- TUCKER CARLSON CRUCIFIES CNN REPORTER FOR RETWEETING ADAM SALEH PRANK
How dare Brian Stelter, so called ‘journalist’ at CNN, retweet an obvious prank by some dipshit named Adam Saleh — over what he sensationalized to be ISLAMOPHOBIA at the hands of a fine American company called Delta Airlines.
The claim by the very flamboyant and effeminate Adam Saleh was that he was merely talking a barbarous version of Arabic to his Mother, to which was met with an unrelenting form of ISLAMOPHOBIA by the employees at Delta, who quickly ferreted him off the fucking plane for obvious fears that he was about to stage a terrorist event by way of hijacking or shoe bomb detonation.
Little did the plebian employees know that Adam was just an effete member of the youtube theatre, playing tricks on the people, hoping to cash in on his adsense ads on his stupid videos. In other words, he was full of shit. A simply cursory google search would’ve produced such valuable information, something the CNN journalist named BRIAN STELTER didn’t bother to do.
Mr. Stelter didn’t bother to do a cursory search on Adam Saleh, instead opting to RETWEET his salacious story, because he’s a very dumb man — a stone aged type of person with savage qualities occupying a very low station in life. Most of the time Mr. Stelter is busy putting out stories about FAKE NEWS, while at the same time creating his own FAKE NEWS. The main stream media today is an active practice of a nonsensical nature, very Kafkaesque for you literary and Orsen Welles aficionados.
Here’s Brian making fun of himself.
The bow-tie less Tucker Carlson calls out Mr. Stelter, and the media as a whole, for being very stupid, falling for the oldest tricks in the book.
Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com
- Bitcoin Soars Above $900 As China Opens
For the 3rd night in a row, China opens with a panic bid for Bitcoin. The cryptocurrency is now up over 14% in less than 3 days, topping $900 for the first time since December 2013. Interestingly yuan is not moving much tonight.
The USD price for a Bictoin has soared over 14% in the last 2 days. We first warned of this 'outlet' for Chinese capital in September 2015 when Bitcoin was trading around $200…now it is topping $900…
And volume is very heavy once again from China…
Getting very close to record highs…
As a reminder, back in 2013, the government classified bitcoin as a commodity and not currency, placing it outside the purview of the foreign-exchange regulator, the people said. That does not mean, however, that China is powerless at limiting bitcoin's upside.
Several Chinese government bodies including the People’s Bank of China and the financial regulators said in a joint notice that year that bitcoin functioned like a digital commodity without the legal status of a currency. The central bank said in January it is studying the prospects of issuing its own digital currency and aims to roll out a product as soon as possible.
While China dominates bitcoin mining and trading, the government has shown caution over its spread in the nation. In 2013, the PBOC barred financial institutions from handling bitcoin transactions.
- Federal Reserve Initiates End Game As Trump Heads To White House
Submitted by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,
For years, alternative economic analysts have been warning that the “miraculous” rise in U.S. stock markets has been the symptom of wider central bank intervention and that this will result in dire future consequences. We have heard endless lies and rationalizations as to why this could not be so, and why the U.S. “recovery” is real. At the beginning of 2016, the former head of the Dallas branch of the Federal Reserve crushed all the skeptics and vindicated our position in an interview with CNBC where he stated:
“What the Fed did — and I was part of that group — is we front-loaded a tremendous market rally, starting in 2009.It’s sort of what I call the “reverse Whimpy factor” — give me two hamburgers today for one tomorrow. I’m not surprised that almost every index you can look at … was down significantly.” [Referring to the results in the stock market after the Fed raised rates in December.]
Fisher continued his warning (though his predictions in my view are wildly conservative or deliberately muted):
“…I was warning my colleagues, “Don’t go wobbly if we have a 10-20 percent correction at some point. … Everybody you talk to … has been warning that these markets are heavily priced.”
Here is the issue — stocks are a mostly meaningless factor when considering the economic health of a nation. Equities are a casino based on nothing but the luck of the draw when it comes to news headlines, central banker statements and algorithmic computers. Today, as Fischer openly admitted, stocks are a purely manipulated indicator representing nothing but the amount of stimulus central banks are willing to pour into them through various channels.
Even with the incredible monetary support pooled together by international financiers, returns on equities investments continue to remain mostly flat. It would seem that the propping up of indexes like the Dow has been only for the sake of keeping up appearances. For many people, revenue is barely being generated.
Unfortunately, the majority of Americans do not care to educate themselves on the finer points of finance. Their only relation to the health of the economy is their daily glance at the Dow. If it is green, or at all time highs, they assume that all is well, even if their gut is telling them something is not quite right.
The elites that stand at the helm of the Federal Reserve understand this dynamic very well. They are not stupid. They know that the whole of the global economy could be in a shambles but as long as stocks remain positive the masses will continue to ignore reality until the flames of destabilization are at their very doorsteps.
With this fact in mind one might think that the Fed would consider it in their best interest to keep stimulus measures operating indefinitely; but that is not what they are doing.
In fact, the Fed along with other central banks like the ECB has been slowly peeling back pillars of support from markets that have been in place since 2008-2009 and leaving the system open to a crisis event that should have been dealt with years ago. I examined this process of deliberate destabilization in my article 'The Global Economic Reset Has Begun.'
In that piece I outlined the three major pillars holding up the U.S. market system and certain parts of our economy and how they were being systematically removed.
The first pillar was the use of bailouts and quantitative easing measures. These were diminished through the implementation of the Fed “taper,” which I predicted would happen three months prior that year.
The second pillar was the use of near zero interest rates, which allowed numerous banks and corporations to access low-cost and no-cost overnight loans from the Fed. These companies then used these loans in large part to support a never-ending program of stock buybacks, which reduced the stock pool and artificially boosted the values of the remaining stocks. I predicted in August of 2015 that the Fed would hike interest rates and that this would be the beginning of the end for the stock buyback bonanza. The Fed hiked rates in December of that year.
This process of removing backdoor manipulation through low interest rates should be our main concern right now. Early in 2016 I believed that the Fed would reach a position in which it would finally unleash a series of rate hikes. I did not think they would be so blatant as to wait until right after the U.S. presidential election to do so. I was wrong.
This is why I eventually predicted the launch of a series of rate hikes starting right after the election of Donald Trump in my article 'World Suffers From Trump Shell Shock — Here’s What Will Happen Next.' The Fed has now once again hiked interest rates with assertions that they will be “accelerating” such hikes throughout 2017.
As I have been arguing for most of the past year, the election of Donald Trump was inevitable and would precede the triggering of the final stage of our ongoing economic crisis. I came to realize that the Fed’s timing of their latest rate hike is highly strategic. Not only does it set the stage for a series of hikes that will crush U.S. stock markets this coming year and finally shock the public out of their fiscal stupor, but it also maneuvers the crisis right into the lap of Donald Trump and the conservative movements that support him.
Beyond this, it perpetuates an increasing Left/Right division in America. Think about it — during a fiscal crisis under Trump, tiggered by accumulating Fed rate hikes, liberals will immediately set upon Trump as the culprit, while conservatives will immediately defend Trump as a victim of Federal Reserve meddling.
The Federal Reserve and the mainstream media are already composing the narrative by stating that Trump's potential economic policies and a widening budget deficit would REQUIRE higher rates at a faster pace in order to be accommodated.
I have heard arguments from some that this tactic would simply not work. That people would “never buy” a narrative in which Trump and conservatives are blamed for a market collapse that was at least eight years in the making. I have to say, this view is incredibly naive.
I understand why people would want to embrace the notion that the public is as savvy as the liberty movement when looking at economic events, but this simply isn’t reality. A large portion of the U.S. population identifies with the “Left” end of the political spectrum. We have already seen how they react in the face of a Trump election win. They are predisposed to believe that Trump is responsible for a market crash regardless of the facts. Not to mention, much of the rest of the world is economically ignorant and will likely jump on the anti-conservative bandwagon during a crisis as well.
But the real master stroke of this strategy on the part of the elites is that it creates the perfect platform for the destruction of the U.S. dollar’s world reserve status — the third and final pillar I mentioned months ago that is supporting our economic system.
Imagine that the Fed’s rate hike frenzy sparks an open feud between the central bank and Trump? Some people might say “Good! Shut the bastards down!” However, this is exactly what the elites want. With the Fed “at odds” with the president of the U.S., faith in the U.S. dollar will plummet. Its world reserve status will be destroyed. And instead of being blamed on central banks, the majority of people around the world will claim it was the fault of Trump.
With a historically sufficient excuse for the end of dollar dominance in hand, the elites can move forward with their great global reset, which includes the replacement of the dollar with the IMF’s special drawing rights as the go-to reserve currency mechanism. The SDR basket is an essential bridge in the formation of a single global monetary authority and a true single global currency.
I believe that the Fed will not only continue hiking interest rates throughout 2017, but that some of these rate hikes may be LARGER than many people expect (50 basis points or more). I believe this will be designed to foster extreme tensions between the executive branch and the central bank.
A few months ago I would have said that Trump may or “may not” be aware of this dynamic and the potential that he is a scapegoat. Now that I have seen Trump’s cabinet picks which include neo-con and Goldman Sachs alumni, I have little doubt that he is fully cognizant of the plan. I will be writing more on the issue of Trump as a "Trojan horse" in my next article. In the meantime I would point out that all of the elements of psychological support for stock markets will also disappear in the face of a Trump verses establishment narrative.
All those leftist media outlets cherry picking economic stats and telling half truths to support the recovery lie now have no reason to continue cheerleading for the economy. I expect that propaganda rags like Reuters and Bloomberg will quickly change their tune with Trump in the Oval Office and begin a consistent chorus of negative financial data. Not only will the Fed remove all support from the system, but the mainstream media will be pounding day traders with the kind of “doom and gloom” headlines that they have been criticizing us for over the years.
Make no mistake, the election of Trump may have some in the liberty movement ready to pack up their preps and forget about any national crisis in their lifetimes, but the truth is, vigilance is needed now more than ever. I said it before the election and I’ll say it today — do not get comfortable; the times are about to get even more interesting.
- Royal Mint And CME Make A Mint On The Blockchain?
Royal Mint And CME Make A Mint On The Blockchain?
The last fortnight has been an exciting one in the gold and blockchain space. Earlier this week Euroclear and Paxos announced that a group which included Société Générale, Citi, Scotiabank had completed the first pilot of the blockchain-based gold trading platform as being developed by Euroclear. In Canada, the Royal Canadian Mint became the latest sovereign mint to announce a blockchain product with GoldMoney.
Royal Mint Gold Sovereigns 2017The Royal Mint in the UK had beaten the Royal Canadian Mint and GoldMoney to it by announcing at the end of November that they were launching a blockchain project, one which will be in direct competition with the Euroclear project.
We will be looking at this week’s development in more detail shortly but today focus on the UK Royal Mint announcement and ask what this means for the 1,000 year old institution, the gold market and blockchain technology.
The Royal Mint and CME Group announced a gold and blockchain ‘solution’ three weeks ago. As one would expect from a trading solution using blockchain, it will ‘log each transaction’. The two parties will collaborate on a digital gold asset called Royal Mint Gold (RMG) and will ‘transform the way traders and investors trade, execute and settle gold.’
In a conference call quoted by the Internatonal Business Times, there was very little said about what made the plans any different to what is already being offered by the likes of Goldcore. Bars will be held in secure storage, represented on an online trading platform and then traded. But, a blockchain will be in place.
Despite the fanfare and considerable PR benefit surrounding the announcement there is very little information on the hows and the whys of the decision by HM Treasury owned Royal Mint and the world’s largest futures exchange operator to launch a joint blockchain offering. Instead this appears to be about encouraging physical gold ownership, facilitated by a government who happen to own a storage facility.
But what does it mean?
Blockchain has to be the most hyped technology in a very long time. Even AI, IoT and VR, all of which are creating a lot of excitement, are not experiencing the same level of fuss.
Solutions for trading physical assets, based on the blockchain are becoming more popular and as a result more sophisticated. Many are autonomous which is obviously attractive to those who choose to invest in gold.This is where there is an interesting point when it comes to the Royal Mint and their interest in blockchain. It is too easy for someone unfamiliar with blockchain technology and the gold market to assume that this move by the 1,000 year old institution is to offer some kind of autonomy to the gold market.
It seems that we live in a world where we shout ‘got a problem? Blockchain’ll fix it!’
Take health records, for example. There is little doubt that blockchain technology really could transform the systems and processes that are currently in place. However those problems exist because of a multitude of reasons location, legacy systems, interest of invested parties to name a few.
None of which will disappear with the appearance of a blockchain.
The case is the same for gold and the blockchain. I do believe that blockchain could play a big role in the international gold market. But, in this case for the end customer and for the wider gold market I believe this will not have a significant positive impact. As explained earlier, this is a gold trading platform that happens to be using blockchain.
Economist Ashe Whitener agrees
“In my opinion, this is only news because the Royal Mint is basically a government-owned entity experimenting with blockchain. Just because something tangible like gold has a serial number on a blockchain, doesn’t mean that it is any more secure, safe or less risky.
Since the underlying asset is still physical, we still must place our trust with the Mint in terms of vaulting the gold. So nothing here really changes.”
What is it good for?
This is likely better news for the blockchain industry than for the gold market. For the blockchain space an announcement by a 1,000 year-old, government owned institution along with the world’s largest futures exchange operator is another tick in the legitimacy box for this relatively new and much hyped technology.
The announcement has lead to even more discussions about how the distributed ledger technology can be used in the world of gold trading.
As Michael Scott wrote upon hearing the announcement:
“It reflects blockchain’s ability to adroitly track and authenticate data, secured by a global ecosystem of computers which ensure that recorded transactions are tamper resistant and unalterable.”
Does the Royal Mint need a blockchain?
Blockchain’s abilities to remove uncertainties could be particularly beneficial to the gold market, a market that is so overrun with uncertainty and opacity that companies such as GoldCore go to great lengths to put systems and processes in place in order to guarantee transparency and accessibility.
At present, very little information has been released by CME Group and the Royal Mint on the specifics of what kind of blockchain will be used, and in what capacity it will play a role.
As Sandra Ro of CME said in the conference call
“We will go into further details about exactly how a lot of process will work and the finer details around the platform at a later date.”
What we do know (thanks to Ro) is that the blockchain in place will be a permissioned network. This effectively means that Joe Bloggs cannot decide he would also like to participate in the Royal Mint’s blockchain and start approving transactions. Instead, all actors will be known and ‘and there will be a mechanism by which validators will validate the transactions.’
As the two parties have themselves said, this is not about a blockchain product, this is an investment platform that happens to use blockchain. However, be sure that both the Royal Mint and CME Group will have full oversight and likely control over the blockchain.
The attraction of blockchain technology in the gold market, is similar to that in any other marketplace where there is an exchange of information (which may or may not lead to an exchange of an asset). A central database, or registry, is not needed thanks to the decentralised network of records.
This creates some significant cost and time savings, as well as boosting the efficiencies in how information is recorded, updated and shared.
One of the claims by the Royal Mint is that by using a blockchain solution, they will not have to pass storage fees onto clients. How using the blockchain means that storage fees no longer have to be charged is something that is not yet clear. If RMG is fully-backed by gold then who is covering the storage and insurance costs for participants?
Is it not of interest as to why an institution owned by a heavily indebted government would be making a lot of noise about it’s gold trading platform that just so happens to be connected to some storage vaults?
Boost to London?
The decision to use blockchain technology is, according to the UK’s Daily Telegraph “a bid to broaden London’s appeal as a place to buy and sell bullion.”
Currently the London Gold market, along with the COMEX is the biggest price creator in the gold market. Around $5 trillion of gold deals are done in the capital city, per year. The City is not currently struggling in terms of appeal, to the mainstream at least.
However of late a series of moves across the globe may have current gold market influencers thinking about what the future may hold.
The move to blockchain by both groups is not surprising.
The Royal Mint has been looking at the space for the last couple of years, whilst CME Group have investments in two blockchain companies. Both will no doubt be feeling the pressure from the developments that are going on in London. We recently discussed the increasingly fragmented London gold market, which has new players offering blockchain solutions for various aspects of gold trading.
In the US, CME Group will also be carefully watching TradeWindMarkets, a spin off from IEX Group (of Flashboys fame) which will also be launching a blockchain supported gold exchange.
Outside of London announcements by Singapore and China, plus the setting of the Sharia Gold Standard likely has current price setters in the gold market, anxious about how they can maintain their stronghold.
But this is unlikely to just be about increasing awareness of the London Gold market. The big gold trading institutions are already aware of, and are using the OTC market.
Royal Mint gold is not diversification
Gold investors buy gold to diversify their portfolio. There are more detailed reasons, and further reasons for doing so, but this is the one that covers most gold investors. You might also invest in gold because you read that it would perform well in the next five years, your colleague might invest in gold because of concerns over the cashless society and it goes on. But ultimately we all do it to diversify our investments and as a form of financial insurance.
We want some portfolio diversification because we want to protect (and grow) our wealth as much as possible. What are we protecting it from? Changes in the economy. This in turn is affected by a multitude of factors from financial developments, economic policies, governments, geopolitical events and even the weather.
When we invest in an asset that is designed to reduce our exposure to global risk, it’s probably a great idea to choose one which is as far removed from the system as possible.
This is why we choose gold. It is a border less, autonomous asset, a gold bar or coin cannot be printed many times over at the will of government or central bank, it cannot be eaten away by negative interest rates, if held non bank, non government, safer jurisdictions, a government will find it very hard to remove it through bail-ins or asset confiscation. History has shown how its value remains and it is an invaluable wealth preservation tool.
This is also why a lot of people like bitcoin, and why many are interested in the benefits a blockchain can bring to a system that represents exchange of value.
So when we invest in gold, it flummoxes me why many people choose to do so with the help of the very system that has created the need to hold safe haven assets e.g. gold and silver. Why place your gold in the custody of a heavily indebted national government?
We like the Royal Mint and their bullion coins, including Gold Sovereigns and Gold Britannias, are some of our best selling gold coins. However, for those looking to own gold for diversification, safe haven and financial insurance purposes it is prudent to opt for owning such bullion coins and bars in allocated and segregated storage in large, stable, creditor nations.
It is unlikely that a blockchain solution will give those Royal Mint users greater automony over their gold. The gold will still be stored in Royal Mint vaults, in the UK and, therefore, the custodian will remain the British Government which is under considerable stress and faces many challenges including Brexit and a massive national debt.
To begin to promote gold ownership, via the hype of the blockchain, at a zero-storage fee cost leads to obvious questions as to whether this is a win for the investor or for the Royal Mint.
Gold and Silver Bullion – News and Commentary
Gold steady as dollar edges away from 14-year peak (Reuters.com)
India Said to Consider Lowering Gold Import Tax to 6% From 10% (Bloomberg.com)
Gold Futures Little Changed, But Lower Dollar Lends Some Support (EconomicCalendar.com)
Investors shun Italian bank Monte Paschi’s share offer (Reuters.com)
Italy approves €20 billion bailout fund – MPS closer to collapse (MarketWatch.com)
Yuan Collapse Sends China Physical Gold Premium Soaring To 3-Year Highs (ZeroHedge.com)
Gold: The Wait For Inauguration Day (321Gold.com)
The Most Hated Asset On The Planet – Gold (TheMacraTourist.com)
Krugman’s Latest Conspiracy: Trump Is A Gold Bug (Mises.org)
Gold Prices (LBMA AM)
22 Dec: USD 1,130.55, GBP 916.20 & EUR 1,080.47 per ounce
21 Dec: USD 1,134.40, GBP 919.20 & EUR 1,091.07 per ounce
20 Dec: USD 1,132.75, GBP 915.94 & EUR 1,090.84 per ounce
19 Dec: USD 1,137.60, GBP 913.15 & EUR 1,089.14 per ounce
16 Dec: USD 1,134.85, GBP 911.17 & EUR 1,084.80 per ounce
15 Dec: USD 1,132.45, GBP 904.37 & EUR 1,080.70 per ounce
14 Dec: USD 1,160.95, GBP 917.38 & EUR 1,091.99 per ounceSilver Prices (LBMA)
22 Dec: USD 15.77, GBP 12.78 & EUR 15.10 per ounce
21 Dec: USD 16.03, GBP 12.96 & EUR 15.40 per ounce
20 Dec: USD 15.80, GBP 12.80 & EUR 15.22 per ounce
19 Dec: USD 16.00, GBP 12.89 & EUR 15.34 per ounce
16 Dec: USD 16.05, GBP 12.91 & EUR 15.36 per ounce
15 Dec: USD 16.14, GBP 12.95 & EUR 15.51 per ounce
14 Dec: USD 17.11, GBP 13.52 & EUR 16.07 per ounce
Recent Market Updates– China Gold and Precious Metals Summit 2016 – GoldCore Presentation
– Trumpenstein ! Who Created Him and Why?
– Bail-Ins Coming? World’s Oldest Bank “Survival Rests On Savers”
– Fed’s “Fool Me…”, Silver Suppression, Euro Contagion In 2017?
– Fed Raised Rates 0.25% – Rising Rates Positive For Gold
– Shariah Gold Standard Is “Revolutionary” – Mobius
– Silver Fixing By Banks Proven In Traders Chats
– Euro Crisis and Contagion Coming In 2017
– ECB ‘Bazooka’ Reloaded Until At Least December 2017 – Euro Gold Rises 1%; 13% YTD
– UK £6 Billion Worse Off After Multi Billion Pound Gold “Accounting Error”
– Buy Silver – May Replace Gold As Money In India
– Shariah Gold Standard Approved for $2 Trillion Islamic Finance Market
– Potential “Systemic Crisis In Eurozone” After Italy Votes No, Renzi Resigns - Ron Paul: "US Interferes In Foreign Elections All The Time"
When asked whether all the “Russian hacking” allegations were just a simple “political stunt” or whether a serious investigation needed to be conducted, Ron Paul offered up a startling bit of reality pointing out that America has a long history of interfering with elections and even invading countries “to have our guy in.” We suspect the following response was a bit more truth than Fox Business News expected.
“I think it is politics more than anything else. It’s really is nothing new. It’s like, guess what – somebody might have done A, B, C.”
“The very rarely, if ever, compare what we do with election around the world. We are interfering all the time.”
“I’m sure the Russians are interfering. But when you lose, you can jump on that and make a big point of it. But I don’t think it made any difference. I think it’s insignificant.”
“If you review the history of how many elections we’ve been involved with, how many countries we’ve invaded and how many people we’ve killed to have our guy in, I’ll tell you what – we don’t have very much room for condemning anybody else.”
“I think the spying and interference is sort of the nature of our governments. That’s why I’d like to see government much smaller.”
Here is the full interview:
- Save The Snowflakes
Our nation’s snowflakes are being cared for by colleges and universities across the country. These schools – no, HEROES – are financially supporting cry-ins, hot chocolate, bubbles, kittens, puppies and ponies, crayons, and Play-Doh to comfort these wounded snowflakes. Some schools even canceled exams and classes to ensure that America’s youth are treated with extra care and understanding during these difficult times.
But clearly, state funding – tax-payer dollars – are simply not enough.
State budgets cannot be expected to bear this burden alone. It’s going to take a far more sustainable funding source to ensure special snowflakes have the emotional support they need. In response, we here at the Media Research Center have launched the Save the Snowflakes project to respond to this emergency and bring crucial attention to this devastating human crisis.
The media may not choose to expose this atrocity, but the folks at Media Research Center, through their Save the Snowflakes initiative, is doing much more…
"We won’t rest until we save each and every special snowflake from the horrors of exposure to … things they simply do not agree with."
A testimonial will tug at your heart- and purse-strings…
- Tennessee Man Gets $75 Check To "Restart His Life" After Being Wrongfully Imprisoned For 31 Years
In October 1977, a Memphis, Tennessee woman was raped in her home by two intruders. The woman subsequently identified one of the perpetrators as her neighbor, 22 year old Lawrence McKinney. One year later, McKinney was convicted on rape and burglary charges and sentenced to 115 years in prison.
The only problem is that he didn’t do it. After spending 31 years in prison, DNA evidence cleared Mckinney of any wrongdoing in 2008 and he was later released in 2009 with a very “generous” check of $75 from the Tennessee Department of Corrections to help “restart his life.” To add insult to injury, McKinney told CNN that “because I had no ID it took me three months before I was able to cash it.”
Now, a 61-year-old McKinney is asking Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam to exonerate him, a move that would clear a path to pursue up to $1 million in compensation from the state Board of Claims for 3 decades of wrongful imprisonment. The Tennessee Board of Parole, which makes recommendations to the governor on such issues, denied McKinney’s request for exoneration by a 7-0 vote at a hearing in September saying they could not “find clear and convincing evidence of innocence.”
“The (parole) board reviewed all relevant information related to the crime, conviction and subsequent appeals, as well as all information provided by the petitioner,” said Melissa McDonald, spokesperson for the Tennessee Board of Parole. “After considering all of the evidence, the board did not find clear and convincing evidence of innocence and declined to recommend clemency in this matter.”
One of McKinney’s attorneys, Jack Lowery, believes the decision should rest solely with Haslam.
“The parole board is not qualified to make these decisions and should not,” he said. “For the parole board to step in when many (of them) are not trained in the law is ridiculous.”
Apparently the parole board based their decision, in part, on McKinney’s admission to the 1977 burglary charge, an admission his lawyer at the time told him he needed to make if he wanted any shot at an early parole.
According to John Hunn, McKinney’s pastor and most ardent supporter, the board cited a list of 97 infractions that McKinney incurred while he was in jail, including the alleged assault of a fellow inmate, who testified against McKinney at the hearing. McKinney told the board he’d been in prison for years, and that “only the strong survive,” Hunn said. Hunn testified at the hearing on McKinney’s behalf.
“Lawrence has told that story at our church,” Hunn said. “He doesn’t deny that story. He was in prison, man.”
The parole board also knew that 28 years into his sentence, McKinney admitted to the burglary charge he was convicted of. McKinney said his lawyers at the time told him that if he wanted any chance of being released early, he would need to admit to something.
Despite being forced to waste more than half his life behind bars, Mckinney says he’s not bitter and just wants to “be treated right and fair for what has happened to me.”
“Although I’ve spent more than half of my life locked up for a crime I did not do, I am not bitter or angry at anyone, because I have found the Lord and married a good wife,” McKinney said. “All I ask is that I be treated right and fair for what has happened to me. I didn’t do nothing, and I just want to be treated right.”
Perhaps the “commuter-in-chief” could take a little break from pardoning hardened drug dealers to help clear someone that seemingly actually deserves a break.
- Deutsche Bank Settles With DOJ: Will Pay $3.1 Billion Civil Penalty
With analyst expectations/hopes in the $2 to $5 billion range (against the initial $14 billion fine), Deutsche Bank said it has reached settlement with US authorities to pay a $3.1 billion civil penalty (and provide $4.1bn in relieef to consumers). Removing considerable uncertainty about Deutsche’s capital position, one wonders how much this remarkably low-ball settlement had to do with Donald Trump’s current loan re-negotiations with the “world’s most systemically dangerous bank.”
As a reminder, the Wall Street Journal noted that DB’s attorneys had privately suggested that a $2 – $3 billion settlement with the DOJ was probably in the ballpark. Meanwhile, wall street analysts had estimated settlements in the $2-$5 billion range. Any fines paid pursuant to current negotiations would be in addition to the $1.9 billion already paid in 2013 to settle other U.S. claims related to mortgage-backed securities.
Per the table below, as of June 30, DB had reserved a total of €5.5 billion for civil litigation and regulatory penalties on it’s balance sheet.
And so this lower than expected penalty has sent US equity futures higher…
As Bloomberg reports, Deutsche Bank said it has reached a $7.2 billion agreement to resolve a years-long U.S. investigation into its dealings in mortgage-backed securities, removing a major legal hurdle for the bank.
Deutsche Bank will pay a $3.1 billion civil penalty and provide $4.1 billion in relief to consumers under a settlement in principle with U.S. authorities, which was announced by the Frankfurt-based bank in a statement early Friday. The deal compares with the Justice Department’s opening request of $14 billion, which the firm has said it expected to whittle down.
While the agreement removes significant uncertainty hanging over Deutsche Bank, Germany’s biggest lender remains under Justice Department investigation in several other matters and also faces potentially expensive civil suits. Chief Executive Officer John Cryan has made resolving major litigation a priority as he seeks to restore confidence in the Frankfurt-based lender.
The Obama administration is pressing to wrap up investigations of Wall Street firms for creating and selling the subprime mortgage bonds that fueled the 2008 financial crisis. Authorities have already extracted more than $46 billion in fines from six U.S. financial institutions over their dealings in mortgage-backed securities. Bank of America Corp., which had the largest such settlement, agreed to pay $16.7 billion over bonds that were worth four times what Deutsche Bank’s bonds were worth.
While Obama’s legacy played its part, no doubt; we just can’t help but wonder how much the fact that, as Bloomberg reports, the bank is trying to restructure some of Trump’s roughly $300 million debt as part of an attempt to reduce any conflict of interest between the loan and his presidency, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Normally, the removal of a personal pledge might lead to more-stringent terms. But there is little normal about this interaction. Trump’s attorney general will inherit an investigation of Deutsche Bank related to stock trades for rich clients in Russia — where Trump says he plans to improve relations — and may have to deal with a possible multibillion-dollar penalty to the bank related to mortgage-bond investigations.
Whatever terms a restructured loan might include, they will reflect the complex new relationship spawned between Germany’s largest bank and its highest-profile client. Ethicists say this concerns them.
“When you have political appointees making decisions about banks that the president owes a lot of money to, it looks terrible,” said Richard Painter, a law professor at the University of Minnesota who was the chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush. “The U.S. government is dealing with regulatory and criminal issues with the big banks all the time, and if he owes them a lot of money, there might be an incentive to favor less regulation and less enforcement for the banks.”
Deutsche Bank declined to comment.
Even better news, Deutsche Bank expects to record a pretax charge of about $1.17b in 4Q.
So between Obama’s legacy and Trump’s loan mods, the department of Justice settled for 22c on the dollar of their original demand? That is around 10% of 2016’s revenues… “cost of doing business”?
Where did the number come from? That’s easy…
hmm…back in October Moody’s had $3.1B penciled in for DB as a bond-positive number. pic.twitter.com/ryawWXWSMn
— Carl Lantz (@CarlLantz) December 23, 2016
- Deep State Desperation
Submitted by Robert Gore via StraightLineLogic.com,
The pathetic attempts to undo Donald Trump’s victory are signs of desperation, not strength, in the Deep State.
The post World War II consensus held that the USSR’s long-term goal was world domination. That assessment solidified after the Soviets detonated an atomic bomb in 1949. A nuclear arms race, a space race, maintenance of a globe-spanning military, political, and economic confederation, and a huge expansion of the size and power of the military and intelligence complex were justified by the Soviet, and later, the Red Chinese threats. Countering those threats led the US to use many of the same amoral tactics that it deplored when used by its enemies: espionage, subversion, bribery, repression, assassination, regime change, and direct and proxy warfare.
Scorning principles of limited government, non-intervention in other nations’ affairs, and individual rights, the Deep State embraced the anti-freedom mindset of its purported enemies, not just towards those enemies, but toward allies and the American people. The Deep State gradually assumed control of the government and elected officials were expected to adhere to its policies and promote its propaganda. Only John F. Kennedy directly challenged it, firing CIA Director Allen Dulles after the Bay of Pigs disaster. He was assassinated, and whether or not CIA involvement is ever conclusively proven, the allegations have been useful to the agency, keeping politicians in line. The Deep State also co-opted the media, keeping it in line with a combination of fear and favor.
Since its ascension in the 1950s, the biggest threat to the Deep State has not been its many and manifest failures, but rather what the naive would regard as its biggest success: the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Much of the military-industrial complex was suddenly deprived of its reason for existence—the threat was gone. However, a more subtle point was lost.
The Soviet Union has been the largest of statism’s many failures to date. Because of the Deep State’s philosophical blinders, that outcome was generally unforeseen. The command and control philosophy at the heart of Soviet communism was merely a variant on the same philosophy espoused and practiced by the Deep State. Like the commissars, its members believe that “ordinary” people are unable to handle freedom, and that their generalized superiority entitles them to wield the coercive power of government.
With “irresponsible” elements talking of peace dividends and scaling back the military and the intelligence agencies, the complex was sorely in need of a new enemy. Islam suffers the same critical flaw as communism—command and control—and has numerous other deficiencies, including intolerance, repression, and the legal subjugation of half its adherents. The Deep State had to focus on the world conquest ideology of some Muslims to even conjure Islam as a plausible foe. However, unlike the USSR, they couldn’t claim that sect and faction-ridden Islam posed a monolithic threat, that the Islamic nations were an empire or a federation united towards a common goal, or that their armaments (there are under thirty nuclear weapons in the one Islamic nation, Pakistan, that has them) could destroy the US or the entire planet.
There was too much money and power at stake for the complex to shrink. While on paper Islam appeared far weaker than communism, the complex had one factor in their favor: terrorism is terrifying. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, Americans surrendered liberties and gave the Deep State carte blanche to fight a war on terrorism that would span the globe, target all those whom the government identified as terrorists, and never be conclusively won or lost. Funding for the complex ballooned, the military was deployed on multiple fronts, and the surveillance state blossomed. Most of those who might have objected were bought off with expanded welfare state funding and programs (e.g. George W. Bush’s prescription drug benefit, Obamacare).
What would prove to be the biggest challenge to the centralization and the power of the Deep State came, unheralded, with the invention of the microchip in the late 1950s. The Deep State could not have exercised the power it has without a powerful grip on information flow and popular perception. The microchip led to widespread distribution of cheap computing power and dissemination of information over the decentralized Internet. This dynamic, organically adaptive decentralization has been the antithesis of the command-and-control Deep State, which now realizes the gravity of the threat. Fortunately, countering these technologies has been like trying to eradicate hordes of locusts.
The gravest threat, however, to the Deep State is self-imposed: it’s own incompetence. Even the technologically illiterate can ask questions for which it has no answers. Why has the US been involved in long, costly, bloody, and inconclusive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Why should the US get involved in similar conflicts in Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Iran, and other Middle Eastern and Northern African hotspots? Isn’t such involvement responsible for blowback terrorism and refugee flows in both Europe and the US? Have “free trade” agreements and porous borders been a net benefit or detriment to the US? Why is the banking industry set up for periodic crises that inevitably require government bail-outs? (SLL claims no special insight into the nexus between the banking-financial sector and the Deep State, other than to note that there is one.) Why does every debt crisis result in more debt? How has encouraging debt and speculation at the expense of savings and investment helped the US economy? The Deep State can’t answer or even acknowledge these questions because they all touch on its failures.
Brexit, Donald Trump, other populist, nationalist movements catching fire, and the rise of the alternative media are wrecking balls aimed at an already structurally unsound and teetering building that would eventually collapse on its own. The shenanigans in the US after Trump’s election—violent protests, hysterical outbursts, the vote recount effort, the proof-free Russian hacking allegations, “fake news,” and the attempt to sway electoral college electors—are the desperate screams of those trapped inside.
Regrettably, the building analogy is imperfect, because it implies that those inside are helpless and that the collapse will only harm them. In its desperation, incompetence, and corrupt nihilism, the Deep State can wreak all sorts of havoc, up to and including the destruction of humanity. Trump represents an opportunity to strike a blow against the Deep State, but the chances it will be lethal are minimal and the dangers obvious.
The euphoria over his victory cannot obscure a potential consequence: it may hasten and amplify the destruction and resultant chaos when the Deep State finally topples. Anyone who thinks Trump’s victory sounds an all clear is allowing hope to triumph over experience and what should have been hard-won wisdom.
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...