app. During the development process, the Indians worked outside the regulations, putting in a lot of extra time under duress. The Norwegian managers apparently did not have knowledge that their Indian management counterparts were breaking the law. In my opinion, I believe that the Norwegian managers may have been too afraid to ask difficult questions to the Indians, fearing a PC backlash and being branded a racist.
PC can snuff out the truth, blocking people from doing the right thing. Being correct over being right can suppress expression and push negative sentiment underground. People cannot express legitimate concerns because they are more afraid to offend someone, even if they need it. In a sense, this is discrimination. Is it only white males that get to hear the honest and raw truth while everyone else gets the sugar coated and often distorted version of it? Perhaps this explains the rise of nationalist parties.
Some nationalist parties are extreme and irrational (Golden Dawn in Greece) and others address legitimate concerns (UKIP). The mainstream media does not differentiate. Being in a democracy requires a lot of work, on the individuals part, collecting and analyzing the facts for yourself. Remember that ad revenue powers mass media. Perhaps people should think twice before thinking mainstream media outlets are benevolent.
Focus on success has been America’s edge: greed and the desire to make money trumps personal feelings, race, and gender. American’s simply want the best people on their team, seeing only green. In this sense, greed is fair and democratic, rewarding merit while blind to other factors. Last time I was in America, I noticed that people go pretty far when they are good at something they enjoy.
The world is counting on the American ideal that “right is might, saying it like it is.” Being right over correct gives us the data in the purest form, free of distraction, allowing for the best possible decision.
Globalism vs. Nationalism
Being proud of your country and voting for politicians who put national interests ahead of global ones is not racist like liberal mainstream media would like you to believe. Racism is when you institute policies to block certain people from opportunity or services, based solely on their genetics, personal beliefs, ethnic background or religion. Sexism is when you do this based on gender.
It is not racism to be opposed to helping those outside your borders when so many inside, who paid into the system, need help (education, medical care, access to basic services, etc.). BREXIT highlights this prioritization very clearly. Countries can grow, add diversity and obtain skills with a proper immigration and integration policy.
The American’s have done so much to help the world, twice saving Europe from self-destruction. Instead of rebuilding themselves in full force, the rebuilt the conflict perpetrators.
The American system, based on the premise of strong individuals (families) and weak government, yield self-determination and personal responsibility. Based on my reading of the American system and Constitution, states should take more responsibility for themselves, minimizing the role of the Federal government. This way the people have more say about the spending of their tax contributions. The further away the money goes (to DC vs. the state capital), the less the taxpayer sees regarding benefits. It appears that a lot of money “gets stuck” in Washington DC. Many in the EU feel that a lot of money gets stuck in Brussels (Although Norway is not a member of the EU, we still pay the membership fee and follow the rules. We agreed to this to save our fishing and oil industry).
It’s easier to help others and save the world when your situation is stable. Moreover, stability and prosperity lead to more openness and acceptance of outsiders.
Trump is right to put Americans first, especially if they are paying taxes to the American government.
Failures vs. Success
Everyone is criticizing Trump about past failures. These are probably the same people that say failure is part of success, which is true. Here is an example of someone who failed a lot and then succeeded as president. He was also considered a bit wacky back in the day:
Russian Reality
I am far from being a Russia fan. I am just stating the facts, hoping the Americans can see this issue from another angle.
Although Norway’s experience with Russia during WWII was positive, helping us drive out the Germans and then leaving afterward, many do not have a positive view of them because of the media. They did not occupy us, and we later became trade partners, mainly exchanging fish for metal.
However, Trump is right to reach out to Vladimir Putin. We have a terrorist problem in the Middle East caused by faulty American and Western European policy. The USA, UK, and Russia were allies in WWII, defeating the Nazi’s. The Russians lost the most people in the conflict, created by Europe. Are they really so bad?
The US and Europe created the current situation in Ukraine, making empty promises to the opposition, hanging them out to dry when Russia responded via proxy. Putin hacked NATO by supporting rebels not wearing national uniforms, taking advantage of the EU’s bureaucracy. They are still debating: invasion or insurgency? Europe remains naïve to many things. All the while Ukrainian corruption rages on no matter who is in power. In fact, they cannot get their top leaders to comply with reporting, which is a pre-requisite to a visa-free regime.
Soviet Soldiers are buried in Norway – Memorialized for their sacrifice.
I am upset that our government blindly follows Obama, regarding this issue. Russia is our neighbor, and we have a long-standing relationship. Ironically the trade sanctions we imposed, on America’s behalf, hurt us more than them. Our exports to Russia fell while theirs to us rose markedly in 2015. Now is bad timing, considering that the American frackers are destroying our offshore oil industry, albeit fair and square by “building a better mousetrap.”
Norway has to stop being pathetic, acting like an American lap dog. We need to be more “American” in the sense that we make our own decisions and determine our destiny. Norwegians know all about America, but most Americans don’t know we exist. Therefore we must take care of ourselves, not depending so heavily on others for our protection. If the Finns managed to hold back Russia in 1939-1940, we should be able to do the same if an unlikely event were to happen.
The greater issue is that Europe (EU) needs to grow up. How does a country (Russia) of 143 million with a GDP of $1.2 trillion nominal (smaller than California) stare down a federation with over 500 million people and a $19 trillion economy? WTF right? We have not taken responsibility for our own lives, crutching on America.
Trump is right. NATO is outdated and requires re-evaluation. America, being the World’s babysitter, has done so at the cost of their own people and prosperity. By breaking up NATO, perhaps we can organize with Sweden, Finland and Denmark a robust defense alliance. But then for what? Russia has never intended any harm to us. (The antics with airplanes flying close to the border don’t count. Everyone does that on both sides.)
The Border Wall
Trump is right. A nation is defined by borders and rules. There are people in the country who pay taxes and follow a law, expecting security in return. In light of the recent migrant crisis, we also built a wall.
The wall with Mexico is more of a metaphor for an advanced border control system than an actual concrete structure. The actual wall could be built with drones, robotic and sensor technologies offered by FLIR Systems in America and Kongsberg Gruppen in Norway. Our defense company is an expert in sensor technologies and remote weapon systems. Our leaders should be getting in good with Trump to line up some business. Participation in the border wall project would stimulate innovation in Norway, which we dearly need.
I personally feel that when the EU parliament and Angela Merkel, unilaterally decided to let in massive amounts of refugees, they inadvertently endorsed dictatorships and terror groups. They allowed ISIS and other dictators to seize abandoned properties, assets, and agricultural lands, strengthening their hold. Maybe like Castro in the Mariel boatlift in 1980, the regimes sending us refugees emptied out their prisons on Europe. We will never know until it’s too late, manifested as horrific crimes and gang activity.
I want to make it clear that there is nothing wrong with bringing in refugees and immigrants. It just has to be done in a proper and controlled manner, not to overwhelm the system or society. Otherwise, legal immigrants get short changed. The legal immigrants often wait in cues, sometimes for years, having earned outstanding credentials, only to start over when they arrive in a western country.
Western countries have to acknowledge and deal with the ideological conflicts, assimilating the people to western standards. Otherwise, you get Sharia courts and back alley law, enforced by intimidation and risk of family ostracization. If the West really wants to fix the problems, the feminists should fight for the rights of Muslim women in their home countries, many of which are western allies.
The American way, teaching people to fish, is better than the European way, giving the fish outright, on refugee integration. Work defines your character, and it is what defines an American regardless of background, belief or gender.
Don’t try to be like us, blindly helping people and giving them a lot of “free stuff.” Prolonged destitution leads to self-loathing, mutating into resentment against the host. Mixed with idle time and the fact misery loves company, results in the current European situation. Listen to Ronald Reagan instead.
Trump Care vs. Obama Care
America’s biggest problem is obesity. It’s destroying America from the inside out, more so than any terrorist organization or other external threats. When people don’t feel good physically, they lose it mentally and spiritually. America’s greatest power, more than flags, history, land, guns, and innovation is its’ spirit. The American soul, defiant, driven, determined, brave and wild is unique. It’s what makes American unmeasurable and surprising.
Fat acceptance is about as sensible as condoning drunk driving. It tells those in question that it’s ok to give up on themselves, endangering their own health. This view may not be “correct” but it’s factually right, regarding public health.
Healthcare is something we get right in Norway. So here is some advice.Public health starts with the lifestyle and eating habits. If Trump wants to solve the American health care crisis, he needs to take on the food industry the same way he took on John McCain and the Republican party, laying them to waste. If government must provide free medical care, then it must, through policy, steer people towards healthy eating and fitness. Recently, retired US military leaders stated that the obesity epidemic poses a risk to national security, making it difficult to recruit qualified people.
Perhaps, Trump Care should invest part of the defense budget into a network of sports facilities, making all the Olympic sports accessible to everyone. Inner city kids could take up rowing or learn cross country skiing. Rural Americans can get more access to swimming pools and Soccer. Not only will America rack up more medals but the Army would have a greater pool which to draw. This initiative would be a far better investment than supporting other nation’s defense programs. I am confident Trump Care could bring the cost of medications for the public through bulk buying like the Canadians do. The savings from preventative medicine (proper eating and exercise) along with reduced obesity rates would lead to substantially lower private health insurance costs, making emergency room visits possible for everyone without experiencing bankruptcy afterward.
Norwegians want Americans to live long, healthy and happy lives so they can come and visit us, enjoying our natural wonders.
Conclusion
Trump could surprise everyone, becoming a great president. He is already turning the American political system upside down. Or, he could be a much-needed stick of dynamite applied to an unmovable obstacle – the political system. (When explosives are used to remove obstacles, they are consumed in the process. After detonation, the obstacle is cleared and the explosive is gone.)
The worst case is that Trump will be a one term president. However, he will destroy a lot of bad institutions in the process by shaming them on national TV, causing people to take action at the polls, by protesting or through non-compliance – real democracy. Imagine if Trump started calling out specific government officials, regarding project cost overruns and wasteful spending.
Perhaps Trump will Pardon Edward Snowden and offer Julian Assange free passage to California to spite his rivals? I would like to see them pardoned so they can come to Norway and accept long overdue Nobel Peace Prizes (when the committee comes to its’ senses).
If Trump’s presidency is a catastrophic failure, the collateral damage would also take out the two party system in the process. The US Election of 2020 may well consist of four to five political parties vying for power vs. two, giving Americans more choice. There is really nothing to lose. This Trump statement applies to everyone not just black people.
Many Europeans, Norwegians included, compare Trump to Hitler. This comparison is nonsense. Trump grew up in a family and went to an Ivy League school, married and fathered five kids. Hitler was an utter failure at life, pushed up on a wave of fascism. Europe is the continent that produced 20th-century dictators, not America. It is Europeans who blindly follow like lemmings, not Americans. They are, in general, too unruly, varied and wild for a dictatorship to take hold.
Moreover, there are plenty of checks and balances, including his own family and the US Military. The American military people I have met are very human and have a high standard when it comes to moral law. They would never enforce Third Reich edicts.
Nevertheless, Trump could learn some diplomacy, perhaps from Nigel Farage (who sounds nice even when insulting people). It will also be impossible to ban people based on religion. Religion is a personal declaration that can be changed. (I once met some Iranians who converted to Christianity, getting baptism papers, successfully obtaining refugee status in America). Instead, the immigration process should be a uniform and rigorous process, consisting of background checks, psychological exams, and extensive interviews, verifying the applicant's legitimacy and intent.
America needs to take care its’s own and the world needs to grow up, taking control of their own destiny. Americans need to remember, they as individuals are very powerful, unique and yet compassionate people. They must not depend on large corporations and mass media but their instincts and values. It will never be boring with Trump in the White House. Hence, why Kim Kardashian endorsed Hillary Clinton. Is it so bad that people will leave reality TV behind? Is it a bad thing that people find politics interesting, something that affects their life?
Please ask yourself: do you really want to be like us (socialist)? Then make your decision. Good Luck in November.
Yours Truly,
Ola Nordmann from Norway.
h/t AG
- 10 Reasons Why The Government Does Not Deserve Your Tax Dollars
Government has plenty of money, and as The Rebel's Lauren Southern explains, the idea that feeding more money into a broken system will somehow fix the system is quite literally insane. Yet to this day we still here politicians lying through their teeth saying they need to raise taxes – and liberals defending their decision.
Government wastes so much of that money that we give them that not a single person can convince me raising taxes is a good idea.
Most people see this glaring incompetence, but if you don't here's a list of 10 ridiculous things the US government spent your money on…
- The War Economy: CNN's Wolf Blitzer Warns About Job Loss If US Stops Arming Saudi Arabia
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg,
Ladies and gentlemen, it appears the long anticipated moment of peak mainstream media stupidity may have finally arrived.
This is what passes for journalism in America today.
The Intercept reports:
Sen. Rand Paul’s expression of opposition to a $1.1 billion U.S. arms sale to Saudi Arabia — which has been brutally bombing civilian targets in Yemen using U.S.-made weapons for more than a year now — alarmed CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Thursday afternoon.
Blitzer’s concern: That stopping the sale could result in fewer jobs for arms manufacturers.
“So for you this is a moral issue,” he told Paul during the Kentucky Republican’s appearance on CNN. “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 gonna be a significant loss of jobs, of revenue here in the United States. That’s secondary from your standpoint?”
Paul stayed on message. “Well not only is it a moral question, its a Constitutional question,” Paul said. “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.”
Saudi Arabia began bombing Yemen in March 2015, and has since been responsible for the majority of the 10,000 deaths in the war so far. The U.S.-backed bombing coalition has been accused of intentionally targeting civilians, hospitals, factories, markets, schools, and homes. The situation is so bad that the Red Cross has started donating morgue units to Yemeni hospitals.
The Obama administration has sold more weapons to the Saudis than any other administration, pledging more than $115 billion worth of small arms, tanks, helicopters, missiles, and aircraft.
But hey, the Saudis aren’t really that bad, right. No, they’re just one of the most barbaric, inhumane terrorist supporting states on planet earth.
Need some proof?
Here you go:
U.S. Government Reaffirms Total Support for Saudi War Crimes in Yemen
Saudi Arabia Forces the United Nations to Remove it from a List of Child Killers
Record Beheadings and the Mass Arrest of Christians – Is it ISIS? No it’s Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia Sentences Journalist to Five Years in Prison for Insulting the Kingdom’s Rulers
German Intelligence Warns – Saudi Arabia to Play “Destabilizing Role” in the Middle East
And yes, I could go on — and on and on and on.
Finally, let’s end with the clip referenced in the article at the top.
Great job by Rand Paul. Meanwhile, Wolf Blitzer, you are an embarrassment to your profession and to your country.
- PoSTCaRD FRoM HeLL…
- Germany Prepares For Domestic Troop Deployments As "Catastrophic" Terrorist Attack Deemed "Conceivable, Even Probable"
Merkel continues to publicly defend her "open border" immigration policies despite continued erosion of her popularity amid rising nationalist sentiments in Germany and across the EU. Meanwhile, Germany is preparing to deploy troops within its borders for the first time since World War II amid growing fears that the potential for a large-scale terrorist attack is "conceivable, even probable," at least according to Lt. Gen. Martin Schelleis.
Concerns of a potential threat come as nearly 30,000 asylum seekers continue to flood the country each month from Syria alone (see chart below). Overall, Germany took in about 2.1 million immigrants last year and over half of them were refugees.
Which has resulted in a spike in terrorist attacks….
Plans to utilize soldiers for counter-terrorism efforts within domestic borders is a very controversial concept for a country only seven decades removed from totalitarian rule. Such efforts weren't even allowed until a court decision in 2012 which expanded Article 35 of the German constitution to allow armed forces to be deployed within domestic borders but only in response to a terrorist attack of "catastrophic proportions."
Per Schelleis, German military assets are critical for providing a quick, effective response to a large-scale terrorist attack. Per NBC:
"What matters in a large-scale terrorist situation is that quick and effective action is taken," he told NBC News. "This calls for the procedures to be coordinated and practiced."
Schelleis added the military assistance on offer could include low-altitude air space surveillance, checkpoints, explosive ordnance disposal and even advice on nuclear, biological and chemical threat situations.
"We could also provide mobile laboratory capabilities," Schelleis said. "Our troops are excellently trained. The same applies to medical personnel, who are well versed in treating gunshot and burn injuries."
That said, with an active duty force of only 60,000 (compared to 1.4mm for the United States) others within the German military ranks believe that assisting with domestic operations would spread personnel to thin.
The country's armed forces are spread thin while fulfilling peacekeeping missions in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Mali and in the the Mediterranean Sea.
According to the German Armed Forces Association, many servicemen don't want to be used as "stopgaps at home."
"We favor the planned training under the leadership of police forces in order to assess a potential role of the armed forces in a large-scale terror scenario," said Lt. Col. André Wuestner, the group's head. "But it should not be our goal to protect train stations."
Wuestner said his counterparts in France and Belgium have warned that their domestic security duties — such as patrolling city centers — have kept them from training for their main responsibilities, such as missions abroad.
We were under the impression that Merkel's plan was simply "we can do this"…did she mean "we can do this with the Bundeswehr?"
- Why Does Propaganda Work? Some People Want It
Submitted by Daniel Lattier viaThe Foundation for Economic Education,
There’s a principle in hypnotism that goes like this: A person cannot be hypnotized against his will. He must be a willing subject. He must be fully cooperative.
So it goes with propaganda. For propaganda to be effective, it requires submissive subjects. As Professor Nicholas O’Shaughnessy wrote, propaganda is a “co-production in which we are willing participants.”
Propaganda is typically defined as the dissemination of particularly biased information in support of a political or ideological cause. In his 1965 book Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes, philosopher Jacques Ellul provided us with some of the basic characteristics of propaganda: it thwarts dialogue, it is geared toward the masses, it utilizes various media, it is continuous, it is not intended to make one think.
Disable the Brain
If these are the characteristics of propaganda, then it is no exaggeration to say that we are surrounded by it today. Most news organizations have become partisan shills and propagandists. They provide viewers with a steady stream of videos, audio clips, images, and articles—most lacking nuance and of dubious intellectual merit—that serve the intended purpose of promoting an ideology while fueling disdain for the “opposition”. And they have become very successful doing it.
The reason they are successful, I fear, is that most people today want to be propagandized—though they would never admit it. Most people want to be given ideological marching orders and talking points from an authority. Most people have zero interest, and see little value, in engaging with arguments put forward by those who hold differing positions, unless it’s to ridicule them. Most people want to simply choose the news media organizations that best fit with their selected ideological camps and immerse themselves in their informational streams.
This realization is unfortunate, but not really surprising. Over the past few hundred years we’ve had a massive democratization of public discourse and higher education in the West. A continually larger percentage of the population has gone to school for longer and longer periods of time, and has been given the impression that, as a result of this education, they are enlightened “critical thinkers” whose opinions have as much value as the next person’s.
Yet, at the same time, we must confront the question raised by Dorothy Sayers in her famous 1947 essay “The Lost Tools of Learning”:
“Has it ever struck you as odd, or unfortunate, that today, when the proportion of literacy throughout Western Europe is higher than it has ever been, people should have become susceptible to the influence of advertisement and mass propaganda to an extent hitherto unheard of and unimagined?”
The fact is, though everyone goes through the education system today, most are not provided with the building blocks of thought. Most are no longer taught logic. Most are not shown how to engage in rational debate.
Avoiding Complexity
And even if these skills were better taught in today’s schools, I highly doubt that our situation would be that much better. If history and experience are any indicators, the difficult reality is that most people either don’t possess the intellectual chops for doing battle with complex and controversial ideas, or they choose not to undertake the discipline necessary to acquire this skill.
In the past, when confronted with new or different ideas, people who did not achieve the heights of formal education had the values and traditions embedded in their communities to fall back on. These provided them with a foundation—a “common sense”—by which to assess the merit those opinions that may differ from their own.
But today, hyper-individualism, increased urbanization, the breakdown of the family, and ideological divisions have caused a decline in the formative influence of community, and reduced our access to the “common sense” that it can provide.
Intellectually insecure and socially uprooted, many people are now desperate for some authority to cling to, someone who will give simple expression to the inklings of thoughts and instincts to which they can neither give adequate voice nor adequately live out.
Is it any wonder, then, that so many people would seek out propaganda today, and that its providers would be so happy to oblige?
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...