Goldman Sachs is at the center of a probe into the rigging of U.S. Treasury Auctions, which was the same allegation that resulted in the Treasury shutting down Salomon Brothers in 1991. I wrote about this incident when Salomon was caught. The fact that such rigging in commodities markets was standard for decades was common knowledge. When the commodity industry took over, the practices of such schemes infested Wall Street. Suddenly, what was standard in pork bellies became standard in the U.S. Treasury auctions.
Salomon’s #1 competitor was Goldman Sachs who realized they could be shut down if they were caught doing the same game. It is my belief that this is when a strategy was developed at Goldman Sachs to do a reverse takeover of government. Suddenly, CEOs of the firm infiltrated politics with huge donations and won the prize of U.S. Secretary of the Treasury twice. Draghi is ex-Goldman and now sits at the head of the ECB. He is also a member of the Troika, as is the PM of Australia. I believe they installed people like Larry Summers and bought the Clinton White House to ensure that Glass Steagall was repealed. I believe they own Hillary right down to her pantyhose. They were involved in creating Greek debt as well as their alleged involvement in Malaysia. The German TV ZDF ran a show exposing how Goldman Sachs was ruling the world. It has been removed from the internet.
The curious fact here is that this is starting to leak out to the mainstream press. This is most likely not a coincidence and will have some ramifications, certainly for Hillary as well as Cruz given they both have connections to Goldman Sachs. Hillary has refused to release her transcripts of speeches at Goldman and Cruz “forgot” that they them lent him money. I have written before about my contest with Goldman Sachs. They kept me in prison and demanded the source code to our model. In today’s world of information, ignorance can only be a matter of choice.
The case of a former Federal Reserve Bank of New York employee Jason Gross was given ZERO jail time for leaking of confidential documents to a friend at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. That is insider trading which justified time behind bars. Despite the fact that prosecutors claimed they were disappointed, that was just a show. To put him on trial would mean he would have the right to call people from Goldman Sachs. Then the person at Goldman who obtained such documents would have to reveal what they did with them and how did the firm act upon it. They shut the whole case down, a $2,000 fine and no prison time was a whitewash to say the least.
Search found 153 matches for 1
Is Goldman Sachs Rigging U.S. Treasury Auctions? - Thu 24 Mar 2016, 2:17 pm
15 Dirty Tricks The GOP Establishment Can Use to Stop Donald Trump - Fri 18 Mar 2016, 1:43 pm
15 Dirty Tricks The GOP Establishment Can Use to Stop Donald Trumpby Doug Wead | 5:41 pm, March 13th, 2016
Doug Wead is a presidential historian who served as senior advisor to the Ron Paul presidential campaign in 2012.
Warning to the Trumpets. It ain’t over. It is just beginning.
Below are a list of tactics that Establishment Republicans may use to block the nomination of Donald Trump. Yes, I know. If they succeed they will not win the White House but many in the establishment will make just as much money under a Democrat insider as they will with a Republican insider. So they may not care.
All they may want to do is send the message to any future “outsider” candidate, “This is our party and you need our approval to participate. If you try to do this without us we will destroy you.”
These tactics were used in 2012 to keep Libertarian insurgents from winning delegates to the Republican National Convention. The fear was that Ron Paul would be able to place his name in nomination and give a speech about capital cronyism and how big corporations use the system to corrupt free enterprise. Donald Trump can learn from our experience.
What was at stake in 2012? Money. What’s at stake now? Money.
But why will low level party stalwarts who don’t get that money play along and do the bidding of the big party leaders?
To keep their positions as State, County or Precinct Chairmen. Power. Ego. Prestige. They want that all expenses paid trip to the Republican National Convention. Booze. Free corporate gifts. A box of Godiva chocolates left on their pillow in their room each night. They know that candidates like Trump come and go but the party infrastructure, financed by companies and their lobbyists, remain forever.
Here’s what the new Trump supporters can expect. (Carefully follow the links to stories below to see the actual videos and read the details of how these things happened in 2012.)
#1) Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Romney will cooperate with each other to help block Trump outsiders at key County and State conventions. There is nothing wrong with this. Just don’t be taken by surprise. You may have most of the delegates at the local event and still lose to this combination. Make your own deals with Chairmen and other party officials before its too late.
#2) The RNC Rules Committee will likely change the rules back to a five state requirement needed to put a name in nomination at the Convention. This will make it easier to nominate Rubio, Cruz, Kasich and even Romney. Trump operatives should block this change and keep it at eight, which was originally designed to protect Romney, the expected incumbent.
#3) Make sure that you have your own people chosen as delegates to the convention. The insiders will fight you to the death over this, saying that it doesn’t matter, that you won the primary or the caucus and so the actual delegates are bound by law to vote for you anyway. (Not true.)
They will say that the governor and the senator and the old former chairman, who has been to every RNC since Eisenhower, should be able to represent their state. Be courteous and reasonable but you also need large numbers of your own reliable Trump supporters chosen as delegates.
Keep in mind, the only rules that bind the delegates are the rules of the party and those very delegates can change those rules.
What if there is a media hyped Trump scandal and the party votes to “unbind” the delegates on the first ballot? Then they can vote for whomever they wish.
What if Trump does not win on the first ballot and there is a second ballot? They will then vote their real choice and you will have lost all of those states you thought you had won in primaries.
#4) The place of the caucus that selects the actual delegates who go to the district or state convention may suddenly change without your knowledge. Linked by a telephone chain the insiders will meet without you. Your folks will show up at one hotel and the meeting will take place at another.
#5) The time of the meeting may suddenly change. Your people can show up and find that the building is locked and authorities will say you are too late to be allowed in to participate. This happened many times in 2012, with hundreds of screaming voters left outside.
#6) The chairman may say “Ayes have it,” even if they don’t. This happens at the precinct, county, district, state and even national level. What are you going to do about it? Sue? Meanwhile, their winning precinct delegation will go onto the State Convention as delegates representing your opponent.
You may appeal to the RNC for justice and they may support the cheaters because you don’t have enough of your own people as delegates serving on the Rules Committee.
#7) Off duty police may arrest and detain your newly elected Donald Trump GOP officers. Yep, that happened to us. Your people may be kept for hours in jail cells and those who protest may be arrested as well.
#8) Precinct, County, State leaders may charge a last minute tax. This may have happened in 2012 in Alaska. Voters who had not been tipped off reportedly could not vote without paying $10. Credit cards not accepted. This worked so well at excluding voters in Alaska that Romney operatives used it in King County, Washington. They also turned away young people who did not appear on their outdated voter registration lists.
#9) If the Caucus Chairman is replaced or does not like the outcome of the vote they may suddenly declare the process invalid. For example, they may say that the new chairman is a Trump partisan and thus it is now a Trump event and the GOP insurance for the event is invalid and thus the meeting is ended. See the video above.
#10) State Conventions will prepare ballots misspelling Trump and then later discount them in the voting for those pledged delegates.
#11) Fake ballots will be distributed listing establishment names as the official Trump delegates, confusing the voters. They may also try to split the Trump slate by nominating competing Trump delegates with real names of public figures.
#12) Counting the ballots at the various conventions will be an exhausting business with delays, postponements until the next day, seals broken on the voting boxes, and all kinds of chicanery.
#13) They may cancel the voting due to weather in a key precinct that is heavily Trump, throwing the State. Even though the weather turns out to be fine in the given precinct.
#14) At convention you may find hotel rooms cancelled.They may arrange for the bus bringing your delegates to the Rules Committee to get lost and changes to convention rules may happen in your absence.
#15) When you leave the RNC don’t think it’s over. A Ron Paul delegate was detained by TSA at the airport leaving Tampa when bullets were found in their packed luggage.
The idea is to make you so sick, so weary, so beaten down that you will never, ever, even dare challenge the establishment that runs the Republican Party again. Ever.
Here is the message. It doesn’t belong to you. As in the case of the Democratic Party, it belongs to the insiders, the rich and powerful who make money from a rigged economy that favors a few at the expense of the many. Donald Trump is too independent and too unpredictable for them.
You have been warned. Good luck.
Doug Wead first published this article on his personal blog, and it was republished here with his permission.
Ted Cruz Is the #1 Enemy of the American Middle Class - Wed 16 Mar 2016, 2:45 pm
Ted Cruz Is the #1 Enemy of the American Middle Class
Let’s apply some good ‘0le common sense to the 2016 Republican Primary in order to competently predict what lies ahead.
“From The Twilight Zone, I can see that a few billionaires are shipping tens of millions of jobs and trillions of dollars out of the country, and spreading economic misery upon a nation on an unparalleled level. And these owners of Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and Military Industrial Complex will stop at nothing to continue the gravy train that they set into motion with NAFTA.”
“When I am President, we will keep these jobs home in America. No more with the $500 billlion per year trade deficit with China. No more shutting down American factories and shipping our jobs overseas and bringing back products tax free into America. No more Pfizer’s, they will make their product in America or go broke.”
“I will keep American jobs at home.” Cruz has begun to mimic Trump’s anti-free trade agreement stance, albeit in a very vague manner. Is he telling the truth? Hell no! He takes money for his campaign from the very Wall Street entities that are financially raping the country. And this has occurred on Ted’s watch. Cruz is Wall Street’s last LEGITIMATE chance to legally stop Trump from making good on his threats to keep American jobs inside the country. Cruz is lying and under his potential presidential watch, the Wall Street. carnage being carried out by Wall Street will only increase. Why? Because charity begins at home. Look at the next two graphics
Cruz took out a Wall Street loan to run for the Senate in 2003 and then he failed to disclose this fact as required by law. Cruz is not only a liar, he is a criminal.
Ted Cruz is sleeping with the enemy. His wife is a senior VP at Goldman Sachs, the most corrupt banking institution outside the Federal Reserve. Goldman Sachs and its cronies are a major player in free trade agreements. She is also a regional head of the Council on Foreign Relations. You know, the Rockefeller guys who have wanted a one-world government and economy since the 1920’s.
Stealing the Election for Cruz
In a 2006 documentary entitled, Hacking Democracy, PBS exposed Diebold and their role in rigging elections with their electronic voting machines. It was the first time that any average America was made privy to the fact there was a concentrated effort to steal elections and subsequently deny the will of the people. Most Americans did not believe the documentary. On the heels of this revelation, there came the revelation of Clinton Eugene “Clint” Curtis is an American attorney, computer programmer and ex-employee of NASA and ExxonMobil, who also exposed election hacking. What was remarkable about Curtis is that he actually was one of the computer programmers who wrote code designed to steal elections through the fraudulent use of electronic voting machines.
Eckhart wrote the irregularities are in “Jupiter County” which does not exist. Clearly meant the town of Jupiter or Palm Beach County where Jupiter is located. Palm Beach County is where Trump’s Florida base Mar-a-Lago is located.
Eckhart TweetsJennifer Eckhart @JenniferEckhart
Hearing reports from friends in my home state of Florida that@realDonaldTrump is left OFF of voting ballots at various polling stations
6:08 AM – 15 Mar 2016
“.@samuraiEighty returned ballot said they were given the “wrong one”…called local Fox affiliate – they’ve received dozens of complaints”
“If you’re a registered voter in Florida and you’ve received a ballot w/ @realDonaldTrump OFF the ballot – contact me. @FoxNews on the story.”
Things are about to get very ugly.
You Better Believe 'Islam Hates Us' - cites the Koran - Mon 14 Mar 2016, 7:27 pm
i gonna say it again. when i was in iraq there was 2 kinds of muslims, there were the ones who wanted us there and the ones who wanted us dead, problem is, which is which? do i want them here? not just no, but hell no! there's two things that i totally distrust at this point in time. #1 hillary clinton. #2muslims. not necessarily in that order!
Voters: Scalia vacancy a big deal in election - Sun 06 Mar 2016, 6:14 pm
Voters: Scalia vacancy a big deal in election
Poll shows Americans focused on religious liberty, abortion, gun controlPublished: 3 hours ago
When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died last month, it became immediately clear that President Obama could shift the court’s ideological balance leftward on issues such as religious liberty, abortion, gun control and immigration.
With Obama indicating he will present a nominee to the Senate in his final year in office and the Republican-led Senate vowing not to act until a new president is sworn in, a new poll shows that voters recognize the significance of the vacancy to the nation’s future.
The survey released Thursday by the Family Research Council found that 64 percent of likely voters say the Supreme Court vacancy will be “an important factor in determining who you vote for in November’s elections.”
Among Republicans, the figure is 71 percent.
“Justice Scalia’s replacement may very well be the deciding vote on major cases involving religious liberty, state abortion laws, gun control, and immigration. With so much at stake, the American people should be allowed to decide in November who picks the next Supreme Court justice,” said Tony Perkins, the FRC president.
Perkins said the survey “tells us that the American people have a sobering perspective following the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.”
“Reality is sinking in for voters in both parties that the next president will likely appoint two or three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will impact our nation for decades to come,” he said.
Perkins noted that, by an eight-point margin, Republican voters are more concerned than Democrats about the future of the Supreme Court.
‘I believe this is in part due to previous Republican presidents who have either been unable to identify liberal jurists in conservative clothing or have been unwilling to fight for nominees who were true constitutionalists,” he said.
The survey also shows that frequent churchgoers are even more concerned than non-churchgoers about the direction of the court.
“This higher level of concern is no doubt due to the Supreme Court preempting social consensus by imposing its abortion and marriage views on all 50 states,” Perkins commented.
“While the country is divided over whether the Supreme Court vacancy should be filled now or after the November elections, it’s clear that the court is a greater motivating factor for Republican voters and frequent churchgoers than it is for Democrats and those who attend worship services less frequently,” he said.
The poll found 51 percent of adults believe the Supreme Court issue is important or very important to them. Among likely voters, 64 percent were in agreement.
The poll, conducted by WPA Opinion Research, solicited answers from Americans by phone during the Feb. 18-21 period. It carries a margin of error of 3.1 percent.
Pundits have speculated Obama would nominate a Republican to make it hard for the GOP majority in the Senate to put off a vote until a new president is elected.
“The Liberty Amendments” is the blueprint on how to fix our broken government by Mark Levin, the #1 New York Times bestselling author of “Liberty and Tyranny” and “Ameritopia.” Order it today at WND’s Superstore.
Conservative pundit Ann Coulter said shortly after Scalia’s Feb. 13 death that failure by Republicans in the Senate to block Obama’s nominees would result in a tsunami of new support for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who is opposed by the GOP establishment.
Obama supporters, who during the 2008 and 2012 campaigns made use of social media to raise money and boost support for their candidate, were already weighing in on the Supreme Court vacancy.
The Why Courts Matter Iowa coalition has sent thousands of signatures and copies of portions of the U.S. Constitution to the offices of Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, to fulfill what they believe is his duty to give an nominee a hearing.
The Senate’s role regarding a Supreme Court nominee to “advise and consent,” according to Article Two, Section Two of the Constitution.
Grassley, in a post on the Supreme Court’s blog, said he was going to hold up nominations from Obama, given the president’s lame-duck status.
“The American people deserve the opportunity during this election year to weigh in on whether the next justice should apply the text and original meaning of the Constitution [as Antonin Scalia did] or, alternatively, his or her own life experiences to changing times to advance his or her own sense of what would be ‘just decisions and fair outcomes,'” Grassley wrote. “Senate Republicans will ensure the American people are not denied this unique and historic opportunity.”
But Obama supporters and others on the left want the Senate to act in a time frame favorable to Obama.
The Iowa group, in a Facebook post, wrote: “Join us to tell Senator Grassley – do your job! We will deliver more than 6,000 signatures and copies of Article Two, Section Two of the U.S. Constitution to Senator [Grassley’s] regional offices. Thousands have signed the petition to tell Senator Grassley to do his job. Now we will deliver [these] copies … to remind him of his job.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/03/voters-scalia-vacancy-a-big-deal-in-election/#DFwFX6wsqtbRvurl.99
5 Important Leadership Lessons From Kim Jong Un - Sun 31 Jan 2016, 5:36 pm
5 Important Leadership Lessons From Kim Jong Un
01/31/2016 02:59 pm ET | Updated 1 hour ago
- Dr. Travis Bradberry Author of #1 bestselling book, Emotional Intelligence 2.0, and president of TalentSmart, world's leading provider of emotional intelligence.
Tempers are flaring yet again on the Korean peninsula after two South Korean soldiers were seriously injured recently by land mines that North Korea recently planted in the demilitarized zone. In response to the provocation, South Korea will end a ten-year hiatus and resume blasting propaganda messages across the border via loudspeakers.
The messages will criticize Kim Jong Un's ability to lead, and my hunch is that they won't go over well as Kim doesn't take kindly to people who question his authority.
When it comes to Kim's leadership, there's a lot to criticize, but that also means there's a lot to learn.
Leadership lessons typically come from celebrated cultural icons, whether they work in business, politics, or the arts. But that doesn't mean that we can only learn from our heroes. In fact, we can learn just as much about leadership from those who've failed us.
By looking carefully at some of the questionable qualities of the world's more suspect leaders, we can gain a deeper understanding of why certain things don't work, how our actions affect people, and how we can yield influence to inspire growth over destruction.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has plenty to teach us about leadership -- you just have to know where to look. Here are five important lessons from the Supreme Leader.
Lesson #1: Don't annihilate your enemies
Strong leaders don't fear dissent because they've done the hard work to inspire genuine loyalty. Weak leaders, on the other hand, see anything short of pandering as a threat, and they'll do whatever it takes to quash the threat.
After Kim's defense minister, 66-year-old Hyon Yong-Chol, nodded off during a meeting earlier this year, Kim had him executed with a ZPU-4 anti-aircraft gun -- a massive, four-barreled machine gun capable of firing 600 rounds per minute. Naturally, Kim had the execution conducted in front of hundreds of onlookers. In all, Kim is thought to have executed over 70 "dissenters" since coming to power.
Like many errant leaders, Kim sees an excessive show of force as a sign of strength that will teach people a lesson. In reality, it shows weakness and fear. Sure, many who witness the act will toe the line, but only as long as they absolutely have to because they now know that their leader has poor character, no self-control, and an utter lack of self-confidence. Whenever a leader engages in verbal abuse, temper tantrums, and harsh punishments that don't fit the crime, people are quick to look for the door.
Lesson #2: Your people are not your pleasure squad
Great leaders believe that they are there to serve their people. A bad leader is one who has things the other way around. In April, Kim reactivated the pleasure squad that had last served during his father's reign. Women "recruited" for the squad are forced to live with Kim and submit to his every whim in exchange for $4,000 and home appliances. While we have laws in place to prevent such behavior in the workplace, it's demotivating and demoralizing any time you feel as though you're only being paid to be at a leader's service. Great leaders see their position as having additional responsibility to serve those who follow them, to motivate them, and to help them achieve more than they ever thought possible.
Lesson #3: Don't fear those who might have something to teach you
Great leaders realize that there is always more to learn; weak leaders try to nullify any evidence that somebody else might have more wisdom and experience than they do. Kim Jong Un falls into the latter category. One South Korean official said that he is trying to "erase all traces of his father's rule" and is "replacing top brass with officers who are loyal to him alone." Three men who were handpicked by his father to groom the young leader have either been demoted or disappeared entirely, as have three defense ministers and four chiefs of the army's general staff. Like weak leaders everywhere, Kim has a habit of pushing people out who might have something to teach him, a behavior which stifles good ideas and sends everyone who isn't trapped by a heavily armed border packing.
Lesson #4: Don't alienate your allies
Great leaders know that they are only as good as their allies. They cultivate these relationships as one of their most valuable business assets and consider them carefully when making important decisions. Although China has been one of North Korea's staunchest allies since the Korean War, Kim Jong Un's lack of consideration for its interests has been a major strain on their relationship throughout his rule. One of China's biggest aims is to maintain stability on the Korean peninsula. Kim's provocative solo maneuvers, including widely publicized missile tests, have irked the Chinese and threatened that stability. Leaders who go rogue and make major decisions without considering the input of their allies are tough to work for and even harder to trust and find themselves without any support when they need it most.
Lesson #5: Know the difference between wielding power and having power
Great leaders never wield power for the sake of it. On August 15, North Korea will move its time zone back by 30 minutes. The reason? The time zone was initially set by Japan, so Kim Jong Un sees it as a sign of "Japanese imperialism." There's no practical reason to wind the clocks back. Kim Jong Un essentially wants to tell Japan, "You're not the boss of me." True leaders are confident enough in their authority that there's no need to prove it. If you have to prove that you're the boss by going around showing everyone how powerful you are, you've got a big problem.
Bringing it all together
Emotionally intelligent leaders find lessons everywhere they look as their journey continually moves them towards greater self- and social awareness. While our heroes have a lot to teach us, so do those who fail to earn our respect.
Hillary Rodham Clinton: The Queen of Codeword Compromise–America’s #1 Unprosecuted Felon - Wed 27 Jan 2016, 3:42 pm
Hillary Rodham Clinton: The Queen of Codeword Compromise–America’s #1 Unprosecuted Felon
Recent news reports on the Clinton Servergate scandal have made it clear that Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) does not deserve a term in the White House. Rather, she deserves a term in prison, a long term.
On January 19th, Fox News published an exclusively-obtained, unclassified letter written by I. Charles McCullough III, the Intelligence Community Inspector General for the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). His letter summarized the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified “several dozen” previously unreported classified e-mails stored on Clinton’s “secret” (yet unsecure) server that until 2013 was managed by Justin Cooper, an aide to former President Bill Clinton. According to published accounts, that server was kept in a home closet, and Cooper held no security clearance, and he had no expertise in computer security or classified document handling procedures. HRC later contracted privately with Platte River Networks, which was a continuing violation of both departmental procedures and Federal law (since their system was outside of official secure channels).
Most importantly, the “several dozen” e-mails quite obviously included intelligence products for Top Secret Special Access Programs (SAPs), also known as compartmented access intelligence and conversationally called “TS Codeword” material in intelligence circles. These intelligence gathering and analysis programs have “sources and methods” that are so sensitive that they carry the blanket proviso that any compromise to this compartmented information would cause “irreparable injury” to the security of the United States. Often erroneously referred to in the mass media as “Above Top Secret”, they are in fact collateral to Top Secret, but SCI access is very strictly guarded, and special codeword or corresponding acronym markings are used at the top and bottom of every page of these documents. In order to have Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI), an individual must first have a Top Secret security clearance following a Special Background Investigation (SBI). Note that someone only gets a very expensive SBI if the intent is to give them potential access to one or more SCI programs.
It is apparent that HRC made repeated gross breaches of both national security policy and Federal law. After reading the news reports, I can only ask:
- Why, after all these months, has HRC not been interviewed by the FBI about this? (She recently claimed that she still hasn’t been interviewed by the FBI.)
- Why hasn’t she been “read off” of SCI and had her security clearance revoked? (If anyone else had done anything even remotely approaching the level of her alleged crimes, then that would have happened immediately after the investigation began (not to mention that the individual would probably have been arrested, advised of their rights, polygraphed, and confined without bail).
- Why wasn’t it until August of 2105 that Hillary’s secret e-mail server was finally seized by the FBI? (News of the private server was made public in March of 2015, but word of it had been circulating inside the Beltway much longer.)
- Why hasn’t a House or Senate Intelligence subcommittee been assigned to specifically investigate the potential damage that the “several dozen” e-mails containing SCI material could have caused or has caused, if it was somehow surreptitiously accessed? (Again, these were SCI products or summaries thereof that were stored on a non-secure server in a closet in a private home, not in a government facility, and that server was entirely outside of the DCI’s control procedure/channels. Furthermore, it was managed by a private contracted individual who had no security clearance!)
- It has been reported that more than 100 Federal agents (mostly from the FBI) have been assigned to this case full time, for many months. With so many people working on this for so long, and with such abundant evidence, why haven’t any formal charges been made?
- If what HRC did was “legal”, then why did her aide Bryan Pagliano plead the Fifth Amendment when subpoenaed to testify about what had happened? At the very minimum–even aside from the much more serious issue of SCI codeword material– Federal law prohibits “Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information”, per 18 U.S. Code § 793, paragraphs (e) and (f). That is a felony offense with a penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment. Here are the applicable paragraphs:
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
- The feds have a prima facie case against HRC on violating those statutes. So why hasn’t that first simple charge been made? Oh, I think I might have the answer: Such charges are up to the prosecutorial discretion of the U.S. Attorney, both for what charges are filed and when they are filed and the U.S. Attorney for United States Attorney for the District of Columbia is Obama Administration appointee Channing D. Phillips, who is Democratic party faithful. So I’m not holding my breath.
- Under the 1950 Federal Records Act (which was codified under 44 U.S. Code § 3106 “Unlawful removal, destruction of records”):
The head of each Federal agency shall notify the Archivist of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration, or destruction of records in the custody of the agency of which he is the head that shall come to his attention, and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records he knows or has reason to believe have been unlawfully removed from his agency, or from another Federal agency whose records have been transferred to his legal custody. In any case in which the head of the agency does not initiate an action for such recovery or other redress within a reasonable period of time after being notified of any such unlawful action, the Archivist shall request the Attorney General to initiate such an action, and shall notify the Congress when such a request has been made.
So why hasn’t the more recent head of the Department of State made that formal referral to the Attorney General? Failing to do so is a violation of Federal law!
9.) HRC and her staff failed to provide records to fulfill a Congressional Committee subpoena, which violates Federal law. Why have no charge been brough on that?
10.) HRC and her staff failed to provide records to fulfill a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, which also violates Federal law. Why have no charges been brought on that?
11.) By law, immediately after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton must have signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) Nondisclosure Agreement that spells out the criminal penalties for “any unauthorized disclosure” of classified information. That legally binding NDA states:
“I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.”
“I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department … in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SCI.”
That “unauthorized retention, or negligent handling” wording in the NDA seems pretty clear to me! Why wasn’t it clear to HRC? It was certainly clear to Edward Snowden. So why haven’t our nation’s prosecuting attorneys pressed charges against HRC, the same way that they did Edward Snowden?
Here is the bottom line, folks: Back when I was an Army Intelligence Corps officer, I held a TS/SBI clearance and was “read on” to access several codeword compartments of SCI. Those codewords themselves were classified as Secret, and the act of revealing them would be a crime, just by itself. Moving those files from a a secure computer inside a SCIF on a memory stick and copying them to a unsecure computer or server grossly violates the basic “air gap” rule that was constantly drilled into us: “NO, NO, NO! Thou shalt not!…”
If I had done the same things that HRC reportedly did by copying actual SCI intelligence products to her private mail server, then right now I would now be in Leavenworth prison, awaiting trial. I would be facing at least one 10 year prison sentence–and probably multiple 10 years sentences, to be served consecutively.
So why isn’t Hillary Rodham Clinton already in prison? – JWR
(Note: Permission is granted for re-posting of this entire article, but only if done so in full, with proper attribution to James Wesley, Rawles and SurvivalBlog, and only if the included links are preserved.)
US Elite Wants to Destroy Russia at Any Price - Thu 14 Jan 2016, 5:33 pm
[size=32]US Elite Wants to Destroy Russia at Any Price[/size]
America’s aristocracy is determined to take over Russia. Ever since the end of the Soviet Union and of its communism, the Cold War has become replaced by an increasingly hot war in which the US and its allies are expanding NATO right up to Russia’s borders, and imposing against Russia what the US refused to accept being imposed upon itself during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis: nuclear checkmate!
The direction of aggression since the end of communism has reversed, and the aggression itself has considerably intensified. Though the ideological excuse for the conflict is thus entirely gone, the aggression against Russia is far more than the Soviet Union ever dream of even trying against America. It’s so blatant. This is raw aggression, for nothing else than conquest – ideology has nothing to do with it. First, Russia’s allies are assassinated or otherwise overthrown; then, Russia is to be in the cross-hairs, isolated as much as possible: Russia’s ally Saddam Hussein in Iraq was killed in 2003; Russia’s ally Muammar Gaddafi in Libya was killed in 2011; America and its allies (Sunni-fundamentalist nations Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey) tried to kill Russia’s ally the non-sectarian Shiite Bashar al-Assad in Syria in 2013 but failed; and the US perpetrated a coup that overthrew the Russia-friendly President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014.
In each instance, chaos and an enduring hell for the victim-nation’s public have resulted, but America’s rulers are psychopaths, and they keep up the propaganda and the lies alleging the US regime to be good and the regimes they overthrow to have been bad and ‘deserving’ of the American-and-allied aggression. The regimes they overthrew were bad, but not nearly so vile as America has imposed after them. In Syria, Russia itself interceded in order to defeat the jihadists that the US-led operation has been using to bring down Assad. Only the US-and-allied nonstop propaganda fools the publics in US-allied countries to think that their own rulers were «well-intentioned» but «misled by poor intelligence». The suckers don’t even notice that it happens again and again: there is clearly a pattern to these ‘mistakes’. These weren’t mistakes; they were aggressions, for spreading conquest. This is an increasingly hot war; to call it «the new Cold War» is to lie, yet again.
The US and its allies (the Sunni-Islamic, Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish aristocracies) are the world’s aggressors now; and Russia and its allies (who have emerged as being the Shia-Islamic, Orthodox Catholic, Confucian, Tao, and Hindu aristocracies) are in the West’s gunsights, to be forced by the American aristocratic gang to capitulate, as the former capitalist-v.-communist Cold War has increasingly (ever since 1990) morphed into an increasingly aggressive and increasingly hot war for brute conquest, by the US and its allies, taking over, one-by-one, without overthrowing but instead playing simply upon residual fears against the long-expired communist Soviet Union, Russia’s former allies, who were: Czech, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia; and soon: Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ukraine, and Georgia. The aim of all of this is ultimately to take over Russia itself, to become the vestigial whipping-boy for Soviet crimes. (Whereas the US wants all of the former Warsaw Pact countries in its NATO, the US has consistently refused to accept Russia into NATO – though that had been verbally promised to Gorbachev.) This isn’t actually retribution based on vengeance; it is instead aggression based on the craving that America’s aristocrats have for sheer global conquest.
This is not a grab for added wealth and power by any public anywhere – the non-aristocrats (the public) are basically just servants and/or suckers to the aristocracy, in any country. The public in each country are overwhelmingly comprised of the servers and the mere fools of that country’s aristocracy. The aristocracy include the people who own the ‘news’ media, and who (as servers are paid to) slant their ‘news’ ‘reporting’ (to the multitudes of mere suckers) in order to block from national power any politician who resists continuing rule by the given nation’s aristocracy – regardless of any politician’s particular political party within that country. These ‘news’ media are, in turn, being paid by other aristocrats, the advertisers, and so the entire aristocracy controls each and every one of them, and thus collectively decides which ‘news’ gets published, and which (like this) does not. The editors whom the aristocrats hire won’t publish this, but that doesn’t mean its false and the lies they publish are true. It simply means that the truth is suppressed.
Here is the best documentary introduction to this global war, and this documentary is only 22 minutes long; so, a viewer might want to replay and investigate on his/her own some of the passages that whiz by in it. I have found that everything in it is honest and true: this documentary, Aaron Hawkins (or «Storm Clouds Gathering»), is far more careful to exclude fabricated ‘information’ than are the vast majority of documentarians and videographers – especially about such ‘sensitive’ geopolitical subjects. False and fake sources are carefully excluded by Hawkins; only the most-solid sources are employed in his documentaries. In the 22 minutes of this one are the most-important global historical events since the start of Richard Nixon’s massively history-shaping presidency. The changes that Nixon pioneered are rising to a crescendo today, and some of them are explained in that documentary.
As I myself have documented in an earlier article, the US war against Russia started in 1990 while the Administration of the then-US President George Herbert Walker Bush was negotiating with the Administration of the Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev the conditions for the re-unification of Germany, and the end of the Cold War: Bush told his negotiators to make certain promises; but, then, once Gorbachev’s people said yes to these understandings, Bush instructed his people to move forward on the basis of ignoring what they had just promised, and they all did so – and there was nothing that Russia now could do about it, because Russia had just disbanded (and this is Putin’s big lament about Gorbachev) not only the Soviet Union, but even the broader Warsaw Pact – the military alliance that had been the USSR’s equivalent to America’s NATO alliance.
Gorbachev actually trusted the West – he didn’t know that the US, which leads the West, was no longer a democracy; he didn’t know that the aristocracy had retaken it. He wasn’t prepared for the reality that the US had recently been restored to aristocratic control after the brief period of post-Civil-War democracy in the US, 1932-1972. And now, the US is more in the grip of its aristocracy than ever since the country had started, back in 1776. US President Jimmy Carter is correct that today’s US is a dictatorship. But public in the US-allied nations haven’t yet figured that out.
From the end of the Soviet bloc (1991) till the present time, each successive US President has run a foreign policy that continues from George Herbert Walker Bush’s exquisitely engineered deceit, which was designed ultimately to surround Russia, and to swallow it up. That’s the plan, and Barack Obama is utterly devoted to it – to such an extent that, according to the great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Dempsey, who had been in on the planning for the operation to overthrow the Russia-friendly leader of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, quit over Obama’s determination to continue the operation until Assad is removed and replaced by a leader who will do what the US aristocracy wants (which is to allow the gas-pipeline from Qatar into Europe to be built and to run through Syria).
Russia is the world’s most resource-rich nation. The US aristocracy wants to control it. And Qatar and Saudi Arabia want to weaken their biggest oil-and-gas competitor: Russia.
When the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, Russia became ruled by Boris Yeltsin, who accepted guidance from Washington, and privatized the Russian nation’s most valuable assets, in deals that spun them off to corrupt operators who shared their bonanzas with American aristocrats, including even some of the Harvard economists who were basically making the decisions and overseeing the entire process of this stripping from the Russian public their key national assets and enriching the most grubby US-subservient new Russian aristocrats. Both the wealth and the welfare of the Russian people immediately plunged, and then started slowly climbing back up to what it had been before the breakup. The US operation of Russia was an absolute disaster for the Russian people.
But here is what the agents for America’s aristocrats said about Yeltsin’s rule of Russia (as quoted in pages 3-5 of Stephen F. Cohen’s 2001 «Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia»:
«The Russian prospect over the coming years and decades is more promising than ever before in its history». David Remnick, journalist, 1997 [now the editor of the New Yorker].
«Optimism prevails universally among those who are familiar with what is going on in Russia». US Vice President Al Gore, 1998.
«Only a few years from now… what will be left standing is the towering edifice of Yeltsin’s achievement». Leon Aron, biographer, 2000.
At the same time (also on those same pages from Cohen) was being published outside the US the depressing reality inside Yeltsin’s Russia:
«A human crisis of monumental proportions is emerging in the former Soviet Union». UN Development Program, 1999.
«Will we continue looting and destroying Russia until nothing is left?… God forbid these reforms should continue». Alexander Solzhenitsyn, 2000.
Look at the reality, and you’ll see in the statistics of Russia, what was blatantly obvious to everyone except Americans (who are so deluded by the agents for America’s aristocracy). For examples of this «human crisis of monumental proportions»: Between 1991 when Yeltsin took over, and 1993 a mere two years later, Russia’s male life expectancy plunged from 63 years down to less than 58 years. When Putin took over in 2000, it was 59 years. By 2010, it was back again to 63 years. By 2014, it was 66 years, an all-time-record high. But America’s propaganda says that Putin is bad and Yeltsin was good.
Per-capita GDP was 39% of America’s in 1991, and was 20% of America’s in 1998, while Americans were praising Yeltsin’s rule. By 2010, after 10 years of Putin, it had risen to 39% of America’s. It kept rising until Obama slammed on the economic sanctions in 2014.
Pew Global polling shows unfavorable opinions of Putin everywhere but in Vietnam, China, India, and Philippines (and they didn’t show their figure in Russia itself, where Pew had actually found an 88% approval-rating for Putin) – and strongly negative ratings in all of the US-allied countries. However, earlier than the February 2014 Obama coup that replaced a Moscow-friendly with a Washington-run President of Ukraine, Pew found no such international hostility toward either Putin personally or Russia nationally. All of this hostility was manipulated by the US as part of Obama’s all-out campaign to cripple and isolate Russia so as to cause Putin to lose power ultimately and become replaced by a US stooge.
The US government propaganda services, quite understandably, brag about how effectively they’ve demonized Putin. They have, indeed, done a terrific job for their aristocratic masters. They’ve convinced billions of suckers, that white is black, black is white, up is down, and down is up.
And that’s the news, about the ‘news’.
And here is more, just in case someone still really believes the US aristocracy’s lie that the sanctions against Russia are based on international criminality by Russia’s leadership, and not on international criminality by America’s leadership. The truth here is too hot to handle: the US, just like it was internationally recognized to be in the only global opinion poll on the subject, is overwhelmingly recognized as constituting «the greatest threat to peace in the world today».
And that’s news the US aristocracy and its allied aristocracies don’t report; they suppress. It’s also why the pollster, which was hired by them for this poll, buried it, instead of headlined with it. (Perhaps if – as America’s aristocrats might have been hoping – Russia had been named there as #1 instead of the US, that would have been the headline. But Russia wasn’t even listed among the top 5 there. News like that always gets buried. Just as does the news that the only scientific analysis of the evidence about the overthrow of Yanukovych proves that it was a US coup, no authentic ‘revolution‘.)
Parliamentary economy reveal about the benefits of selling foreign currency at the central bank auct - Sun 03 Jan 2016, 4:12 pm
fonz1951 wrote:duck2000 wrote:the entire country has been explored and they have way more then 150 million barrells!
ok,i stand corrected, now i will correct you, 150 billion not 150 million.
Oil reserves in [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] are [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] proven oil reserves, with 140 billion barrels.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] The sources for this oil is primarily located in the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]-majority and Kurdish-majority regions. Sunni-dominated areas on the other hand are comparatively lacking.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
As a result of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and civil unrest, the official statistics have not been revised since 2001 and are largely based on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] data from three decades ago. International geologists and consultants have estimated that unexplored territory may contain vastly larger reserves. The majority of Iraq's proven reserves of oil comes from the following cities: Basra (Being [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]), Baghdad (Being [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]), Ramadi (Being [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]), and finally, Ba'aj (Being the last oil rich city).[size=11][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
A measure of the uncertainty about Iraq's oil reserves is indicated by widely differing estimates. The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (DOE) estimated in 2003 that Iraq had 112 billion barrels (17.8×10[size=11]9 m3). The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (USGS) in 1995 estimated proven reserves were 78 Gbbl (12.4×109 m3). Iraq's prewar deputy oil minister said that potential reserves might be 300 Gbbl (48×109 m3). The source of the uncertainty is that due to decades of war and unrest, many of Iraq's oil wells are run down and unkept. Repairs to the wells and oil facilities should make far more oil available economically from the same deposits. Iraq may prove to contain the largest extractable deposits of oil in the entire Middle East once these upgrading and facility improvements have advanced.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
Council declares Nineveh Operations Command in drunken equipped with "250 Hummer wheel" in preparati - Tue 29 Dec 2015, 5:37 pm