Thursday, October 6, 2022

Intimidation of 9/11 Commission witnesses: the “minders”

0

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News:

Let’s say you work for a large corporation, which is undertaking an internal investigation of possible corruption and fraud within the company.

You’re sitting in a room, and an employee of the company is interviewing you.

But next to you sits your boss. He hears all the questions, and he hears your answers. He takes notes on the interview. He answers questions you are supposed to answer. He is your “minder.”

Getting the picture?

On October 2, 2003, during the 9/11 Commission investigation into what happened on September 11, 2001, a memo was sent to two Commission attorneys, Daniel Marcus and Steven Dunne. It was ominously titled:

“Executive Branch Minders’ Intimidation of Witnesses.”

The memo was written by members of the 9/11 Commission’s Team 2: Kevin Scheid, Lorry Fenner, and Gordon Lederman. There is no indication that any official subsequently acted on their highly serious charges:

“When we have asked witnesses [in interviews] about certain roles and responsibilities within the intelligence community, minders [in the room] have preempted witnesses’ responses by referencing formal policies and procedures. As a result, witnesses have not responded to our questions and have deprived us from understanding the intelligence community’s actual functioning and witnesses’ view of their roles and responsibilities.”

“[M]inders have positioned themselves physically and have conducted themselves in a manner that we believe intimidates witnesses from giving full and candid responses to our questions. Minders generally have sat next to witnesses at the table and across from Commission staff, [falsely] conveying to witnesses that minders are participants in interviews and are of equal status to witnesses.”

“[Minders now and then] answer questions directed at witnesses.”

“[Minders write] verbatim notes of witnesses’ statements [which] conveys to witnesses that their superiors will review their statements and may engage in retribution.”

“[Minders making notes] facilitates [government] agencies in alerting future witnesses to the Commission’s lines of inquiry and permits agencies to prepare future witnesses either explicitly or implicitly.”

“[T]he net effect of minders’ conduct, whether intentionally or not, is to intimidate witnesses and to interfere with witnesses providing full and candid responses.”

This key memo defines the term “cover-up.”

Take it even further. This Commission “minder procedure” would be analogous to you sitting in the witness box at a criminal trial of a mob boss. You’re testifying for the prosecution against the boss. But in the box, next to you, sits a mob assassin.

So you say: “I may have implied I was there on the night the defendant was planning…whatever it was. But I didn’t really say that. I was misinterpreted. I don’t recall being there. I’ve never met the defendant. I’m a retired investor living on a pension. I’m receiving treatment for early-onset dementia…”

Granted, the 9/11 Commission interviewers were certainly asking superficial questions of witnesses from the get-go. But if a government witness by chance saw something or heard something or knew something that would have exploded the official 9/11 story, with his minder there he was in a straitjacket.

And he’ll stay in a straitjacket.

Read More @ NoMoreFakeNews.com

People Are Making Such Ridiculous Claims About What Is Going To Happen On September 23, 2017 And None Of Them Are True

0

by Michael Snyder, End Of The American Dream:

All sorts of sensationalist claims are being made about what is going to happen on September 23rd, and all of them are false. In recent days, I have spent time looking into these various claims, and I have been deeply disturbed by what I have discovered. Yes, it does appear that there will be a unique celestial alignment on September 23rd, and it does appear that it at least bears a resemblance to what is described in the first couple of verses in Revelation 12. And yes, this alignment will happen at about the time of Rosh Hashanah (the Feast of Trumpets). But people have gone way beyond those basic facts and have come up with ridiculous theories that are going to make them look like nutjobs when September 23rd comes and goes and their predictions don’t come to pass.

For example, let’s take a look at what “Christian numerologist” David Meade is saying. The following comes from Fox News

A Christian numerologist claims that the world will end next Saturday when a planet will, supposedly, collide with Earth.

According to Christian numerologist David Meade, verses in Luke 21:25 to 26 are the sign that recent events, such as the recent solar eclipse and Hurricane Harvey, are signs of the apocalypse.

And it turns out that Meade has written an entire book about this. The following comes from the book’s description

This book is a compendium of information from every sphere—astronomical, scientific, the Book of Revelation and geopolitics. It contains absolutely amazing revelations that direct us to one precise point in time in 2017. Planet X is a cryptogram and this book contains the keys necessary to decode it. When everything is considered together, it fits together perfectly like a watch. The existence of Planet X is beyond any reasonable doubt, to a moral certainty. We examine proofs of its existence. In fact, if you want to ask one simple question that posits the theory of the reality of Planet X, just ask yourself where did 2.2 Trillion disappear to in the Pentagon’s budget that Rumsfeld said was missing, and why do we have over 100 Underground Deep Bunkers throughout the U.S.? Why are critical government infrastructures moving from their susceptible positions on the East Coast to the protected areas of Colorado?

September 23rd is going to come, and we are going to see that Meade was dead wrong.

If Planet X was close enough to be here by September 23rd, we would be able to see it by now. The fact that it isn’t visible to anyone means that his theory has already been disproved.

Others are predicting that the rapture is going to take place on September 23rd. The following is an excerpt from an article in a British news source

Scores of YouTube doom videos and evangelical websites point to an astrological constellation on September 23 matching Revelation 12:1–2, which will signal the start of the Rapture and second coming of Christ:

The passage 12:1–2 reads: “And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of 12 stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth.”

Sorry, but this isn’t going to happen either. If you have read my book entitled “The Rapture Verdict”, then you already know that the Bible says that certain events must happen before the rapture takes place, and those events have not happened yet.

So September 23rd is going to arrive, and those waiting for the rapture are going to be greatly let down.

And because of these failed predictions, it will just cause more people to mock the Biblical promise of the second coming of Jesus Christ. I really like how investigative journalist Kara Pickering made this point in one of her recent articles…

When we are not whisked away on Sept. 23, 2017; it will effectively cause “men’s hearts to grow” further “cold.” It will give an open platform to the scoffer’s that say, “Where is the promise of His coming?” (see: Matthew 24:12, 2 Peter 3:4)

There are others out there that are suggesting that even though the rapture might not take place on September 23rd, it may still mark the beginning of the Great Tribulation.

This is not going to happen either, and for an extended explanation of why that is not possible I would once again recommend reading “The Rapture Verdict”.

But could it be possible that the alignment on September 23rd does have some sort of spiritual meaning?

Of course.

Read More @ EndOftheAmericanDream.com

Pedophile Furore Wrecks Iceland Coalition

0

from Disobedient Media:

A furore over a pedophile’s links to Prime Minister Bjarni Benediktsson has triggered the collapse of Iceland’s ruling coalition.

The Bright Future party announced it was withdrawing from the three-party coalition after nine months in office.

It blamed a “serious breach of trust within the government”.

Earlier it emerged that the prime minister’s father had written a letter recommending a convicted pedophile have his “honor restored”.

This old Icelandic system permits convicts to have certain civil rights restored – enabling them to run for public office, qualify for certain government jobs or serve as an attorney or solicitor, for example – if three letters of recommendation from persons of good character are provided.

But Icelanders have been horrified by the secret backing for Hjalti Sigurjón Hauksson – convicted in 2004 of raping his stepdaughter almost every day for 12 years from when she was five. He served a five-and-a-half-year jail term.

The Reykjavik Grapevine news site quotes the survivor of Hauksson’s abuse as saying it was “surreal” that he should receive restored honor.

The government has also been accused of an attempted cover-up after it refused to disclose who had written the letter of recommendation.

It only emerged on Thursday that it was Benedikt Sveinsson, Prime Minister Benediktsson’s father, but the prime minister is said to have been informed about his involvement in July.

In a statement, Mr Sveinsson apologised for providing the recommendation for Hauksson, an old friend of his.

Iceland’s justice minister has said she is preparing a bill to reform the restored honor system in response to the furore.

Icelandic journalist Hjortur Gudmundsson says the coalition’s position was already fragile, as it had a majority of only one parliamentary seat before Bright Future withdrew its support.

Read More @ DisobedientMedia.com

POTUS Trump Makes Good on His $1 Million Hurricane Harvey Relief Donation – Liberals Still Trash Him

0

by Cristina Laila, The Gateway Pundit:

President Trump announced in late August that he was pledging $1 million to victims of Hurricane Harvey.

Hate-filled liberals immediately attacked President Trump saying that he was lying and that he actually wouldn’t give the money. They also attacked Trump when he released the names of the charities he was donating to. Apparently Trump is evil because he donated his money to too many ‘Christian charities’.

Now that Trump has made good on his pledge, liberals are still trashing him. Satan runs the left.

President Trump tweeted over a report from the Washington Examiner confirming he officially donated the $1 million dollars to Hurricane Harvey relief saying “My great honor!”

Via the Washington Examiner:

President Trump made good on his promise to donate $1 million to Harvey relief efforts, according to a report Saturday.

The president sent 12 checks to various organizations helping Texas and Louisiana recover after last month’s disastrous storm, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders confirmed to The Hill.

Liberals immediately trashed POTUS.

Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com

Russia Hacking Truth Continues to Unravel

0

by Mike Whitney, Russia Insider:

Incidentally the most pro-establishment conspiracy theory is also the most successful one

A new report by a retired IT executive at IBM, debunks the claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential campaign by hacking Democratic computers and circulating damaging information about Hillary Clinton.  The report, which is titled “The Non-Existent Foundation for Russian Hacking Charge“,  provides a rigorous examination of the wobbly allegations upon which the hacking theory is based, as well as a point by point rejection of the primary claims which, in the final analysis, fail to pass the smell test. While the report is worth reading in full, our intention is to zero-in on the parts of the text that disprove the claims that Russia meddled in US elections or hacked the servers at the DNC.

Let’s start with the fact that there are at least two credible witnesses who claim to know who took the DNC emails and transferred them to WikiLeaks. We’re talking about WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and WikiLeaks ally, Craig Murray. No one is in a better position to know who actually took the emails than Assange, and yet, Assange has repeatedly said that Russia was not the source. Check out this clip from the report:

Assange …. has been adamant all along that the Russian government was not a source; it was a non-state player. …

ASSANGE: Our source is not a state party

HANNITY (Conservative talk show host): Can you say to the American people unequivocally that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta’s emails — can you tell the American people 1,000 percent you did not get it from Russia…

ASSANGE: Yes.

HANNITY: … or anybody associated with Russia?

ASSANGE: We — we can say and we have said repeatedly… over the last two months, that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party…

(“The Non-Existent Foundation for Russian Hacking Charge”, Skip Folden)

Can you think of a more credible witness than Julian Assange?  The man has devoted his entire adult life to exposing the truth about government despite the risks his actions pose to his own personal safety. In fact, he is currently holed up at the Ecuador embassy in London for defending the public’s right to know what their government is up to. Does anyone seriously think that a man like that would deliberately lie just to protect Russia’s reputation?

No, of course not, and the new report backs him up on this matter. It states:  “No where in the Intelligence Community’s Assessment (ICA) was there any evidence of any connection between Russia and WikiLeaks.” The reason Assange keeps saying that Russia wasn’t involved is because Russia wasn’t involved. There’s nothing more to it than that.

As for the other eyewitness, Craig Murray, he has also flatly denied that Russia provided WikiLeaks with the DNC emails.  Check out this except from an article at The Daily Mail:

(Murray) “flew to Washington, D.C. for emails….He claims he had a clandestine hand-off … near American University with one of the email sources. Murray said the leakers’ motivation was ‘disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the  ’tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders’…

Murray says: ‘The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks’. ‘Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that,’ Murray insists.” ….

Murray said he was speaking out due to claims from intelligence officials that Wikileaks was given the documents by Russian hackers as part of an effort to help Donald Trump win the U.S. presidential election.

‘I don’t understand why the CIA would say the information came from Russian hackers when they must know that isn’t true,’ he said. ‘Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that.”

(EXCLUSIVE: Ex-British ambassador who is now a WikiLeaks operative claims Russia did NOT provide Clinton emails“, Daily Mail)

Is Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and human rights activist, a credible witness?

There’s one way to find out, isn’t there?  The FBI should interview Murray so they can establish whether he’s telling the truth or not. And, naturally, one would assume that the FBI has already done that since the Russia hacking story has been splashed across the headlines for more than a year now.

But that’s not the case at all. The FBI has never questioned Assange or Murray, in fact, the FBI has never even tried to get in touch with either of them. Never. Not even a lousy phone call. It’s like they don’t exist.

Why? Why hasn’t the FBI contacted or questioned the only two witnesses in the case?

Could it be because Assange and Murray’s knowledge of the facts doesn’t coincide with the skewed political narrative the Intel agencies and their co-collaborators at the DNC what to propagate?  Isn’t that what’s really going on?  Isn’t Russia-gate really just a stick for beating Russia and Trump?  How else would one explain this stubborn unwillingness of the FBI to investigate what one senator called “The crime of the century”?

Read More @ Russia-Insider.com

Peter Schiff – Mother of All Financial Cyclones About to Make Landfall

0

by Kerry Lutz, Financial Survival Network:

Peter Schiff joined us to discuss the latest developments in the economic landscape. Contrary to MSM opinion, the crash of 2008 was only a precursor to what’s coming next. And unlike Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, there’s no hiding from it. When it hits, not if, the devastation to the financial system will be the equivalent of a Cat 5 making a direct hit on Wall Street. Time to prepare now before it’s too late. Gold, silver but not Bitcoin as it’s not worth the paper it’s not printed on.

Click HERE to listen.

Read More @ FinancialSurvivalNetwork.com

CNN Cuts Off Black Trump Supporter When He Answers ‘White Guilt’ Question [VIDEO]

0

by Justin Caruso, Daily Caller:

A CNN broadcast Saturday cut off an African-American Trump supporter in the middle of answering a question about “white guilt” posed by a reporter.

“I [have seen] one shirt that said ‘no white guilt,’ things like that. I mean, there have been some messages that might not be that open to folks from diverse perspectives. What would your message be to folks like that?”

WATCH:

Trump supporter Diante Johnson answered, “When it comes to ‘no white guilt,’ I–I agree with that, I actually just made a post about it on my page and a video about it…There are some White Americans that feel guilty for what their ancestors did, you know, this and that, and the thing about it is, they shouldn’t have to feel guilty, this is America…” The video was then cut off.

The reporter continued, “Certainly, an interesting perspective there from an African-American who supports Donald Trump and is here today.”

The CNN video comes from coverage of a rally held on the National Mall Saturday.

Read More @ DailyCaller.com

ESPN Employee: ‘I Pretend I’m A Democrat So I Can Keep My Job Here’

0

by Matt Vespa, Townhall:

It was another bad week for ESPN. Controversy erupted when host Jemele Hill tweeted that President Donald Trump was a white supremacist. The network said that this issue had been addressed, and that she realized her actions were inappropriate. Oh, and those tweets don’t reflect the position of ESPN—classic public relations move here. They also didn’t fire her. That’s fine. On its face, what Hill did was not an offense that would warrant termination, but was worthy of a reprimand and a social media torching. It was a stupid remark. We all know that. Then again, Curt Schilling was fired for an offense of a much lesser degree concerning transgender bathrooms. 

Yet, where it gets into eyeroll territory (again) is what happened to anchor Linda Cohn, who was suspended when she said that politics might be a contributing factor to ESPN’s declining subscription base. She said this in April:

Longtime ESPN anchor Linda Cohn believes the network’s embrace of political issues is at least partially to blame for falling subscription rates.

“That is definitely a percentage of it,” Cohn said, when asked Thursday on New York radio show “Bernie and Sid” if viewers were tuning out because of politics, according to the New York Post. “I don’t know how big a percentage, but if anyone wants to ignore that fact, they’re blind.”

ESPN has lost 10 million subscribers over the past five years as “cord-cutting” allows viewers to cancel their cable subscriptions in favor of online streaming services.

Like I said, ESPN is a network where you can call the president a racist, but get suspended if you criticize the network. Clay Travis of Outkick The Coverage, and a sports analyst for Fox Sports 1, reported on this development earlier this week and got a ton of statements from his sources within the network upon the Hill backlash. One employee said, “I’m tired of pretending this company is not full of s**t” (via Outkick) [emphasis mine]:

…most inside ESPN kept the Cohn story quiet until yesterday, when Jemele Hill received no punishment for Tweeting Donald Trump was a “white supremacist,” that Trump was only elected president because he was white and had the support of racists and that Trump’s administration — the cabinet of which features a black man, an Indian woman, an Asian woman, and multiple Jewish people — was “largely…white supremacists.”

At that point the floodgates broke and employee after employee reached out to Outkick to share the Cohn story and other comments. (Outkick granted them anonymity because they all feared being fired if they used their names. Plus, these are the same sources that have consistently been correct about ESPN’s firings, the Robert Lee debacle and now the Linda Cohn suspension.)

Said another, different ESPN personality, “If Jemele can say that and Linda can’t say what she said, what kind of standard actually exists here? There isn’t one. There’s clearly a double standard. If you say things the company agrees with, you don’t get punished. If you say things the company disagrees with, you do get punished. Maybe even fired.”

Another prominent employee who also requested anonymity stated, “If I’d said Obama got elected because he was black is there any way I’d still be employed here? No chance. But Jemele can say Trump got elected because of white racists and no one does anything? They protect the people they agree with politically. They give them better jobs, more money, everyone can see it.”

Another employee recently contacted Outkick and said, “I pretend I’m a Democrat so I can keep my job here. And there are others just like me. We’re like a secret society inside ESPN.”

This isn’t the first time the sports network has stepped on a rake. In August, they reassigned an Asian anchor named Robert Lee from providing coverage of the University of Virginia vs. William & Mary football game because his name was too similar to that of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. Yes, it seems Asian Confederates are a problem, ESPN. Dear Lord, fellas. 

Read More @ Townhall.com

US will lose the trade war with China – Jim Rogers

from Hang The Bankers:

If the Trump administration puts sanctions on China, this would hurt America more because it just forces China and Russia and other countries to cooperate, says investor and financial commentator Jim Rogers.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned on Tuesday that the US could impose economic sanctions on China if it does not implement the new sanctions regime against North Korea, saying that the restrictions could involve cutting off Beijing’s access to the US financial system.

“If China doesn’t follow these sanctions, we will put additional sanctions on them and prevent them from accessing the US and international dollar system, and that’s quite meaningful,” Mnuchin said at the Delivering Alpha Conference in New York City.

The UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution banning North Korea’s textile exports and capping its oil imports following Pyongyang’s sixth nuclear test conducted last week.

RT spoke to famous investor, author, and financial commentator Jim Rogers to discuss global perspectives in the case of the US imposing sanctions on China.

RT: What is the likelihood that the US will go through with and actually impose economic sanctions on China if it does not implement the new sanctions regime against North Korea?

 

Jim Rogers: Sanctions are sanctions. They could do sanctions which are not very important or don’t do much damage. And then they will have good public relations which says they have sanctions, but it is meaningless. I would suspect if anything, that is what they will start with. If they put sanctions on China in a big way, it brings the whole world economy down. And in the end, it hurts America more than it hurts China because it just forces China and Russia and other countries closer together. Russia and China and other countries are already trying to come up with a new financial system. If America puts sanctions on them, they would have to do it that much faster and in the end America will lose its monopoly on the financial system, which will hurt America more than anybody.

RT: What do you think, is it an empty rhetoric and saber-rattling from Donald Trump because he said “those [UN] sanctions are nothing compared to what ultimately will have to happen” without specifying what he meant by that. Do you think this is just mere bluff on the part of the US, or would it really use the ‘nuclear option’?

JR: If it uses a nuclear option for sanctions, it will hurt America much more than will hurt North Korea, it will hurt America much more than it will hurt China, Russia and everybody else. It will force the rest of the world to find an alternative to the US financial system. If he does that, it is going to cause a lot of turmoil in the world financial economy and in the end it is going to hurt America more than it is going to hurt anybody else.

I would give you an example, if you look at Russian agriculture right now – America put sanctions on Russian agriculture trying to hurt Russia, but it has helped Russian agriculture. Russian agriculture is booming now. In the end, America has hurt itself more than it has hurt anybody else.

RT: If that happens, what would the consequences be for the global economy? Could this end up becoming a global economic crisis?

JR: We are probably going to have a global economic problem, maybe even crisis, in the next couple of years. This may be one of the things that start it. There is always something which starts a crisis. If America does something like this, this could be the thing that did it. In 1929, it started when America started a huge trade war with the rest of the world and the economists said, “please, this is a mistake,” but America did that anyway. And then we had a great collapse and The Great Depression of the 1930s.

RT: Washington runs a $350 billion annual trade deficit with Beijing. China also holds more than $1 trillion in US debt. How could the US actually threaten China in such circumstances?

JR: Mr. Trump has been saying for over a year, two years, that he was going to start a trade war with China. He was going to put very high tariffs on Chinese goods. In his mind, he wants to do it, he is ready to do it. Some of his advisors are very much in favor of a trade war. It may very well happen. If it happens, it is going to be very bad for the world and it is going to be worse for America than for other people.

RT: How significant is Chinese trade with North Korea?

JR: For North Korea, it is extremely important – that is really the only trade partner. They don’t trade with many people except China. But it is not very important for China. China has got gigantic trade all over the world and North Korea is a very small economy.

Read More @ HangTheBankers.com

The Rules of the Electric Car Game Just Changed in a Massive Way

0

by Marin Katusa, Katusa Research:

Last weekend, as the media focused on hurricanes and Donald Trump’s immigration policies, two massive stories flew under the market’s radar.

These stories were about one of the biggest economic revolutions of our time… and they have major investment implications.

First, China announced it plans to ban the sale of fossil-fuel powered cars and trucks. No date was given, but China is making it clear that Electric Vehicles (EVs) are the future of the world’s largest car market (which is 35{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} larger than the U.S. market). China is desperate to clean up its infamous air pollution. Emission-free electric vehicles will play a huge role in the efforts.

Secondly, Volkswagen, the world’s largest car company, announced it plans to design electric versions of all 300 of its models. To achieve this, Volkswagen plans to invest over $70 billion into new infrastructure. It’s going to be a huge shift undertaken by one of the world’s largest, most powerful manufacturing companies.

Regular Katusa Research readers know that I believe the Electric Vehicle revolution is one of the biggest investment themes of our time. For a long time, mass adoption of EVs were an environmentalist’s fantasy. Zero emission vehicles that run on electricity just couldn’t compete with conventional cars on price, quality, and fueling infrastructure. But thanks to incredible advances in technology, massive investments by large car makers, and huge government support, electric vehicles (EVs) are poised to go mainstream.

The news from China (the world’s largest car market) and Volkswagen (the world’s largest car maker) tell me that mass EV adoption will occur faster than most people believe it will… even faster than I believed it would just six months ago.

I believe a big reason the rate of EV adoption will take so many people by surprise because they don’t understand how technological progress is now occurring at an exponential rate. This rate of change is far faster than the kind of “linear change” most people are used to.

Exponential progress is happening now because of the stunning increases in the power and speed of computers. Computing power is the foundation on which our world of technological progress rests on. It’s what makes the Internet, your iPhone, your Facebook account, Tesla cars, Wi-Fi, and thousands of other things possible. After decades of refining and improving computer technology, progress in the field is accelerating. Our computers are getting much faster, much more powerful, much smaller, and much cheaper. The kind of economic shifts that used to take 20 years to play out are now taking just five years to play out… and catching many people off guard. This trend is affecting all industries, no matter how “old school” they are.

Back to China and Volkswagen…

Of course, China’s new policy will have measurable and direct affects in China. Of course, Volkswagen’s new policy will have measurable and direct affects in the company. But just as importantly, these policies will have massive indirect affects across the entire world.

These decisions mean more and more money will be invested into EV research and development. I’m talking about tens of billions of dollars over the short-term and hundreds of billions of dollars over the long-term (over 10 years). More money and more minds will go to work on making EVs better, cheaper, and more reliable. More new ideas will be developed and tested. Many will fail, but some will be world-changing breakthroughs. These breakthroughs will be developed at a faster rate than before. The world’s largest car market and the world’s largest car maker want it that way.

The enormous amount of money and energy devoted to EVs will drive production costs lower. Lower EV production costs will mean cheaper EV sticker prices and increased competitiveness with fossil fuel powered vehicles.

Increased competitiveness means more people buying electric vehicles sooner. More EV sales will signal to automakers that they should invest even more money into research and development. Even better technology will be developed and production costs will go even lower. It will become a virtuous, self-reinforcing cycle.

Perhaps the best way to showcase how increased investment has cut costs in the EV sector is by looking at the cost of lithium-ion batteries used in EVs. The chart below shows the dramatic cost reduction from 2010 to 2017.

Personally, I believe the best way to profit from the electric vehicle revolution is not by investing in EV makers, but by selling EV makers the materials they must all consume in huge quantities for decades in the future.

The average electric vehicle with a 65 kwh battery pack will require over 100 pounds of copper, 20 pounds of cobalt and 100 pounds of lithium carbonate.

Remember how I mentioned Volkswagen wants to make electric versions of all 300 of its models. Below is a chart which shows the quantity of metals demanded by Volkswagen to go 100{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} electric, relative to the current annual production. These numbers are not exact. There is going to be variance depending on battery type, however the numbers are staggering enough as is.

Read More @ KatusaResearch.com