from Greg Hunter:
by Phil Shriver, Conservative Review:
Filling in for Mark Levin Friday night, former Secret Service agent and host of “The Dan Bongino Show” Dan Bongino made the case that the entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative was a “setup.”
“You can see the left-wing media’s own stories about all of this. The spying, the setup, the framing of Donald Trump. The left wing reported on it because they thought it was real … because they’re suckers for the Democrats!” Bongino argued.
“Folks, this was a setup. It was sting operation, an entrapment operation the entire time.”
Along with Levin, Bongino has been leading the charge in exposing the Obamagate scandal on his chart-topping podcast, calling it the “biggest political scandal in U.S. history.”
— CRTV (@CRTV) 6 February 2018
Read More @ ConservativeReview.com
by Jack Montgomery, Breitbart:
A former professor of sociology at the University of Kent in Canterbury, Furedi recounted his experience with the globalist’s “missionaries” in an article for the Telegraph newspaper, having been prompted by the revelations about his efforts to bring down the British government and trigger another EU referendum.
“Soros believes that if the people voted the wrong way, he is entitled to thwart decisions made by them,” Furedi wrote.
“Soros does not believe in the legitimacy of borders nor in the authority of national electorates. Consequently, he feels entitled to influence and if possible direct the political destiny of societies all over the world.”
REAL COLLUSION: Foreign Billionaire George Soros Funding Gina Miller’s Anti-Brexit Campaign https://t.co/LiNvlsDRw4
— Jack Montgomery ن (@JackBMontgomery) 8 February 2018
Furedi said his own encounter with “the Soros operation” took place in the 87-year-old’s native Hungary in 2013, at an Open Society Youth Exchange exchange event which brought together so-called ‘civil society’ activists from across the globe:
Most of those in attendance were smart, idealistic young people who appeared to be committed to making the world a better place. My only concern with the gathering was it regarded its participants as a group of democratic missionaries, who would go back home to spread the good word.
It was later during lunch at a plush Budapest hotel that I encountered the full force of the arrogant ethos promoted by the Soros network of organisations. At my table I listened to Dutch, American, British, Ukrainian and Hungarian representatives of Soros NGOs boast about their achievements. Some claimed that they played a major role in the Arab Spring in Egypt. Others voiced their pride in their contribution to the democratisation of the Ukraine. Some bragged about their influence in preparing the ground for the overthrow of the Gadafif regime in Libya.
I sat quietly and felt uncomfortable with a group of people who so casually assumed that they had the right to play God throughout the world. At one point, the head of the table – a Hungarian leader of a Soros NGO – asked me what I thought about their work. Not wishing to offend, I quietly remarked that I wasn’t sure whether the external imposition of their idea of democracy on the people of Libya was legitimate nor that it would work. Without a second’s hesitation, my interlocutor rounded me with the response: “I don’t think that we have the luxury of waiting until the Libyan people come up with their own Jefferson!”
Furedi recalled being alarmed by “the haughty tone with which she lectured me about performing the role of Jefferson” in countries like Libya.
Foreign intervention has changed the North African country into a failed state, where jihadists are at large, black Africans are sold openly in slave markets, and criminal people-smugglers coin a handsome profit ferrying illegal migrants to Europe — often with the assistance of NGOs linked to Soros.
Read More @ Breitbart.com
by The Saker, via Russia Insider:
“He rebuilt, stabilized and modernized Russia in a way to prevent future collapses”
I have recently had the pleasure of watching a short presentation by Professor Stephen F. Cohen entitled “Rethinking Putin” which he delivered on the annual Nation cruise on December 2, 2017 (see here for the original Nation Article and original YouTube video).
In his short presentation, Professor Cohen does a superb job explaining what Putin is *not* and that includes: (but, please do watch the original video before proceeding).
Professor Cohen ended his talk by suggesting a few things which might form a part of a future honest biography:
The key thesis is this: Putin began as a pro-Western, European leader and with time he realigned himself with a much more traditional, Russian worldview. He is more in line with Russian voters today.
Professor Cohen concluded by addressing two topics which, I presume, his audience cared deeply about: he said that, contrary to Western propaganda, the so-called ‘anti-gay’ laws in Russia are no different from the laws of 13 US states. Secondly, that “by any reckoning, be it flourishing inside Russia or relations with Israel, by general consent of all, nobody denies this, Jews under Putin in Russia are better off than they had ever been in Russian history. Ever. They have more freedom, less official anti-Semitism, more protection, more official admiration for Israel, more interaction, more freedom to go back and forth”.
This is all very interesting important stuff, especially when delivered to a Left-Liberal-Progressive US audience (with, probably, a high percentage of Jews). Frankly, Professor Cohen’s presentation makes me think about what Galileo might have felt when he made his own “presentations” before the tribunal of Inquisition (Cohen’s articles and books are now also on the modern equivalent of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum). In truth, Professor Cohen is simply true to himself: he opposed the crazies during the old Cold War and now he is opposing the same crazies during the new Cold War.
His entire life Professor Cohen was a man of truth, courage, and integrity – a peacemaker in the sense of the Beatitudes (Matt 5:9). So while I am not surprised by his courage, I am still immensely impressed by it. Some might think that delivering a short presentation on a cruise-ship is hardly a sign of great courage, but I would vehemently disagree.
Yes, nobody would shoot Cohen in the back of the neck like, say, the Soviet ChK-GPU-NKVD would have done, but I submit that these methods of “enforcing” a single official consensus were far less effective than their modern equivalents: the conformity imposition techniques (see: Asch Conformity Experiment) so prevalent in the modern Western society.
Just look at the results: there was far more reading and thinking (of any kind) going on in the Soviet society than there is today in the modern AngloZionist Empire (anybody who remembers the bad old USSR will confirm that to you). As one joke puts it: in a dictatorship, you are told to “shut up”, while in a democracy you are encouraged to “keep talking”. QED.
Turning to Professor Cohen’s talking points, numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4 are basic facts. Nothing to be debated here – Cohen is plainly setting the factual record straight. Number 5 is much more interesting and controversial. For one thing, we are talking views/intentions, which are hard to judge. Was Putin ever pro-Western? Who knows? Maybe his closest friends know? My own belief is that this question must be looked at in combination of issue #8: Putin’s service in the KGB.
There is still a huge amount of misinformation about the old Soviet KGB in the West. To the average American a “KGB agent” is a guy called Vladimir, with steel gray-blue eyes, who beats up dissidents, steals Western technological secrets, and spies on the wives of politicians (and even beds them).
Read More @ Russia-Insider.com
by Shepard Ambellas, Intellihub:
Something is afoot at the Clark County Coroner’s office, autopsy of “Stephen Paddock” reveals body was not Paddock and rather someone else
LAS VEGAS (INTELLIHUB) — It is unknown why the Clark County Coroner has released the autopsy report of a random 6′-1″ tall individual with bad teeth after cremating the body, violating court a court order, and then claiming the body is that of the alleged shooter Stephen Paddock when Paddock is clearly 6′-4″ tall and has rather good teeth.
No this is not a joke. This is real and should scare any American who entrusts their government, to tell the truth.
The bogus autopsy records were released by the coroner on Friday and contradict everything we know about Paddock physically.
Fox News reports:
The autopsy showed Paddock, who was just more than six feet tall, was considered to be slightly overweight at 224 pounds, had high blood pressure and bad teeth. But he appeared to be healthy and nothing out of the ordinary was uncovered in his physical condition, even after experts at Stanford University conducted a microscopic brain examination, according to the documents.
As Intellihub reported on 20 Jan., in the article titled Body autopsied by doctor likely not Steven Paddock’s, official LVMPD report reveals:
Information listed in the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s preliminary report on the 1 Oct. massacre, reveals that the body autopsied by Dr. Lisa Gavin may not be Steven Paddock at all.
According to Section VIII of the report titled Suspect Autopsy: “On 10-06-17, at approximately 1625 hours, under CCOCME case 17-10064 and FBI incident number 4-LV-2215061 an autopsy was performed on the body of Paddock at the CCOCME
by Doctor Lisa Gavin.”
However, the report lists the decedent Stephen Paddock as being only “73 inches” tall (6′-1″) despite the fact that it is well known that Paddock was 6′-4″ in height and had a much larger frame than the dead guy pictured in the leaked crime scene photographs.
Read More @ Intellihub.com
by Jim Rickards, Daily Reckoning:
To understand the risk of contagion, you can think of the marlin in Hemingway’s Old Man and the Sea. The marlin started out as a prize catch lashed to the side of the fisherman Santiago’s boat.
But, once there was blood in the water, every shark within miles descended on the marlin and devoured it. By the time Santiago got to shore, there was nothing left of the marlin but the bill, the tail and some bones.
In this metaphor, the marlin is XIV. During regular trading hours last Monday, there was not much blood in the water. But, once traders saw the damage to VIX, they smelled blood in terms of the value of XIV.
At that point, markets (the sharks) no longer traded XIV in relation to other instruments. Instead markets systematically traded against XIV in an effort to force every holder, sponsor and guarantor to suffer a total loss. They were out to break it.
Markets intended to pressure the price of XIV until there was a suspension of redemption, a collapse to zero, or ultimately noteholder litigation.
I apologize if this sounds a bit technical. The bottom line is, the damage seems to have been contained.
But, what if the XIV ETN holdings had been concentrated at just one or two hedge funds? What if those holders themselves were highly leveraged and were losing money on stocks and XIV at the same time? What if rumors had leaked out into the marketplace about “hedge funds in distress?”
An even greater danger for markets is when these two kinds of contagion converge. This happens when market losses spillover into broader markets, then those losses give rise to systematic trading against a particular instrument or hedge fund.
When the targeted instrument or fund is driven under, credit losses spread to a wider group of fund counterparts who then fall under suspicion themselves. Soon a market-wide liquidity panic emerges in which, “everybody wants his money back.”
This is exactly what happened during the Russia-Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) crisis in 1998. The month of August 1998 was a liquidity crisis involving broad classes of instruments. But, the month of September was systematically aimed at LTCM.
I was right in the middle of that crash. It was an international monetary crisis that started in Thailand in June of 1997, spread to Indonesia and Korea, and then finally Russia by August of ’98. It was exactly like dominoes falling.
LTCM wasn’t a country, although it was a hedge fund big as a country in terms of its financial footings.
I was the general counsel of that firm. I negotiated that bailout. The importance of that role is that I had a front-row seat.
I’m in the conference room, in the deal room, at a big New York law firm. There were hundreds of lawyers. There were 14 banks in the LTCM bailout fund. There were 19 other banks in a one billion dollar unsecured credit facility. Included were Treasury officials, Federal Reserve officials, other government officials, Long-Term Capital, our partners.
It was a thundering herd of lawyers, but I was on point for one side of the deal and had to coordinate all that.
It was a 4 billion dollar all-cash deal, which we put together in 72 hours with no due diligence. Anyone who’s raised money for his or her company, or done deals can think about that and imagine how difficult it would be to get a group of banks to write you a check for 4 billion dollars in 3 days.
Systematic pressure on LTCM persisted until the fund was almost broke. As Wall Street attacked the fund, they missed the fact that they were the creditors of the fund. By breaking LTCM, they were breaking themselves. That’s when the Fed intervened and forced Wall Street to bail out the fund.
Those involved can say they bailed out Long-Term capital. But if Long-Term Capital had failed, and it was on the way to failure, 1.3 trillion dollars of derivatives would’ve been flipped back to Wall Street.
In reality, Wall Street bailed out itself.
The panic of 2008 was an even more extreme version of 1998. We were days, if not hours, from the sequential collapse of every major bank in the world. Think of the dominoes again. What had happened there? You had a banking crisis.
Except in 2008, Wall Street did not bail out a hedge fund; instead the central banks bailed out Wall Street.
And today, systemic risk is more dangerous than ever. Each crisis is bigger than the one before.Too-big-to-fail banks are bigger than ever, have a larger percentage of the total assets of the banking system, and have much larger derivatives books.
New automated trading algorithms like high-frequency trading techniques used in stock markets could add to liquidity in normal times, but the liquidity could disappear instantly in times of market stress. And when the catalyst is triggered and panic commences, impersonal dynamics take on a life of their own.
These kinds of sudden, unexpected crashes that seems to emerge from nowhere are entirely consistent with the predictions of complexity theory.
Read More @ DailyReckoning.com
by Jack Burns, The Free Thought Project:
A man is seeking $26 million after the force used by police resulted in life-threatening injuries and third-degree burns when he was forced onto the scorching 170-degree pavement.
Sacramento, CA — A California man is suing the city of Citrus Heights and several of its police officers for the horrific injuries he sustained when police forced him onto the ground of a restaurant parking lot when the temperature was more than 100 degrees outside.
The pavement was estimated to have been around 170 degrees, causing James Bradford Nelson III’s flesh to melt and resulting in third-degree burns on his face, torso, legs, and buttocks.
Nelson suffers from schizophrenia and has been in and out of jail since he was a juvenile. While defense attorneys will likely bring up his criminal past as being responsible for the police officers’ use of force, Nelson’s family says his incarcerations have followed a pattern of mental instability, leading to criminal behavior, and then jail time. But, arguably, no human should receive life-threatening burns after a run-in with police.
Police officers were called to the KFC when Nelson was behaving erratically. The shirtless man then fled the restaurant but was taken to the ground, with his bare skin being exposed to the scorching roadway.
Nelson’s mother and stepfather, Tarsha and Barry Benigno, told the Sacremento Bee that they believe the officers were “poorly trained,” and that the injuries Nelson sustained have taken an emotional toll on both him and his family.
Citrus Heights police chief Ronald Lawrence said the case will be tried in court, adding that it is, “something that will involve the judicial system, and will not be resolved in the court of public opinion.”But it will be the opinion of the jury and not the chief which will matter when restitution must be decided.
The lawsuit contends, “During this time on the ground Nelson was screaming and yelling in excruciating pain,” and adds, “the officers forced his head down onto the hot pavement, leaning onto it with such force that Nelson could not move it for relief, exposing the right side of his face and neck to the scorching heat of the concrete.”
Read More @ TheFreeThoughtProject.com