Apr 02

Today’s News 2nd April 2017

  • Obamacare Implosion Now? Since Obama Siphoned GSE Dividends To Prop Up, Can Trump Simply Halt 1st Qtr Sweep?

    Earlier this month, Harvard Ph.D. Jerome Corsi of InfoWars (@jerome_corsi) and a CPA “who worked for two years for a major U.S. accounting firm as an outside auditor for Freddie Mac,” confirmed a 2012 scheme hatched by the Obama administration to funnel hundreds of billions in dividends from Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to prop up the failing Obamacare program – by paying subsidies to insurers to remain in the system.

    If you need to catch up on it, read the InfoWars article above or watch this 18 minute video:

      

    The conclusion reached by Corsi and others is that this was probably illegal.

    In fact, House Republicans actually sued the Obama Administration in 2014 over the fact that the subsidies to insurers weren’t appropriated by congress and won, which the Obama administration appealed. As Zerohedge and the Atlanta Journal Constitution pointed out last week, the Trump administration has until May 22nd to decide whether or not to pursue the appeal:

    In 2014, House Republicans sued the Obama administration over the constitutionality of the cost-sharing reduction payments, which had not been appropriated by Congress. The lawmakers won the lawsuit, and the Obama administration appealed it. Late last year, with a new administration on the other end of the suit, the House sought to pause the proceedings — with a deadline for a status update in late May. –AJC

    And a ZeroHedge analysis:

    Of course, any decision to remove those subsidies would likely result in yet another massive round of premium hikes and further withdrawals from the already crippled exchanges where an astounding number of counties across the country have already been cut to just 1 health insurance provider.  And, as we’ve pointed out before, higher rates = lower participation = deterioration of risk pool = higher rates….and the cycle just repeats until it eventually collapses. –ZeroHedge

    Meanwhile, President Trump has made several Tweets since the Ryancare debacle in congress:

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    But wait, could it happen even sooner? Former Blackrock portfolio manager Ed Dowd may be on to something…

    Simple question: what if Trump’s Treasury simply stopped the illegal dividend sweep NOW? It is the end of the 1st quarter, after all…

    Not only would it force the MSM to cover Obama’s 2012 scheme to siphon funds from Fannie and Freddie, the stage would be set for far more sensible healthcare solutions from lawmakers who aren’t simply shilling for the industry.


    Content originally generated at     iBankCoin.com * Follow on Twitter @ZeroPointNow

  • Connecticut Set To Become First State To Allow Deadly Police Drones

    Connecticut could become the first US state to allow police to use drones equipped with deadly weapons if a bill opposed by civil libertarians becomes law. The bill, which was approved overwhelmingly by the state legislature’s judiciary committee on Wednesday, would ban so-called weaponized drones in the state but exempts police and other agencies involved in law enforcement, the AP reported. The legislation was introduced as a complete ban on weaponized drones but just before the committee vote it was amended to exclude police from the restriction. Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, was reviewing the proposal, “however in previous years he has not supported this concept,” spokesman Chris Collibee wrote in an email.

    “Obviously this is for very limited circumstances,” said Republican state Sen. John Kissel, of Enfield, co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee that approved the measure Wednesday and sent it to the House of Representatives. “We can certainly envision some incident on some campus or someplace where someone is a rogue shooter or someone was kidnapped and you try to blow out a tire.”

    The bill now goes to the House of Representatives for consideration. Details on how law enforcement could use drones with weapons would be spelled out in new rules to be developed by the state Police Officer Standards and Training Council. Officers also would have to receive training before being allowed to use drones with weapons.

    North Dakota is the only state that allows police to use weaponized drones, but limits the use to “less lethal” weapons, including stun guns, rubber bullets and tear gas.

    Currently five states – Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont and Wisconsin – prohibit anyone from using a weaponized drone, while Maine and Virginia ban police from using armed drones, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Several other states have restricted drone use in general. So far, 36 states have enacted laws restricting drones and an additional four states have adopted drone limits, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

    Meanwhile, concerns are growing about potential unchecked police brutality and death raining from the robotic skies: civil libertarians and civil rights activists are lobbying to restore the bill to its original language before the full House vote Reuters adds.

    “Data shows police force is disproportionately used on minority communities, and we believe that armed drones would be used in urban centers and on minority communities,” said David McGuire, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Connecticut. “We would be setting a dangerous precedent,” McGuire added. “It is really concerning and outrageous that that’s being considered in our state legislature. Lethal force raises this to a level of real heightened concern.”

    “That’s not the kind of precedent we want to set here,” McGuire said of the prospect that Connecticut would become the first state to allow police to use lethally armed drones.

    Others echoed McGuire’s concerns: “We have huge concerns that they would use this new technology to abuse our communities,” said Scot X. Esdaile, president of state chapter of the NAACP. Esdaile said he has received calls from around the country from NAACP officials and others concerned about the Connecticut legislation.

    Three police departments in the state – Hartford, Plainfield and Woodbury – began using drones within the past year, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut.

    For now, however, the proposal is unlikely to unleash scenes out of some Robocop spinoff: The bill includes restrictions on drone use and reporting requirements that are supported by the ACLU.

    It would require police to get a warrant before using a drone, unless there are emergency circumstances or the person who is the subject of the drone use gives permission. It also would require police to report yearly on how often they use drones and why, and create new crimes and penalties for criminal use of drones, including voyeurism.

    Furthermore, final passage is not assured: although the bill overwhelmingly passed the Judiciary Committee, several members said they just wanted to see the proposal get to the House floor for debate. They said they had concerns about police using deadly force with drones. If Connecticut’s Democratic-controlled House passes the bill it will move to the Senate, which is split evenly between Democrats and Republicans.

    “I think that police are taught one thing,” said Democratic Bridgeport Sen. Edwin Gomes. “You put a weapon in their hand, they shoot center mass, they shoot to kill. If it’s going to be used, you’re going to use it to kill somebody.”

    Finally, for those wondering how a drone could possibly shoot, the following video of a drone shooting a gun – appropriately enough in Connecticut – should answer that question.

  • Does Size Matter? Visualizing The Population Of Every Country (In Bubbles)

    The beautiful thing about data visualization is that it can appear deceptively simple, writes VisualCapitalist's Jeff Desjardin. The world is infinitely complex and burgeoning with all kinds of information. As a result, it seems counterintuitive that things can be reduced to a basic bubble chart or a graph – and to be fair, most things can’t. When the opportunity does arise, however, the results can be very compelling and thought-provoking. A distilled story can help create insight around a subject that wasn’t possible when looking at it with more nuance and complexity.

    THE POPULATION OF EVERY COUNTRY IN BUBBLES

    Today’s visualization comes from Datashown, and it helps to give some perspective on world population.

    It’s a deceptively simple visualization, but the story that gets distilled is loud and clear:

    The beauty lies in the simplicity – and although all countries are represented, only the labels of the biggest are shown.

    If you want to dive into the granular data, here is an interactive version of the same diagram, with all countries and population statistics embedded.

    ZOOMING IN ON THE UNITED STATES

    On the above bubble chart, envision “zooming in” on the circle representing the United States, which is located just below China and India.

    Here’s the population of every U.S. county. Click the image for an interactive version, from Overflow Data.

     

    Feeling small yet?

    Just for fun – here’s a video that notches it up to a more universal level:

     

  • "If True, Does Not Get Much Bigger" Trump Tweets About "Very Well Known" Intel Official Behind Trump "Unmasking"

    After slamming NBC’s coverage of the “Fake Trump/Russia story”, congratulating the NYTimes for “finally getting it” on Obamacare, Trump on Saturday commented on the previously discussed Fox News story about a “very senior, very well known” U.S. intelligence official who was allegedly involved in unmasking the names of Trump associates, and who had reprotedly surveilled Trump before the nomination.

    “Wow, @FoxNews just reporting big news. Source: ‘Official behind unmasking is high up. Known Intel official is responsible. Some unmasked not associated with Russia. Trump team spied on before he was nominated. If this is true, does not get much bigger. Would be sad for U.S.,” he added.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As discussed Friday night, A Fox News source (unnamed, because these days that’s all there is, just ask the NYT and Wapo) said that the U.S. official behind the systematic unmasking of Trump associates and private individuals was “very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world” and was doing so for political, not nationa security reasons, intent on “hurting and embarrassing Trump and his team.” In other words, another intel agency war between the old, pro-Hillary Clinton, guard and the new administration.

    Additionally, the Friday Fox News report cited “a number of sources” with claims that not only were the two White House officials not the sources of the information shared with Nunes, but that Nunes knew of the information in January, and that the agencies where the information came from had blocked Nunes from gaining access to it. Further, the report cited officials within the agencies who said they were frustrated with the spreading of names for political purposes.

    “Our sources, who have direct knowledge of what took place, were upset because those two individuals, they say, had nothing to do with the outing of this information,” Fox reported.

    “We’ve learned that the surveillance that led to the unmasking of what started way before President Trump was even the GOP nominee,” Fox News reported Adam Housley said. “The person who did the unmasking, I’m told, is very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world and is not in the FBI.”

    “This led to other surveillance which led to multiple names being unmasked. Again these are private citizens in the United States,” said Housley. “This had nothing to do with Russia, I’m told, or foreign intelligence of any kind.”

    “Fox also learned that an individual with direct knowledge that after Nunes had been approached by his source, the agencies basically would not allow him in at all,” said Housley.

    Understandably, the Fox News report has gotten zero media attention on any other news outlet.

    For those who missed the original report from Friday night, it is reproduced below.

    * * *

    Intel Official Behind “Unmasking” Of Trump Associates Is “Very Senior, Very Well Known”

    Day after day, various media outlets, well really mostly the NYT and WaPo, have delivered Trump-administration-incriminating, Russia-link-related tape bombs sourced via leaks (in the hope of keeping the narrative alive and “resisting.”). It now turns out, according to FXN report, that the US official who “unmasked” the names of multiple private citizens affiliated with the Trump team is someone “very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world.”

    As Malia Zimmerman and Adam Housley report, intelligence and House sources with direct knowledge of the disclosure of classified names (yes, yet another “unnamed source”) said that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, now knows who is responsible – and that person is not in the FBI (i.e. it is not James Comey)

    Housley said his sources were motivated to come forward by a New York Times report yesterday which reportedly outed two people who helped Nunes access information during a meeting in the Old Executive Office Building. However, Housley’s sources claim the two people who helped Nunes “navigate” to the information were not his sources. In fact, Nunes had been aware of the information since January (long before Trump’s ‘wiretap’ tweet) but had been unable to view the documents themselves because of “stonewalling” by the agencies in question.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     

    For a private citizen to be “unmasked,” or named, in an intelligence report is extremely rare. Typically, the American is a suspect in a crime, is in danger or has to be named to explain the context of the report.

    “The main issue in this case, is not only the unmasking of these names of private citizens, but the spreading of these names for political purposes that have nothing to do with national security or an investigation into Russia’s interference in the U.S. election,” a congressional source close to the investigation told Fox News.

    The White House, meanwhile, is urging Nunes and his colleagues to keep pursuing what improper surveillance and leaks may have occurred before Trump took office. They’ve been emboldened in the wake of March 2 comments from former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas, who on MSNBC suggested her former colleagues tried to gather material on Trump team contacts with Russia.

    White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Friday her comments and other reports raise “serious” concerns about whether there was an “organized and widespread effort by the Obama administration to use and leak highly sensitive intelligence information for political purposes.”

    “Dr. Farkas’ admissions alone are devastating,” he said.

    Clearly this confirms what Evelyn Farakas said, accidentally implicated the Obama White House in the surveillance of Trump’s campaign staff:

    The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we would not longer have access to that intelligence.

    Furthermore, Farkas effectively corroborated a New York Times article from early March which cited “Former American officials” as their anonymous source regarding efforts to leak this surveillance on the Trump team to Democrats across Washington DC.

    * * *

    In addition, citizens affiliated with Trump’s team who were unmasked were not associated with any intelligence about Russia or other foreign intelligence, sources confirmed. The initial unmasking led to other surveillance, which led to other private citizens being wrongly unmasked, sources said.

    “Unmasking is not unprecedented, but unmasking for political purposes … specifically of Trump transition team members … is highly suspect and questionable,” according to an intelligence source. “Opposition by some in the intelligence agencies who were very connected to the Obama and Clinton teams was strong. After Trump was elected, they decided they were going to ruin his presidency by picking them off one by one.”

    * * *

    So if the source isn’t Comey, has anyone seen Jim Clapper recently? The answer should emerge soon, meanwhile the ridiculous game with very high stakes of spy vs spy, or in this case source vs source, continues.

    The report summarized below in video format:

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5380606763001&w=500&h=281

    Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

  • WARNING: U.S. Ponzi Retirement Market In Big Trouble As Withdrawals Now Exceed Contributions

    srsrocco

    By the SRSrocco Report,

    The U.S. Retirement Market is in BIG TROUBLE as annual benefits paid out are now larger than total contributions.  Actually, the amount of net withdrawals were the highest in history.  When payouts become larger than contributions… then we have the making of the typical PONZI SCHEME.

    Americans who have invested their hard-earned money into a 401K, had no idea that it was the Greatest Ponzi Scheme in history.  Unfortunately, when the markets crack, so will the value of the U.S. Retirement market.  On the other hand, Americans who were wise enough to purchase physical precious metals will protect their wealth as the U.S. Paper Retirement Market collapses.

    According to the most recent data by the ICI – Investment Company Institute, the U.S. Retirement Market ballooned to a new record high of $25.3 trillion at the end of 2016:

    US Retirmen Market

    As we can see, the U.S. Retirement Market has nearly doubled since the collapse of the Housing & Banking sectors in 2008.  Total value of the U.S. Retirement Market increased from a low of $13.9 trillion in 2008 to $25.3 trillion at the end of 2016.  It’s not quite double… but close enough.

    Furthermore, the surge in U.S. Retirement assets from $19.7 trillion in 2012 to $22.6 trillion in 2013 was due to the Federal Reserve QE 3 policy (Quantitative Easing #3).  This was the year that the monetary stimulus was funneled into the Stock, Bond and Real Estate Market and away from the precious metals.  Thus, the precious metals suffered huge price declines in 2013.

    As Americans continue to contribute into their “supposed” retirement plans, few realize that more funds are now heading out than going in.  This is not a good sign at all.  If we look at the most recent data from the Investment Company Institute, Americans contributed a total of $373.6 billion into their Private Sector DC Plans in 2014 versus total benefits paid out of $402.3 billion.  Which means, net contributions were a negative $28.7 billion… the highest on record:

    U.S. Retirement Market Contributions vs Withdrawals

    The grey bars represent total contributions while the red line shows total benefits paid.  The net result is shown in the GREEN & RED bars at the lower part of the chart.  Green bars are positive net contributions, while the red bars are net withdrawals.  Unfortunately, the Investment Company Institute does not provide data for 2015 or 2016 yet.  It will be interesting to see if these net withdrawals continue to increase.  My gut tells me that they most likely have.

    NOTE: The majority of the Private-Sector DC Plans were 401k’s, which accounted for roughly 98% of total contributions and 91% of total benefits paid.

    So, why is the U.S. Retirement Market is BIG TROUBLE?  Well, if we look at the next chart, we find our answer:

    US Retirement Market vs Public Debt

    The chart shows that the U.S. Retirement Market has increased right along with surge in total U.S. public debt.  Thus, the U.S. Retirement Market’s value is being propped up by debt.   As the U.S. debt exploded from $875 billion in 1980 to $20 trillion currently, the U.S. Retirement Market surged from $822 billion to $25.3 trillion during the same time period.  We must remember the following:

    DEBT IS NOT AN ASSET.  Also, the true value is subtracting total debt from total assets

    Thus, if we just applied simple math here, the U.S. Retirement market’s net value is approximately $5 trillion… 80% less than what it is currently.  And that $5 trillion figure is likely inflated.  I do realize I am making a very general calculation here, but DEBTS are not ASSETS.

    I discussed this in my recent interview on the Hagmann Report, which I highly recommend watching if you haven’t already:

    The reason the U.S. Retirement Market is a huge Ponzi Scheme is that it has stored “Digital IOU’s” rather than real physical wealth.  A typical stock price is based on “Net Present Value.”  They take the future value of the company’s earnings and give it a price today.  Unfortunately, companies earnings are based on the burning energy in the future.   There lies the rub.

    Back during the 1930’s, most stock prices were based on the BOOK VALUE.  Basically, what the value of the company was worth if all its assets were sold.  Today, a stock price is based on EARNINGS.  Earnings can and will implode when the markets crack due to massive debt and falling oil production.

    However, the few Americans who were wise enough to purchase physical precious metals rather than put their money into the Greatest Ponzi Scheme in history, will be protect wealth while most paper assets disintegrate.

    $100,000 Physical Gold Investment vs $100,000 Invested in 401K

    If an American decided to purchase $100,000 in physical gold over the past 30 years, they would have a true physical asset that they can sell close to that $100,000 figure.  If an American had $100,000 in their 401K, they would have to pay a 10% penalty for early withdrawal.  While a 401K withdrawal is taxed as regular income compared to physical gold taxed at a maximum of 28% capital gains, at least you can hold onto nearly three-quarters of your wealth (likely much higher percentage).

    That being said, once the market crash occurs, the value of most American’s retirement assets are going to implode.  I would not be surprised to see at least 50-75% collapse (or more) in the typical U.S. Retirement Account.  Thus, the $100,000 invested in a 401K could fall to a low of $25,000, while $100,000 invested in physical gold, could easily double to $200,000.

    Actually, this is the likely outcome.  Mark my words.  A typical American who has invested $100,000 into a typical 401K will find that his or her retirement account will fall to one-tenth its value versus someone who purchased physical gold instead.  The coming collapse of the U.S. and Global Oil Industries, due to lower oil prices, will be the factor that destroys the U.S. Retirement Ponzi Scheme.  It is not a matter of IF, it is a matter of WHEN.

    Please continue to check back at the SRSrocco Report as I will be providing updates on the continued disintegration of the U.S. and Global Oil Industry.  Paying attention to what is taking place in the Energy Industry will provide CLUES to the timing of the Market Collapse.

    Lastly, if you haven’t checked out our new PRECIOUS METALS INVESTING section or our new LOWEST COST PRECIOUS METALS STORAGE page, I highly recommend you do.

    Check back for new articles and updates at the SRSrocco Report.

  • Stockman Warns "'Stimulus-Blinded' Mules Don't See What's Coming At All"

    Authored by David Stockman via Bonner & Partners,

    Reagan’s top economic adviser David Stockman explains why Trump’s tax cuts… and his stimulus plan… are dead on arrival.

    The mules of Wall Street were back at it again, buying the dips after the overnight whoosh downward in the futures market. Apparently, it will take an actual two-by-four between the eyes to break a habit that has been working for 96 months now since the March 2009 post-crisis bottom.

    We think it is plain as day, however, that we are in a new ball game that the "stimulus-blinded” mules don’t see coming at all. To wit, they have been juiced for eight years running by the Keynesian apparatchiks at the Fed who needed permission from exactly no one to run the printing presses full tilt or to rescue the market with a new round of QE or an extension of ZIRP whenever the indices began to wobble.

    But now, even the money printers have made it clear in no uncertain terms that they are done for this cycle, anyway, and that they will be belatedly but consistently raising interest rates for what ought to be a truly scary reason.

    That is, the denizens of the Eccles Building have finally realized that they have not outlawed the business cycle after all and need to raise rates toward 2-3% so that they have headroom to "cut" the next time the economy slides into the ditch.

    In effect, the Fed is saying to Wall Street: "Price in" a recession because we are!

    After all, our monetary central planners are not reluctantly allowing interest rates to lift off the zero bound because they have become converts to the cause of honest price discovery—-nor are they fixing to liberate money rates, debt yields, and the prices of stocks and other financial assets to clear on the free market.

    Instead, they are merely storing up monetary ammo for the next downturn.

    But the Wall Street mules keep buying the dips anyway because they are under the preposterous delusion that one source of "stimulus" is just as good as the next.

    And since the gamblers have now decreed that the "stimulus" baton be handed off to fiscal policy, it only remains for Congress and the White House to shape up and get the job done with all deliberate speed.

    But they won’t.

    Not in a million years.

    The massive Trump tax cut and infrastructure stimulus is DOA because Uncle Sam is broke and the U.S. economy has slithered into moribund old age.

    In that context, it’s not remotely the same as the 12  members of the FOMC sitting behind closed doors for two days jawing about the short-term economic weather; and then at the conclusion of their gabfest, ordering the New York Fed’s open market desk to flood the canyons of Wall Street with cash by buying another $80 billion of bonds with digital credits conjured from thin air.

    Au contraire. Fiscal policy is inherently an exercise in herding cats and an especially impossible one when the cupboards are bare.

    The essence of the matter at the present state of play is the legislative equivalent of "no ticky, no washy."

    Without a 10-year budget resolution for FY [fiscal year] 2018 and associated reconciliation instructions, there is no possibility of passing a tax bill or even an infrastructure spending boondoggle.

    But hammering out a budget resolution, passing it in each house, and reconciling the differences in conference would take months under the best of circumstances. But given the parlous state of Uncle Sam’s fiscal condition and the partisan acrimony that already suffuses Washington in the era of Trump, passage of a budget resolution by summer would be a miracle in itself.

    Indeed, even the thought of surmounting this next daunting legislative obstacle course puts to rest this week’s particular Wall Street fantasy. Namely that after being burned by the Freedom Caucus on Obamacare Lite, the Trump White House will now "pivot" to the middle and form a coalition with the Democrats to make a deal on corporate tax cuts and infrastructure spending.

    Yes, and if dogs could whistle, the world would be a chorus.

    That is to say, there is no conceivable fiscal policy menu that could be agreed upon by Speaker Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and the Donald, and then be shoe-horned into a 10-year budget resolution.

    Yet without a budget resolution and reconciliation instructions, there is not a fiscal stimulus "ticky" and no grand bipartisan compromise on building airports and slashing corporate tax rates.

    So what lies directly ahead, therefore, is another bumbling attempt by the White House and Congressional Republicans to hammer out an FY 2018 budget resolution and what amounts to a 10-year fiscal plan. And it is there where the whole fantasy of the Trump Stimulus comes a cropper.

    There are not remotely 218 GOP votes for what would be a $12 trillion-13 trillion add to the national debt with the Trump Stimulus program over the next decade—-even with all the "dynamic" scoring and revenue "reflows" that are imaginable.

    To be sure, this is why the GOP Congressional leadership stoutly insists on a deficit-neutral tax cut. They are keenly aware of the debt monster they have been kicking down the road—-even if the headline-reading robo-traders of Wall Street are not.

    What that means, in turn, of course, is that the rapidly fracturing Trump/Republican coalition must find the offsets on the spending side of the ledger.

    In short, the whole enterprise amounts to budgetary madness and demonstrates the monumental magnitude of the Debt Trap that has enveloped the Imperial City.

    And the “buy the dip” crowd will soon be getting that two-by-four between the eyes.

    So now is not the time to buy.

  • Blaming Russia For Everything

    Authored by Robert Parry via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    It’s almost getting comical how everything that happens in the United States gets blamed on Russia! Russia! Russia! And, if any American points out the absurdity of this argument, he or she must be a “Moscow stooge” or a “Putin puppet.”

    The FX series, “The Americans,” a spy thriller about two deep-cover Soviet spies in the 1980s

    When Sen. Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign fails seemingly because he was a wet-behind-the-ears candidate who performed like a robot during debates repeating the same talking points over and over, you might have cited those shortcomings to explain why “Little Marco” flamed out. However, if you did, that would make you a Russian “useful idiot”! The “real” reason for his failure, as we learned from Thursday’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, was Russia!

    When Americans turned against President Obama’s Pacific trade deals, you might have thought that it was because people across the country had grown sick and tired of these neoliberal agreements that have left large swaths of the country deindustrialized and former blue-collar workers turning to opioids and alcohol. But if you did think that, that would mean you are a dupe of the clever Russkies, as ex-British spy Christopher Steele made clear in one of his “oppo” research reports against Donald Trump. As Steele’s dossier explained, the rejection of Obama’s TPP and TTIP trade deals resulted from Russian propaganda!

    When Hillary Clinton boots a presidential election that was literally hers to lose, you might have thought that she lost because she insisted on channeling her State Department emails through a private server that endangered national security; that she gave paid speeches to Wall Street and tried to hide the contents from the voters; that she called half of Donald Trump’s supporters “deplorables”; that she was a widely disliked establishment candidate in an anti-establishment year; that she was shoved down the throats of progressive Democrats by a Democratic Party hierarchy that made her nomination “inevitable” via the undemocratic use of unelected “super-delegates”; that some of her State Department emails were found on the laptop of suspected sex offender Anthony Weiner (the husband of Clinton’s close aide Huma Abedin); and that the laptop discovery caused FBI Director James Comey to briefly reopen the investigation of Clinton’s private email server in the last days of the campaign.

    You might even recall that Clinton herself blamed her late collapse in the polls on Comey’s announcement, as did other liberal luminaries such as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. But if you thought those thoughts or remembered those memories, that is just more proof that you are a “Russian mole”!

    As we all should know in our properly restructured memory banks and our rearranged sense of reality, it was all Russia’s fault! Russia did it by undermining our democratic process through the clever means of releasing truthful information via WikiLeaks that provided evidence of how the Democratic National Committee rigged the nomination process against Sen. Bernie Sanders, revealed the contents of Clinton’s hidden Wall Street speeches, and exposed pay-to-play features of the Clinton Foundation in its dealings with foreign entities.

    Boris and Natasha, the evil spies from the Rocky and Bullwinkle shows

    You see the evil Russians undermined American democracy by arming the American people with truthful information! How dastardly is that! Could Boris and Natasha do any better or worse? And although the Soviet spies in FX’s “The Americans” were in their prime in the 1980s and would be pretty old by now, do we know where they are in the present day? Though WikiLeaks denies getting the two batches of emails – the DNC’s and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s – from the Russians, have we ruled out that the emails might have been slipped to WikiLeaks by the FX characters Philip and Elizabeth Jennings, presumably in disguise?

    Oddly, too, when similar factual revelations come from Western-favored leaks, such as the purloined financial records of a Panamanian law firm known as the “Panama Papers,” we hail the disclosures regardless of the dubious methods that were used to steal them, especially if the contents can be spun to undermine disfavored governments like Russia (while also inconveniently embarrassing a few unimportant “’allies”).

    But if you make that comparison or you note how the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. government-funded National Endowment for Democracy have supported various “independent” journalists and news outlets to advance U.S. propaganda, that makes you guilty of “moral equivalence,” another serious offense.

    Crazy Talk

    So now that you know how the game is played, you had the Senate Intelligence Committee eliciting testimony from people like media watcher Clint Watts, who seems to believe that any criticism of a U.S. government official (at least anyone he likes) must be directed by Russia!

    Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin

    “This past week we observed social media accounts discrediting U.S. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan,” said Watts, who is billed in The Washington Post as “an expert in terrorism forecasting and Russian influence operations.”

    Gee, I know you might say that you went on Facebook last week to criticize Ryan for bungling the “repeal and replace” of Obamacare by proposing a scheme that managed to alienate both right-wing and moderate Republicans as well as all Democrats. But that only proves you are indeed a Russian disinformation agent! (Watts also claimed that Sen. Rubio’s presidential bid “anecdotally suffered” from an online Russian campaign against him.)

    As Watts describes these nefarious Russian schemes, they are so nefarious that they don’t have any discernible earmarks or detectable predictability. In his view, the Russians don’t want to help any particular person or group, just undermine America’s faith in its democracy.

    As Watts puts it, Russians attack “people on both sides of the aisle … solely based on what they [the Russians] want to achieve in their own landscape, whatever the Russian foreign policy objectives are. They win because they play both sides.” In other words, any political comment that an American might make might just prove that you’re a traitor.

    But Watts singled out President Trump for special criticism because he supposedly has tweeted about Russian-planted conspiracy theories. “Part of the reason active measures have worked in this U.S. election is because the commander-in-chief has used Russian active measure at times against his opponent,” Watts said, citing Trump’s bogus claims about 2016 voter fraud and his earlier silliness about President Obama’s Kenyan birthplace. Yes, as we all know, every goofy idea is manufactured in Russia. Americans are incapable of developing their own nonsense.

    Watts then suggested that some kind of Ministry of Truth is needed to stamp out unapproved information. “Until we get a firm basis on fact and fiction in our own country, … we’re going to have a big problem,” Watts said. He warned of a dangerous future from Russian information: “Somewhere in their cache right now there’s tremendous amounts of information laying around they can weaponize against other Americans.”

    Perhaps what is even more frightening than the Russians letting Americans in on how Washington’s political process really works – by somehow slipping WikiLeaks some evidence of Democratic Party bigwigs tilting the Democratic primaries to ensure Clinton’s nomination and revealing what Clinton told those Wall Street bankers – is the idea that the U.S. government should be enlisted to enforce what Americans get to see and hear.

    The PropOrNot Smear

    Watts and his alarums showed up in another context in the weeks after the 2016 election when The Washington Post ran a front-page story highlighting the claims by an anonymous group, PropOrNot, which was pushing a blacklist of 200 Internet news sites, including such independent sources of information as Counterpunch, Truthdig, Naked Capitalism, Zero Hedge, Truth-out and Consortiumnews.

    The Washington Post building in downtown Washington, D.C. (Photo credit: Washington Post)

    Though the Post granted PropOrNot anonymity so it could safely slander independent-minded journalists, the Post turned to Watts to bolster PropOrNot’s case. “They [the Russians] want to essentially erode faith in the U.S. government or U.S. government interests,” Watts said. “This was their standard mode during the Cold War. The problem is that this was hard to do before social media.”

    The Post then linked to an article that Watts had co-authored entitled, “Trolling for Trump: How Russia Is Trying to Destroy Our Democracy.” which, in turn, cited as proof RT articles that mentioned Hillary Clinton’s health problem last September (which was later acknowledged to be a bout with pneumonia) and that discussed the vulnerabilities of the Federal Reserve (in an age of escalating public and private debt). Both might seem to you like reasonable topics for journalists, but you must understand that RT – because it is Russian-sponsored – has become the favorite whipping boy of anyone trying to make the case that America is besieged by Russian propaganda. And don’t you dare mention that almost no one in America actually watches RT or you might end up on PropOrNot’s list, too.

    Watts and his cohorts continue: “Social issues currently provide a useful window for Russian messaging. Police brutality, racial tensions, protests, anti-government standoffs, online privacy concerns, and alleged government misconduct are all emphasized to magnify their scale and leveraged to undermine the fabric of society.”

    And, we know for sure that you’re a Russian agent if you express any concern that the heightened tensions between the U.S. and Russia might lead to nuclear war. As Watts and friends write, “More recently, Moscow turned to stoking fears of nuclear war between the United States and Russia” – and their “proof” was a link not to RT but to the financial Web site, Zero Hedge, which already had made it onto PropOrNot’s black list.

    So, let’s see if we got this right: We are not to worry our pretty little heads about nuclear war or a future financial meltdown or police brutality toward racial minorities or race relations in general or armed right-wing clashes with authorities or spying on our Internet use or any government wrongdoing at all or even citizen protests against that wrongdoing. Because if we debate such issues – if we even read about such issues – we are playing into Vladimir Putin’s evil plans.

    What Democracy?

    Which makes me wonder what kind of “democracy” these brave “defenders of democracy” have in mind. The New York Times, The Washington Post and some establishment-approved Internet sites already have begun work on establishing standards for what information the American people will be allowed to see and hear – with disapproved sources of news marginalized by Internet search engines or prevented from earning any money by exclusion from Google and other ad programs.

    U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell presents a dummy vial of anthrax on Feb. 5, 2003, during a speech to the UN Security Council outlining the American case that Iraq possessed forbidden stockpiles of WMD

    Presumably, the 200 or so Web sites on PropOrNot’s black list would be the first cut for the new Ministry of Truth since many of them have published articles that raised questions about the accuracy of claims made by the U.S. State Department or they have expressed the belief that there may be two sides to complex issues – when Americans are supposed to hear only the side that Official Washington wants them to hear.

    Some of these “Russian propaganda” Web sites – prior to the Iraq War – even raised doubts about the U.S. government’s certainty that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of WMDs. Thank goodness the Internet wasn’t as widely used back then or perhaps many Americans would have doubted the truth-telling by The New York Times and The Washington Post, which dutifully passed on the U.S. government’s pronouncements about Hussein’s secret WMDs.

    Surely, in 2002-03, the Russians must have been behind the resistance by those few Web sites to the WMD group think that all the respectable people just knew to be true. How else can you explain the skepticism? And maybe Russia was responsible for the U.S. government’s failure to find any of those WMD stockpiles. Curse you, Russia!

    With the Senate Intelligence Committee’s hearing on Thursday, this determination to squelch any dissenting American views as “Russian disinformation” moved up a notch, beyond some think-tank chatter, some newspaper articles or some initial planning for private-sector censorship.

    The craziness has now become the focus of an official Senate investigation into Russian “meddling” in American political life. We have taken another step down the path of a New Cold War that blends a New McCarthyism with a New Orwellianism.

  • Australia Has The World's Worst Money-Laundering Property Market

    Authored by Leith van Onselen via MacroBusiness.com.au,

    Transparency International has released a new report, entitled Doors Wide Open: Corruption and Real Estate in Four Key Markets, which has identified Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA as the top four spots targeted by corrupt officials or criminals for real estate crime. 

    Australia is the worst, failing to address 10-out-of-10 loopholes.

    Below are the key extracts:

    The real estate market has long provided a way for individuals to secretly launder or invest stolen money and other illicitly gained funds… According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), real estate accounted for up to 30 per cent of criminal assets confiscated worldwide between 2011 and 2013…

     

    In many such cases, property is purchased through anonymous shell companies or trusts without undergoing proper due diligence by the professionals involved in the deal. The ease with which such anonymous companies or trusts can acquire property and launder money is directly related to the insufficient rules and enforcement practices in attractive markets…

     

    This assessment identifies the following 10 main problems that have enabled corrupt individuals and other criminals to easily purchase luxurious properties anonymously and hide their stolen money in Australia, Canada, the UK and the US:

    1. Inadequate coverage of anti-money laundering provision
    2. Identification of the beneficial owners of legal entities, trusts and other legal arrangements is still not the norm
    3. Foreign companies have access to the real estate market with few requirements or checks
    4. Over-reliance on due diligence checks by financial institutions leads to cash transactions going unnoticed
    5. Insufficient rules on suspicious transaction reports and weak implementation
    6. Weak or no checks on politically exposed persons and their associates
    7. Limited control over professionals who can engage in real estate transactions: no “fit and proper” test
    8. Limited understanding of and action on money laundering risks in the sector
    9. Inconsistent supervision
    10. Lack of sanctions

     

    Australia has severe deficiencies under all 10 areas identified in the research and is therefore not in line with any of the commitments to tackle corruption and money laundering in real estate made in international forums.

     

    In Australia, real estate agents are not subject to the provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering and CounterTerrorism Financing Act 2006. Other professionals such as lawyers and accountants who may also play a role in the sector are not covered either. This means that properties can be bought and sold without any due diligence on the parties. Currently there are no requirements for real estate agents or any professional involved in real estate deals to submit STRs, even if they suspect illegal activity is taking place, and there are no requirements or rules for verifying whether customers are PEPs or their close associates…

     

    In Australia, Canada and the US, the current anti-money laundering framework shows a tendency to rely on financial institutions to conduct the necessary background checks on real estate transactions… there are no checks on cash transactions.

     

    In Australia, 70 per cent of Chinese buyers pay in cash and they represent the largest proportion of foreign purchases in the country.

    What a complete and utter disgrace. Legislation to implement the second tranche of anti-money laundering (AML) legislation covering real estate gate keepers has been gathering dust for nearly a decade despite explicit criticism from the global regulator, the Paris-based Financial Action Taskforce (FATF), that Australian homes are a haven for laundered funds, particularly from China, as well as similar warnings from Austrac.

    In the meantime, dodgy Chinese money has piled into Australian property, in the process inflating house prices and pricing young Australians out of home ownership.

    When will Australia’s politicians finally take action and end more than a decade of neglect by bringing Australia’s real estate gatekeepers into the AML net – as demanded by FATF and Austrac, promised by the federal government in 2003, and intended when the AML legislation was first drafted in 2006?

    Or will the Australian Government continue to turn a blind eye to the dirty foreign money flooding into Australian property?

  • Matt Drudge In Rare On Air Appearance Declares: 'Trump Saved the Media'

    Celebrating Michael Savage’s 75th birthday, Matt Drudge, founder of the largest news aggregator site in the world, DrudgeReport.com, paid him a surprise visit and guest hosted for a short while, fielding some calls and offering his opinion on the ongoing struggle between Trump versus the world.

    Almost begrudgingly, Drudge declared that Trump, single handedly, saved the main stream media from death spiraling amidst catastrophic ratings — thanks to public disinterest. Because of Trump, Drudge believes, the opposition has ‘consolidated’, ‘following every bouncing ball’, which has created a revitalization in the media not seen in years.

    “I’m getting a little bit nervous about the media situation. Do you know, the media was near death. The New York Times was hanging on the short hairs. Do you know Vanity Fair was going under. CNN barely had a fraction,” Drudge said during an appearance on Michael Savage’s radio show.

     
    Trump saved media

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     
    Case in point, the share prices for all of the major media companies are sharply higher this year.

    Being a provider of both financial and political news, I can tell you, first hand, our finance traffic pales in comparison to the political stuff. People are simply transfixed by this administration, because the man, Donald Trump, love him or hate him, is a lightening rod for controversy. We’re living through a reality show, the White House edition, and the media loves it.

    Drudge also touched on Twitter, suggesting their audience is inflated and not that big. Largely, it’s an echo chamber for junkies.

    Twitter’s audience isn’t that big. It’s for junkies.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Lastly, he cited recent Rasmussen poll numbers that showed Trump with a 44% approval rating. He said he trusted Rasmussen and that the bad polling data was ‘a danger’ for Trump and a consequence of having been dealt a bad hand, with everyone working in concert against the President. Drudge believes taking some time away from the limelight would do the President some good, judging the tree by the fruit it produces.

    Drudge is worried about Trump’s poll numbers.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Here’s the full clip.

    Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

Digest powered by RSS Digest