What Would A U.S. Civil War Look Like?

Authored by GIS/Defense & Foreign Affairs' Gregory Copley via OilPrice.com,

Yes, there is a civil war looming in the United States.

But it will not look like the orderly pattern of descent which characterized the conflict of 1861-65. It will appear more like the Yugoslavia break-up, or the Russian and Chinese civil wars of the 20th Century.

It will appear as an evolving chaos.

And the next US civil war, though it yet may be arrested to a degree by the formal hand of centralized gov-ernment, will destabilize many other nation-states, including the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

It may, in other words, be short-lived simply because the uprising will probably not be based upon the decisions of constituent states (which, in the US Civil War, created a break-away confederacy), acting within their own perception of a legal process. It is more probable that the 21st Century event would contage as a gradual breakdown of law and order.

The outcome, to a degree dependent on how rapidly order is restored, would likely be the end, or constraint, of the present view of democracy in the US. It would see a massive dislocation of the economy and currency. It would, then, become a global-level issue.

Humans mock what they see as an impulse toward species suicide among the beautiful lemming clan of Lemmus lemmus. In fact, these tiny creatures have a societal survival pattern which seems more consistent than that of their human detractors. The pattern of human history shows that civilizations usually end through internal illness rather than at the hand of external powers.

It is significant that the gathering crisis in the United States was not precipitated by the November 7, 2016, election of Pres. Donald Trump, and neither was the growing polarization of the United Kingdom’s society caused by the Brexit vote of 2016.

In both instances, the election of Mr Trump and the decision by UK voters for Britain to exit the European Union were late reactions — perhaps too late — by the regional populations of both countries to what they perceived as the destruction of their nation-states by “urban super-oligarchies”.

The last-ditch reactions by those who voted in the US for Donald Trump and those who voted in the UK for Brexit were against an urban-based globalism which has been building for some seven decades, with the deliberate or accidental intent of destroying nations and nationalism. It is now crystallizing into this: urban globalism sees nations and nationalism as the enemy, and vice-versa.

The battle lines have been drawn.

The urban globalists — the conscious and unconscious — have thrown their resources behind efforts to avert a return to nationalism, particularly in the US and UK, but also in Europe, Canada, Australia, and the like.

Urban globalists control most of the means of communications [is this new “means of production”; the 21st Century marxian dialectic?] and therefore control “information” and the perception of events.

“Nationalists”, then, are operating instinctively, and in darkness.

There is little doubt that the US, despite the evidence that economic recovery is at hand, could spiral into a self-destructive descent of dysfunction, dystopia, and anomie. The path toward a “second civil war” has significant parallels with the causes of the first US Civil War (1861-65). Both events — the 19th Century event and a possible 21st Century one — saw the polarization of a fundamentally urban, abstract society against a fundamentally regional, traditional society.

In some respects, it is a conflict between people with long memories (even if those memories are flawed and selective) and people to whom memories and history are irrelevant. Equally, it is a conflict between identity and materialism, with the abstract social groups (the urban populations) the most preoccupied with short-term material gain.

I have covered the US for 50 years, and my earliest view of it was, a half century ago, that its populations would inevitably polarize into protective islands of self-interest, surrounded by seas of unthinking locusts. What is ironic is that the present islands of wealth and power — the cities — have come to represent short-term materialism, as cities have throughout history.

But what is interesting is that, despite the global attention on the political/geographic polarizations occurring in the US and other parts of the Western world, there has been a reversion in other parts of the world to a sense of Westphalian or pre-Westphalian nationalism. The fact that “the West” may have ring-fenced Iran, Russia, and so on, with sanctions and other forms of isolation may well be what ensures their endur-ing status.

They have avoided the contagion of globalism.

Russia, indeed, recovered from the Soviet form of globalism in 1991.

An urban globalist “victory” over Trump and Brexit would trigger that meltdown toward a form of civil societal collapse – civil war in some form or other – as the regions disavow the diktats of the cities. That would, in turn, bring about the global economic uncertainty which could impact the PRC and then the en-tire world.

But such a conflict – physical or political – could, equally, lead to a victory for nationalism over globalism, and to the protection of currencies and values. We have seen this cycle repeated for millennia.

It is the eternal battle.


via Read More Here..

Beware the “The Cultural Civil War” Narrative: You’re Being Played

http://ift.tt/2lBcwch

Remember the “Russians hacked our election!” hysteria–or have you already forgotten? That entire narrative collapsed under a deluge of factual evidence that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) data release was an insider job, and a compelling lack of evidence of any other Russian hacking.

That failed narrative has now been replaced with a new mass hysteria: “a new cultural Civil War is inevitable.” In this narrative, America has succumbed to us-versus-them divisions divided by all-or-nothing ideological bright lines.

Snap out of it, America: you’re being played, just as you were played by the absurd “Russia hacked the election” mania.

The core strategy here is the destruction of any common ground: 

once the delusion that there is no common ground left has been cemented by relentless mainstream and social media hysteria/ propaganda, the populace fragments into echo-chamber fiefdoms of ideological conformity that are easily manipulated by the political-financial power structure.

Once the populace has been fragmented into ideologically divisive camps, controlling the resulting mass of warring mobs is easy. Rather than recognize the commonality of their powerlessness and impoverishment, the fragmented fiefdoms are easily turned on each other:

From the point of view of each fragmented fiefdom, the problem isn’t structural, i.e. the dominance of extreme concentrations of wealth and power; the “problem” is the other cultural-ideological fiefdoms.

Once the masses accept this false division and the destruction of common ground, their power to reverse the extreme concentrations of wealth and power is shattered. The play is as old as civilization itself: conjure up extremists (paying them when necessary), goad the formation of opposing extremists, then convince the populace that these extremists have been normalized, i.e. your friends and neighbors already belong to one or the other.

This normalization then sets up the relentless demands to choose a side– the classic techniques of misdirection and false choice.

Just as you’re sold a triple-bacon cheeseburger or a hybrid auto, you’re being sold a completely fabricated cultural civil war. There have always been extremists on every edge of the ideological spectrum, just as there have always been religious zealots.

In a healthy society, these fringe pools of self-reinforcing fanaticism are given their proper place: they are outliers, representing self-reinforcing black holes of confirmation bias of a few.

In times of social, political and financial stress, such groups pop up like mushrooms. In times of media saturation, a relative handful can gain enormous exposure and importance because the danger they pose sells adverts and attracts eyeballs/viewers.

Add a little fragmentation, virtue-signaling, demands for ideological conformity and voila, you get a deeply fragmented and deranged populace that is incapable of recognizing the dire straits it is in or recognizing the structural sources of its impoverishment and powerlessness.

In other words, you get an easily mallable populace at false war with itself.

There is always common ground for those who dare to seek it. The Powers That Be are blowing up the bridges as fast as they can, whipping up fear and hatred of the Other, fanning the flames of extremism and claiming extremists are now normalized and everywhere.

All of this is false. Would you buy an entirely manipulated cultural civil war if it was advertised as such? If not, then don’t buy into the false (but oh so useful to the ruling elites) narrative of an “inevitable cultural Civil War.”

 

If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

Vía Max Keiser http://ift.tt/2g15SdU

Bitcoin (BTCUSD) Breaks Below 4000, Testing Month Plus Upchannel Support

Bitcoin (BTC/USD) Weekly/Daily

Bitcoin (BTCUSD) appears to be ending its month long rally from just below the 2k level, as it threatens to break an upchannel support (on the weekly and daily charts). Significantly, BTCUSD is forming a red weekly candle with its trading range thus far below last week’s Doji body. If BTCUSD breaches the weekly/daily chart upchannel support today, the current weekly red candle will likely continue lengthening potentially forming an Island Reversal pattern consisting of the last 2 weekly candles (and the current). Significantly, the all-time peak last week coincides with the 2.618 Fib extension that could have been drawn based on the May to July sideways channel low and high. With the daily RSI and Stochastics turning down from overbought levels, and the daily MACD negatively crossing, a decent chance exists for the daily/weekly chart upchannel support to be breached today. An upchannel support break would accelerate profittaking resulting in the weekly MACD blue line quickly flattening and turning down perhaps by late week.

 

Bitcoin (BTC/USD) Weekly

 

Bitcoin (BTC/USD) Daily

 

Click here for today’s technical analysis on Raw Sugar, Cocoa


 

Tradable Patterns was launched to demonstrate that the patterns recurring in liquid futures, spot FX and cryptocurrency markets can be analyzed to enhance trading performance. Tradable Patterns’ daily newsletter provides technical analysis on a subset of three CME/ICE/Eurex futures (commodities, equity indices, and interest rates), spot FX and cryptocurrency markets, which it considers worth monitoring for the day/week for trend reversal or continuation. For less experienced traders, tutorials and workshops are offered online and throughout Southeast Asia.


via Read More Here..

Contrary To Popular Belief, Dietary Calcium Does Not Prevent Bone Loss

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
Dairy products, specifically milk is one of the beverages still aggressively pushed as a health promoting food, especially relating to strong bones. However, Bone Mineral Density (BMD) and rates of bone loss showed no association with dietary calcium intake in men, according to a recent study in British Journal of Nutrition.

Vía PreventDisease.com http://ift.tt/2il8jc0

Killer Robots: Experts Warn of ‘Third Revolution in Warfare’

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

More than 100 leading robotics experts are urging the United Nations to take action in order to prevent the development of “killer robots”. In a letter to the organisation, artificial intelligence (AI) leaders, including billionaire Elon Musk, warn of “a third revolution in warfare”.

Vía BlackListed News http://ift.tt/2v0zzma

Secret Service Reportedly Going Broke Protecting Trump Family

The Secret Service is going broke trying to protect President Donald Trump and his family, according to an exclusive report by USA Today. After Trump released his first budget outline, mainstream media outlets seized the opportunity to attack the president by reporting on the exorbitant cost of protecting First Lady Melania Trump, and son Barron Trump, who had remained behind at the Trumps' suite in Trump Tower after the president moved to the White House so Barron could finish the school year.  

In an interview with USA Today, Secret Service Director Randolph "Tex" Alles said more than 1,000 agents have already hit the federally mandated caps for salary and overtime allowances that were meant to last the entire year.

Randolph "Tex" Alles

Here’s USA Today with more:

“The agency has faced a crushing workload since the height of the contentious election season, and it has not relented in the first seven months of the administration. "The president has a large family, and our responsibility is required in law,'' Alles said. "I can't change that. I have no flexibility.''

 

"The president has a large family, and our responsibility is required in law,'' Alles said. "I can't change that. I have no flexibility.''

According to USA Today, 42 people have secret service protection under Trump, a number that includes 18 members of his family. That's up from 31 during the Obama administration.

The Secret Service said Monday it has enough money to protect President Trump through September, even as the agency acknowledged it’s running up against its spending limit for agents protecting the president and his family.
Since Trump took office, the Secret Service has spent more than $6.6 million to protect Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, and each weekend trip there costs an additional $1 million. To cover these costs, the agency has asked Congress to increase its $60 million budget, and allow it to exceed overtime caps for certain employees.

However, in a statement published in response to the USA Today report, the agency assured its employees, and the public, that it will be able to fully compensate employees for overtime, according to the Hill.

“The Secret Service has the funding it needs to meet all current mission requirements for the remainder of the fiscal year and compensate employees for overtime within statutory pay caps,” agency director Randolph “Tex” Alles said in a statement.”

The current fiscal year ends Sept. 30.
 


via Read More Here..

Remarks by President Trump on the Strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Fort Myer
Arlington, Virginia

9:02 P.M. EDT
 
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  Please be seated.

Vice President Pence, Secretary of State Tillerson, members of the Cabinet, General Dunford, Deputy Secretary Shanahan, and Colonel Duggan.  Most especially, thank you to the men and women of Fort Myer and every member of the United States military at home and abroad.

We send our thoughts and prayers to the families of our brave sailors who were injured and lost after a tragic collision at sea, as well as to those conducting the search and recovery efforts.

I am here tonight to lay out our path forward in Afghanistan and South Asia.  But before I provide the details of our new strategy, I want to say a few words to the servicemembers here with us tonight, to those watching from their posts, and to all Americans listening at home.

Since the founding of our republic, our country has produced a special class of heroes whose selflessness, courage, and resolve is unmatched in human history.

American patriots from every generation have given their last breath on the battlefield for our nation and for our freedom.  Through their lives — and though their lives were cut short, in their deeds they achieved total immortality.

By following the heroic example of those who fought to preserve our republic, we can find the inspiration our country needs to unify, to heal, and to remain one nation under God.  The men and women of our military operate as one team, with one shared mission, and one shared sense of purpose.  

They transcend every line of race, ethnicity, creed, and color to serve together — and sacrifice together — in absolutely perfect cohesion.  That is because all servicemembers are brothers and sisters.  They're all part of the same family; it's called the American family.  They take the same oath, fight for the same flag, and live according to the same law.  They are bound together by common purpose, mutual trust, and selfless devotion to our nation and to each other. 

The soldier understands what we, as a nation, too often forget that a wound inflicted upon a single member of our community is a wound inflicted upon us all.  When one part of America hurts, we all hurt.  And when one citizen suffers an injustice, we all suffer together.

Loyalty to our nation demands loyalty to one another.  Love for America requires love for all of its people.  When we open our hearts to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice, no place for bigotry, and no tolerance for hate. 

The young men and women we send to fight our wars abroad deserve to return to a country that is not at war with itself at home.  We cannot remain a force for peace in the world if we are not at peace with each other.

As we send our bravest to defeat our enemies overseas — and we will always win — let us find the courage to heal our divisions within.  Let us make a simple promise to the men and women we ask to fight in our name that, when they return home from battle, they will find a country that has renewed the sacred bonds of love and loyalty that unite us together as one.

Thanks to the vigilance and skill of the American military and of our many allies throughout the world, horrors on the scale of September 11th — and nobody can ever forget that — have not been repeated on our shores.     

But we must also acknowledge the reality I am here to talk about tonight:  that nearly 16 years after September 11th attacks, after the extraordinary sacrifice of blood and treasure, the American people are weary of war without victory.  Nowhere is this more evident than with the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history — 17 years.

I share the American people’s frustration.  I also share their frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money, and most importantly lives, trying to rebuild countries in our own image, instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations.

That is why, shortly after my inauguration, I directed Secretary of Defense Mattis and my national security team to undertake a comprehensive review of all strategic options in Afghanistan and South Asia.

My original instinct was to pull out — and, historically, I like following my instincts.  But all my life I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office; in other words, when you're President of the United States.  So I studied Afghanistan in great detail and from every conceivable angle.  After many meetings, over many months, we held our final meeting last Friday at Camp David, with my Cabinet and generals, to complete our strategy.  I arrived at three fundamental conclusions about America’s core interests in Afghanistan.

First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made, especially the sacrifices of lives.  The men and women who serve our nation in combat deserve a plan for victory.  They deserve the tools they need, and the trust they have earned, to fight and to win.

Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable.  9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, was planned and directed from Afghanistan because that country was ruled by a government that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists.  A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11th.

And, as we know, in 2011, America hastily and mistakenly withdrew from Iraq.  As a result, our hard-won gains slipped back into the hands of terrorist enemies.  Our soldiers watched as cities they had fought for, and bled to liberate, and won, were occupied by a terrorist group called ISIS.  The vacuum we created by leaving too soon gave safe haven for ISIS to spread, to grow, recruit, and launch attacks.  We cannot repeat in Afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in Iraq.

Third and finally, I concluded that the security threats we face in Afghanistan and the broader region are immense.  Today, 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan — the highest concentration in any region anywhere in the world.  

For its part, Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence, and terror.  The threat is worse because Pakistan and India are two nuclear-armed states whose tense relations threaten to spiral into conflict.  And that could happen. 

No one denies that we have inherited a challenging and troubling situation in Afghanistan and South Asia, but we do not have the luxury of going back in time and making different or better decisions.  When I became President, I was given a bad and very complex hand, but I fully knew what I was getting into:  big and intricate problems.  But, one way or another, these problems will be solved — I'm a problem solver — and, in the end, we will win.

We must address the reality of the world as it exists right now — the threats we face, and the confronting of all of the problems of today, and extremely predictable consequences of a hasty withdrawal.

We need look no further than last week’s vile, vicious attack in Barcelona to understand that terror groups will stop at nothing to commit the mass murder of innocent men, women and children.  You saw it for yourself.  Horrible.  

As I outlined in my speech in Saudi Arabia three months ago, America and our partners are committed to stripping terrorists of their territory, cutting off their funding, and exposing the false allure of their evil ideology.

Terrorists who slaughter innocent people will find no glory in this life or the next.  They are nothing but thugs, and criminals, and predators, and — that's right — losers.  Working alongside our allies, we will break their will, dry up their recruitment, keep them from crossing our borders, and yes, we will defeat them, and we will defeat them handily.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan, America’s interests are clear: We must stop the resurgence of safe havens that enable terrorists to threaten America, and we must prevent nuclear weapons and materials from coming into the hands of terrorists and being used against us, or anywhere in the world for that matter.

But to prosecute this war, we will learn from history.  As a result of our comprehensive review, American strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia will change dramatically in the following ways:

A core pillar of our new strategy is a shift from a time-based approach to one based on conditions.  I’ve said it many times how counterproductive it is for the United States to announce in advance the dates we intend to begin, or end, military options.  We will not talk about numbers of troops or our plans for further military activities.

Conditions on the ground — not arbitrary timetables — will guide our strategy from now on.  America’s enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out.  I will not say when we are going to attack, but attack we will.

Another fundamental pillar of our new strategy is the integration of all instruments of American power — diplomatic, economic, and military — toward a successful outcome. 

Someday, after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban in Afghanistan, but nobody knows if or when that will ever happen.  America will continue its support for the Afghan government and the Afghan military as they confront the Taliban in the field.  

Ultimately, it is up to the people of Afghanistan to take ownership of their future, to govern their society, and to achieve an everlasting peace.  We are a partner and a friend, but we will not dictate to the Afghan people how to live, or how to govern their own complex society.  We are not nation-building again.  We are killing terrorists.

The next pillar of our new strategy is to change the approach and how to deal with Pakistan.  We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban, and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.  Pakistan has much to gain from partnering with our effort in Afghanistan.  It has much to lose by continuing to harbor criminals and terrorists.

In the past, Pakistan has been a valued partner.  Our militaries have worked together against common enemies.  The Pakistani people have suffered greatly from terrorism and extremism.  We recognize those contributions and those sacrifices.  

But Pakistan has also sheltered the same organizations that try every single day to kill our people.  We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars at the same time they are housing the very terrorists that we are fighting.  But that will have to change, and that will change immediately.  No partnership can survive a country’s harboring of militants and terrorists who target U.S. servicemembers and officials.  It is time for Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace. 

Another critical part of the South Asia strategy for America is to further develop its strategic partnership with India — the world’s largest democracy and a key security and economic partner of the United States.  We appreciate India’s important contributions to stability in Afghanistan, but India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United States, and we want them to help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistance and development.  We are committed to pursuing our shared objectives for peace and security in South Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region.

Finally, my administration will ensure that you, the brave defenders of the American people, will have the necessary tools and rules of engagement to make this strategy work, and work effectively and work quickly.

I have already lifted restrictions the previous administration placed on our warfighters that prevented the Secretary of Defense and our commanders in the field from fully and swiftly waging battle against the enemy.  Micromanagement from Washington, D.C. does not win battles.  They are won in the field drawing upon the judgment and expertise of wartime commanders and frontline soldiers acting in real time, with real authority, and with a clear mission to defeat the enemy. 

That’s why we will also expand authority for American armed forces to target the terrorist and criminal networks that sow violence and chaos throughout Afghanistan.  These killers need to know they have nowhere to hide; that no place is beyond the reach of American might and Americans arms.  Retribution will be fast and powerful.

As we lift restrictions and expand authorities in the field, we are already seeing dramatic results in the campaign to defeat ISIS, including the liberation of Mosul in Iraq.  

Since my inauguration, we have achieved record-breaking success in that regard.  We will also maximize sanctions and other financial and law enforcement actions against these networks to eliminate their ability to export terror.  When America commits its warriors to battle, we must ensure they have every weapon to apply swift, decisive, and overwhelming force.   

Our troops will fight to win.  We will fight to win.  From now on, victory will have a clear definition:  attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing al Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan, and stopping mass terror attacks against America before they emerge. 

We will ask our NATO allies and global partners to support our new strategy with additional troop and funding increases in line with our own.  We are confident they will.  Since taking office, I have made clear that our allies and partners must contribute much more money to our collective defense, and they have done so.

In this struggle, the heaviest burden will continue to be borne by the good people of Afghanistan and their courageous armed forces.  As the prime minister of Afghanistan has promised, we are going to participate in economic development to help defray the cost of this war to us.  

Afghanistan is fighting to defend and secure their country against the same enemies who threaten us.  The stronger the Afghan security forces become, the less we will have to do.  Afghans will secure and build their own nation and define their own future.  We want them to succeed. 

But we will no longer use American military might to construct democracies in faraway lands, or try to rebuild other countries in our own image.  Those days are now over.  Instead, we will work with allies and partners to protect our shared interests.  We are not asking others to change their way of life, but to pursue common goals that allow our children to live better and safer lives.  This principled realism will guide our decisions moving forward.  

Military power alone will not bring peace to Afghanistan or stop the terrorist threat arising in that country.  But strategically applied force aims to create the conditions for a political process to achieve a lasting peace.

America will work with the Afghan government as long as we see determination and progress.  However, our commitment is not unlimited, and our support is not a blank check.  The government of Afghanistan must carry their share of the military, political, and economic burden.  The American people expect to see real reforms, real progress, and real results.  Our patience is not unlimited.  We will keep our eyes wide open. 

In abiding by the oath I took on January 20th, I will remain steadfast in protecting American lives and American interests.  In this effort, we will make common cause with any nation that chooses to stand and fight alongside us against this global threat.  Terrorists take heed:  America will never let up until you are dealt a lasting defeat.

Under my administration, many billions of dollars more is being spent on our military.  And this includes vast amounts being spent on our nuclear arsenal and missile defense.

In every generation, we have faced down evil, and we have always prevailed.  We prevailed because we know who we are and what we are fighting for.  

Not far from where we are gathered tonight, hundreds of thousands of America’s greatest patriots lay in eternal rest at Arlington National Cemetery.  There is more courage, sacrifice, and love in those hallowed grounds than in any other spot on the face of the Earth.

Many of those who have fought and died in Afghanistan enlisted in the months after September 11th, 2001.  They volunteered for a simple reason:  They loved America, and they were determined to protect her. 

Now we must secure the cause for which they gave their lives.  We must unite to defend America from its enemies abroad.  We must restore the bonds of loyalty among our citizens at home, and we must achieve an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the enormous price that so many have paid.  

Our actions, and in the months to come, all of them will honor the sacrifice of every fallen hero, every family who lost a loved one, and every wounded warrior who shed their blood in defense of our great nation.  With our resolve, we will ensure that your service and that your families will bring about the defeat of our enemies and the arrival of peace.

We will push onward to victory with power in our hearts, courage in our souls, and everlasting pride in each and every one of you.

Thank you.  May God bless our military.  And may God bless the United States of America.  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  (Applause.)
 
END
9:27 P.M. EDT

 
 
 

Vía White House.gov Press Office Feed http://ift.tt/2xmXjNU

Double Standard Debbie: Stop Lying!

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (DWS) has been caught, yet again.

By Taylor Foland

Thirty-seven-year-old Imran Awan was a former IT staffer for the House of Representatives, along with several other of his family members. Imran was arrested on July 25, 2017 at Dulles International Airport for bank fraud while attempting to flee the country for Pakistan. Back in February, there was an investigation opened into several people related to Imran who were also IT staffers in the House of Representatives. The people included in that investigation were: Imran himself, his brothers Amid and Jamal, his wife, and a family friend. Imran and people connected to him worked for nearly thirty Congressmen and women, providing technical support for them.

Imran virtually had access to everything that was going on within the House of Representatives, including the House Intelligence Committee. He had access to the House Intelligence Committee’s server, as well as the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s server, and had access to several computer mainframes with classified intelligence on them. Wasserman Schultz kept Imran on payroll after everyone else had already fired him (and his family). This is a scandal that could be connected to past scandals, including the DNC hacking. The Democratic National Convention, and the Democratic National Committee were unprotected when it came to their IT networks. You would have thought that the DNC would have had rigorous security, but they didn’t. Debbie Wasserman obviously was fired from her position as Chairwoman of the DNC.

Could Imran be connected to the Clinton email scandal? In some way?

This is just the tip of the iceberg, this strange and disturbing story has more beneath its surface. Representative Ron DeSantis (Florida’s Sixth Congressional District) is calling for the Attorney General to investigate Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Carla Spalding is running against Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and is calling for her resignation.

Wasserman-Schultz put up a pretty pathetic defense, to say the absolute least. She claimed that anti-Muslim sentiment was why Imran was being targeted, and that it was the “right thing” to keep him on payroll for a different position. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was trying to shift everything back to identity politics, like most Democrats do when confronted with reality, and facts.

The Democratic Party operates on the insanity of identity politics. However, by March, this year most Democrats had fired these four IT staffers, with the exception being Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office with Imran Awan! So, for Debbie Wasserman Schultz to act like such a racial justice warrior is just beyond the pale really, it’s quite absurd. This story should be covered more, but the mainstream media, as usual, is completely one-sided and extremely biased. Imran Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi was one of those fired IT consultants, after being fired she left the country in March, and abruptly took her children out of school.

According to Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, the amount of pay that these contractors received was more than three times the normal rate for the same positions. It’s estimated by the Chairman that these people collected over four million dollars over the last thirteen years. Why so much money?

Imran’s attorney, Christopher Gowan released a statement which blames “a frenzy of anti-Muslim bigotry” and “extremist right-wing bloggers” for the firings of the IT consultants, including Imran. Except, there is a contradiction is that statement, because Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the last Democrat to keep Imran on her payroll, under a different duty. All other Democrats had already fired the others. DWS decided to keep Imran on-board after everyone else had fired his family, and the family friend.

According to an official FBI affidavit, Imran had wired over $283,000 to Pakistan, $165,000 of that sum of money being wired from a faulty home-equity loan. Imran was arrested for bank fraud, upon his arrest, only then did DWS fire him. This is the definition of “the swamp”. A story made complete with bank fraud, and corrupt officials on Capitol Hill covering for people. The only reasonable explanation that comes to mind of why Wasserman Schultz would do this is that there was some kind of secret deal between her and Imran, perhaps related to the DNC.

Why else would she have kept him on for so long, and then throw him under the bus when he was arrested?

The mainstream media’s coverage of this story has dwindled in recent days. (Not surprising.) As usual, the liberal press sides with the democratic view: that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was protecting an innocent IT staffer, from religious discrimination, and “Muslim bashing.” Instead of reporting on any alleged corruption, they slant the views in a way that makes it seem like Conservatives are the ones in the wrong. It’s the playbook the Democrats have used every single time.

The New York Times (failing fake news) came out with a July 28 article with a clear liberal bias: “conservative news outlets have built a case against Imran Awan, his wife, two brothers and a friend, piece by piece.” No coverage on why she kept him on so long though? Why would she have kept him on payroll by then switching his job title? This story has ‘cover-up’ written all over it.

The double standard is glaring, and it is the last thing the mainstream media wants to talk about. So, this story will continue to grow, all the way until the Midterms. This is the reason why Congress has below 20% approval. This Imran, was being paid by the government to cover in some way for DWS. There needs to be a thorough investigation conducted into this situation.

Let’s not hold our breath on that one though! We are still waiting for Eric Holder, Susan Rice, Hillary, Samantha Power, Loretta Lynch, and James Comey to be investigated, and held accountable. We’re still waiting.

With all this being said, the real losers here are the people in District 23 of Florida. They have someone in the House of Representatives who is using their prestige, their office, and their power to intimidate and threaten people, it’s disgraceful.

Why is the House Ethics Committee not throwing the book at DWS? After the violation of security policies, why did DWS allow Imran Awan to stay on her office’s payroll? The Washington Post, the New York Times, and other liberal outlets have reported so voraciously on Russia, but barely covered this.

It is looking more and more unlikely that DWS will answer any questions on this subject. It is time to DRAIN THE SWAMP. There is more to this story, don’t let it go.

 

Taylor Foland is a Volunteer Coordinator for ACT For America, the nation’s largest grassroots national security group. ACT has over 750,000 members and 1,000 allied volunteers groups across America.

Vía Roger Stone – Stone Cold Truth http://ift.tt/2g0Ua3i

Mnuchin Visits Fort Knox, Says “Gold Is Safe”

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had a busy day today: shortly after warning once again that a US debt ceiling deal has to be done by late September or else the country would run out of cash and suffer a technical default, roughly around the time he hinted that Trump may keep carried interest tax breaks for some firms that create jobs (while eliminating it for hedge fund managers), the former hedge fund manager and Hollywood producer paid a rare official visit to Fort Knox to check out the nation’s gold stash on Monday, while – as Bloomberg put it – keeping an open mind for future film projects.

“I assume the gold is still there,” Mnuchin told an audience in Louisville, Kentucky some 40 miles north of the biggest U.S. Bullion Depository (except of course for the foreign gold stash at the NY Fed). “It would really be quite a movie if we walked in and there was no gold.” It’s unclear if Mnuchin was envisioning a comedy or a drama.

After the visit, Mnuchin who was the first US Treasury Secretary to visit Fort Knox in nearly 70 years, playfullyreassured Americans the treasure was still secure.

“Glad gold is safe!” he wrote in a post on Twitter.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Mnuchin, whose action-film credits include ‘‘Mad Max: Fury Road,” “The Lego Batman Movie” and “Suicide Squad,” according to Bloomberg, said that he would be only the third secretary of the Treasury to go inside the vault since it was created in 1936 by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

“We have approximately $200 billion of gold at Fort Knox,” said Mnuchin. “The last time anybody went in to see the gold, other than the Fort Knox people, was in 1974 when there was a congressional visit. And the last time it was counted was actually in 1953.

Which is why the American public is so lucky it can take the word of a former Goldman partner without any trace of doubt… 


via Read More Here..