Tuesday, March 26, 2019

What Happens to the Federal Debt If the Bond Bubble Pops?

by Peter Schiff, SchiffGold:

Earlier this month, Mint Capital strategist Bill Blain warned that the bond bubble is about to burst.

A crash in the bond market would likely take stocks down with it, but there is another impact that is less obvious. It could have a huge impact on the United States’ ability to finance its massive debt.

As Dan Kurz of DK Analytics points out, the federal government would have a difficult time even paying the interest on the debt in a “normalized” interest rate environment.

Neither US federal debt, nor virtually any OECD government debt, could be easily carried with ‘normalized’ interest rates, which would readily be 2 to 5 percentage points higher than current short-term (ZIRP-dominated) and long-term (based on 10-year OECD government bonds with no or very nominal yields) rates. For the US government, whose cost of funds is currently around 1.4% thanks to both massively lower, QE-enabled long-term rates and to a propensity to fund deficits and refinance debt with more shorter-term funding — which has been extremely cheap thanks to ZIRP or near ZIRP for nearly nine years — every one percentage point higher average cost of funding $20.5 trillion in debt would equate to a $205 billion higher annual interest expense.”

Government bond yields fluctuate wildly from the mean. In fact, they are typically at “non-mean” levels. Yields tend to spike during and after periods of marked debt expansion, wars, and/or higher inflation. When this reverses, yields tend to sink far below the mean. Falling bond yields typically take the S&P 500 earnings yield down with it, as the following chart shows.

According to Kurz, a bond bust would trigger massively higher interest rates/massively higher 10-year government bond yields, i.e., yields that would substantially exceed the 4%-5% nominal historical yields associated with “investment grade” government bonds.

Kurz provides some historical context.

For some fairly recent historical perspective, consider that 36 years ago America was still a $227 billion net creditor nation (vs. an $8.3 trillion net debtor recently), government debt-to-GDP was 31% (vs. 103% recently), one measure of ‘published’ inflation was 9.4% (vs. 1.3% recently), and Volcker’s ‘tough love’ monetary policy coupled with high inflation expectations had 10-year Treasury yields reaching 15.3%. (vs. 2.4% recently).”

He compares this to the environment today and reaches a disturbing conclusion.

Read More @ SchiffGold.com

DESTROY EVERYTHING Bezos Touches (and not just Bezos)

by Karl Denninger, Market Ticker:

So here we are….. you know I’ve written on Bezos using The Washington Post as a “mouthpiece” to push a political agenda that he believes will benefit him, and which extracts value from you.

This is particularly evil.  Let me remind you that business exists to make a profit.  Lobbying is of course part and parcel of what businesses sometimes do; they make their opinions known to lawmakers, among others.  Free speech is a right, not a privilege.

But lying, on purpose, isn’t free speech.  It’s deception, it’s fraud, it harms real people, that is, you, and when done through a perverse attack launched under the guise of “The Press” it must be met with an unrelenting response in which the person or organization that does it is DESTROYED in every possible and legal way, including all firms and interests said entity or person holds.

Why?

Because if you don’t do that then the only other alternative will eventually be the very unlawful use of violence to stop the predation that said person and organizations have organized against you.

Recently I got into a “Twitter Debate” with Dennis Kneale.  You may remember him from the time when he was on CNBS, and he and I went back and forth a number of times, including on the air, which I found amusing.  We have pretty-significant differences of opinion but personally I like the guy.

The recent issue was one of monopolies.  His argument was that my piece of same, and Bezos/Amazon in particular, was well-reasoned, insightful (in other words he agreed with my analysis) and yet, in his opinion, wrong.  The reason he claimed it was “wrong” was that there was no evidence Amazon had caused prices for products they sell to go up, and therefore there was no monopoly problem.

Dennis’ view is common, including among politicians and Attorneys General.

The problem is that it’s both legally and ethically bankrupt.

Let me quote the entirety of 15 USC Chapter 1, Section 1 and 2:

Sec 1:

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Sec 2:

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Do you see anything, anywhere, in that section that says prices must rise in order for there to be a violation?  Do you see anything that says you must succeed in driving out all of your competitors?

No.

The mere attempt — any such contract, combination, conspiracy or similar to restrain trade or commerce is a felony.  It does not matter if you succeed and it does not matter if prices go up in the areas where you are attempting to destroy competition — none of that matters.

Why did the drafters of this law write it this way?

The drafters knew that one of the most-pernicious ways to create a monopoly is to cost-shift.  That is, to give the perception that the consumer is getting a better deal through size and driving out competitors instead of a worse deal.  If you can take a business in which you hold a “first mover” advantage, or worse, in which you have excess capacity that would otherwise go to waste, sell it and use that unrelated service or product’s profit to sell something else below cost the consumer thinks he’s getting a great deal on said thing you sold below cost!

The problem of course is that someone is getting screwed; a competitive market will never allow this sort of cross-subsidization because the subsidizing service or product is also subject to competition, so without the monopoly effect cross-subsidization cannot work since you won’t have any excess profits to use for this purpose.

Therefore the mere existence of such a cross-subsidy channel is evidence of monopoly power.

John Stossel says that there’s nothing wrong with being a rich bastard so long as you don’t collude with government to get special deals.  I agree.  The problem is that as soon as cross-subsidy shows up and especially when it shows up across periods of years you have proof of said collusion — because without it there would be no excess money with which to do it.

In short there’s a very simple reason that 15 USC Chapter 1 Sections 1 and 2 don’t require prices to rise in the monopolized business as part of the predicate for those who try to do so to be guilty of a crime: It is almost always possible for those who monopolize to hide the negative impact that would otherwise show up directly in consumer price by forcing someone else to pay it, by extracting it from the government or by screwing someone, somewhere — whether it be getting screwed out of a job, getting screwed by the taxpayer funding the subsidizing service or product or something else.

Indeed this morning’s “announcement” on Amazon’s “new businesses” with Disney and others for content storage and delivery on AWS is outrageously idiotic except to leverage Amazon’s monopoly power.

The reason is simple — it is ridiculously more-expensive to store bulk data on a “cloud” than on your own infrastructure.  Always.  Not a little more expensive, more-so by orders of magnitude.

Video content is the very definition of “bulk data”!

And now we have this which is exactly why those laws must be enforced right damn now!

Entous says:

“But we really haven’t addressed… Our reporting has not taken us to a place where I would be able to say with any confidence that the result of it is going to be the president being guilty of being in cahoots with
the Russians. There’s no evidence of that that I’ve seen so far.

“We’ve seen a lot of flirtation, if you will, between them but nothing that, in my opinion, would rank as actual collusion. Now that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist, it just means we haven’t found it yet. Or maybe it doesn’t exist.”

Melissa McCullough, the Director of Newsroom Operations, expresses her bias against Trump, admitting “let’s just hope he doesn’t get re-elected in another three years.”

McCullough then backpedals and says, “I shouldn’t be saying these things because we don’t… We’re not supposed to really talk about that kind of stuff.”

You got this folks?  This is the Washington Post’s National Security Reporter who is admitting they have exactly zero evidence of actual Trump-Russia collusion.  None.  They have been digging and digging since well before the election and haven’t been able to find any evidence yet they “report” a knowing lie — they claim said collusion exists in their “newspaper” and that such collusion occurred as a claimed fact.

Then you have the director of their news operations who openly wants to see a sitting President lose, and I think it’s fair to assume wanted to see him lose in the first place and essentially admits this is reflected in the job she does.

Read More @ Market-Ticker.org

Former Intelligence Inspector General threatened by Hillary Clinton to not talk about private email server

0

by Alex Chistoforou, The Duran:

Ex-inspector general: Blowback came from Clinton allies.

Former Intelligence Community Inspector General says Hillary Clinton’s allies threatened retribution when he raised concerns about classified information on Clinton’s private email server.

Charles McCullough told Fox News’ Catherine Herridge that the Clinton campaign, along with Intelligence Director James Clapper, sent out warnings that he would be fired once Hillary was elected president.

McCullough discovering evidence of “top secret” emails passing through Hillary private email server, and went straight to Clapper to present his concerns, of which he has documented in a written statement.

McCullough told Fox News…

“There was personal blowback. Personal blowback to me, to my family, to my office.”


Fox News reports…

A government watchdog who played a central role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation during the Obama administration told Fox News that he, his family and his staffers faced an intense backlash at the time from Clinton allies – and that the campaign even put out word that it planned to fire him if the Democratic presidential nominee won the 2016 election.

*****

The Obama appointee discussed his role in the Clinton email probe for the first time on television, during an exclusive interview with Fox News. McCullough – who came to the inspector general position with more than two decades of experience at the FBI, Treasury and intelligence community – shed light on how quickly the probe was politicized and his office was marginalized by Democrats.

In January 2016, after McCullough told the Republican leadership on the Senate intelligence and foreign affairs committees that emails beyond the “Top Secret” level passed through the former secretary of state’s unsecured personal server, the backlash intensified.

Judicial Watch recently published evidence suggesting the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton email scandal was marred by conflicts of interest.

Read More @ TheDuran.com

Is Washington the Most Corrupt Government in History?

by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts:

Robert Mueller, a former director of the FBI who is working as a special prosecutor “investigating” a contrived hoax designed by the military/security complex and the DNC to destroy the Trump presidency, has yet to produce a scrap of evidence that Russiagate is anything but orchestrated fake news. As William Binney and other top experts have said, if there is evidence of Russiagate, the NSA would have it. No investigation would be necessary. So where is the evidence?

It is a revelation of how corrupt Washington is that a fake scandal is being investigated while a real scandal is not. The fake scandal is Trump’s Russiagate. The real scandal is Hillary Clinton’s uranium sale to Russia. No evidence for the former exists. Voluminous evidence for Hillary’s scandal lies in plain view. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/10/25/hillary-clinton-and-real-russian-collusion.html

Why are the clearly false charges against Trump being investigated and the clearly true charges against Hillary not being investigated? The answer is that Hillary with her hostility toward Russia and her denunciation of Russian President Putin as the “New Hitler” is not a threat to the budget and power of the US military/security complex, while Trump’s aim of normalizing relations with Russia would deprive the military/security complex of the “enemy” it requires to justify its massive budget and power.

Why hasn’t President Trump ordered the Justice Department to investigate Hillary? Is the answer that Trump is afraid the military/security complex will assassinate him? Why hasn’t the Justice Department undertaken the investigation on its own? Is the answer that Trump’s government is allied with his enemies?

How corrupt does Mueller have to be to agree to lead a fake investigation designed to overthrow the democratic election of the President of the United States? Why doesn’t Trump have Mueller and Comey arrested for sedition and conspiring to overthrow the president of the United States?

Why instead is Mueller expanding his investigation beyond his mandate and bringing charges against Manafort and others for decade-old under-reporting of income? Why instead is Congress harassing journalist Randy Credico for interviewing Julian Assange? How does an interview become part of the House Intelligence (sic) Committee’s investigation into “Russian active measures directed at the 2016 U.S. election?” There were no such active measures, but the uranium sale was real.

Why havent the media conglomerates that have produced presstitutes instead of journalists been broken up? Why can presstitutes lie 24/7, but a man can’t make a pass at a woman?

Once you begin asking questions, there is no end of them.

The failure of the US and European media is extreme.

The presstitutes never investigate real events. The presstitutes never question inconsistencies in official stories. They never tie together loose ends. They simply read over and over the script handed to them until the official story that controls the explanation is driven into the public’s head.

Consider, for example, the Obama regime’s claim to have murdered Osama bin Laden in his “compound” in Abbottabad, Pakistan, next to a Pakistani military base. The official story had to be changed several times. The Obama regime claim that Obama and top government officials had watched the raid via cameras on the SEALs’ helmets had to be abandoned. There was no reason to withhold the filmed evidence, and of course there was no such evidence, so the initial claim to have watched the killing became a “miscommunication.” The staged photo of the top government officials watching the alleged live filming was never explained. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382859/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Photo-Obama-watching-Al-Qaeda-leader-die-live-TV.html

The entire story never made any sense: Osama, unarmed and defended only by his unarmed wife, was murdered in cold blood by a SEAL. What in the world for? Why murder rather than capture the “terrorist mastermind” from whom endless information could have been gained? Why forgo the political fanfare of parading Osama bin Laden before the world as a captive of the American superpower?

Why were no photographs taken? Why was Osama’s body dumped in the ocean. In other words, why was all the evidence destroyed and nothing saved to back up the story?

Read More @ PaulCraigRoberts.org

VP MIKE PENCE TELLS PEOPLE TO GET READY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP TO MOVE US EMBASSY TO JERUSALEM AS PROMISED

0

by Geoffrey Grider, Now The End Begins:

US Vice President Mike Pence made the comment in remarks at Israel’s Mission to the United Nations at an event celebrating the 70th anniversary of the United Nations’ vote calling for the establishment of a Jewish state. How’s that for a blockbuster announcement?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP IS ACTIVELY CONSIDERING “WHEN AND HOW” TO MOVE THE U.S. EMBASSY IN ISRAEL TO JERUSALEM, VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE SAID ON TUESDAY.

“Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.” Zechariah 12:2,3 (KJV)

US Vice President Mike Pence made the comment in remarks at Israel’s Mission to the United Nations at an event celebrating the 70th anniversary of the United Nations’ vote calling for the establishment of a Jewish state. How’s that for a blockbuster announcement? (If you’re reading this via email, please click here to watch Pence video.)

This campaign promise of Donald Trump is the reason why I decided to vote for him back when he was a candidate back in 2016. Refresh your memory by watching it here.

The fact that said this at an event commemorating the 70th anniversary of the reestablishment of the nation of Israel is not just perfect timing, to me it seems to be God’s timing. And it is what we here at NTEB have been saying all along. If any big fulfillment of Bible prophecy is going to happen in the foreseeable near future, it will be on or around the 70th anniversary of Israel being back in the land.

Read More @ NowTheEndBegins.com

Sex Toys, Penis Shots, & Sexting: Details Emerge About Matt Lauer’s Sexual Harassment

0

from Zero Hedge:

The details of the sexual harassment complaints against former Today Show host Matt Lauer have finally emerged, and even by 2017 standards, they are pretty remarkable.

But perhaps more disturbing than the details of the actual harassment is the fact that – like the executives at Weinstein Co. and ABC News – the brass at NBC’s news division were repeatedly approached by female employees and warned about Lauer’s behavior. Yet they did nothing, because they didn’t want to jeopardize any of the lucrative advertising deals tied to Today and Lauer.

Fearing being followed by tabloid reporters, Lauer reportedly pursued relationships with female colleagues because he is married and feared being caught cheating. He kept an office in a secluded space at 30 Rock, and even had a button under his desk that allowed him to lock his door from the inside, which is incredibly creepy.

Variety’s story is the result of a monthslong investigation, which suggests that – contrary to the network’s official story – NBC knew the expose was coming and decided to get out in front of it.

 

Several women told Variety they complained to executives at the network about Lauer’s behavior, which fell on deaf ears given the lucrative advertising surrounding “Today.” NBC declined to comment. For most of Lauer’s tenure at “Today,” the morning news show was No. 1 in the ratings, and executives were eager to keep him happy.

In its report, Variety paints Lauer as vain, crude and lecherous – a far cry from the “America’s Dad” image he cultivated at Today.

The daytime host was reportedly “obsessed” with women’s bodies and had numerous affairs with female employees at NBC.

Despite being married, Lauer was fixated on women, especially their bodies and looks, according to more than 10 accounts from current and former employees. He was known for making lewd comments verbally or over text messages. He once made a suggestive reference to a colleague’s performance in bed and compared it to how she was able to complete her job, according to witnesses to the exchange. For Lauer, work and sex were intertwined.

 

“There were a lot of consensual relationships, but that’s still a problem because of the power he held,” says a former producer who knew first-hand of these encounters. “He couldn’t sleep around town with celebrities or on the road with random people, because he’s Matt Lauer and he’s married. So he’d have to do it within his stable, where he exerted power, and he knew people wouldn’t ever complain.”

In one shocking anecdote, a producer recounted how Lauer exposed himself to her after inviting her to his office.

On another day, he summoned a different female employee to his office, and then dropped his pants, showing her his penis. After the employee declined to do anything, visibly shaken, he reprimanded her for not engaging in a sexual act.

Lauer also had a bizarre penchant for playing “f—, marry, kill” with colleagues, a game popular among teenage boys.

He would sometimes quiz female producers about who they’d slept with, offering to trade names. And he loved to engage in a crass quiz game with men and women in the office: “f—, marry, or kill,” in which he would identify the female co-hosts that he’d most like to sleep with.

He even reportedly gave one colleague a sex toy as a gift with a note saying he’d like to use it on her.

As the co-host of NBC’s “Today,” Matt Lauer once gave a colleague a sex toy as a present. It included an explicit note about how he wanted to use it on her, which left her mortified.

Of course, the complaint that led to Lauer’s dismissal was about inapporpriate sexual contact that started when Lauer and an NBC News team were covering the Olympics in Sochi.

On Wednesday, NBC announced that Lauer was fired from “Today.” It was a stunning move for a co-host who was widely considered the crown jewel of the network’s news division, with a $25 million annual salary. The cause of his dismissal, according to sources, was a detailed complaint from another current NBC employee about inappropriate sexual conduct from Lauer that started on a trip at the Sochi Olympics in 2014 and continued for several months.

Even the male employees Lauer surrounded himself with at Today were sexual harassers. As Variety reports, the spotlight on Lauer intensified earlier this month, when his longtime booker Matt Zimmerman was fired over sexual harassment complaints. The two were very close, and Lauer had promoted Zimmerman to a high executive position and offered him a powerful perch.

Lauer is undoubtedly one of the most visible media figures to be felled by the widening national conversation about sexual harassment in the workplace. The scandal is yet another embarassment for NBC  after the network was criticized for turning down Ronan Farrow’s first Harvey Weinstein expose. With Charlie Rose and Lauer gone, Daytime television has now lost two of its most prominent male co-hosts.

Read More @ ZeroHedge.com

Exposing The Tricks Of The Professional Politicians

0

by Michael Snyder, End Of The American Dream:

Have you ever sat through a very long political speech and realized at the end of it that nothing of any real substance was said the entire time?  This is what professional politicians have been trained to do.  They have been trained to sound good without every really getting very specific about anything.  I am running for Congress in Idaho’s first congressional district, and I could be just like the other professional politicians if I wanted to be, because I know all of their tricks.  But I would never do that, because I believe that we need to get rid of the corrupt career politicians that are absolutely ruining this country.

The people that run political campaigns all across America are constantly trying to get their candidates to be as vague as possible.  The reason why this is done is so that the candidates will offend as few potential voters as possible.  So if you go to most candidate websites, you will find a lot of flowery language but very few specific policy proposals.  Instead, you will read lots of fluff about “improving education” and “fixing the healthcare system”, but if the political people have done their job correctly there will be very little in there that could possibly upset someone.

In the end, they want to make you feel good about the candidate, and they want you to be won over by the candidate’s personality.

Of course if you are able to pull a candidate aside and talk with him privately, it will be a completely different story entirely.  In a private conversation, a candidate will spend the first few moments trying to figure out what you want to hear, and then the rest of the conversation will be spent telling you exactly that.  Perhaps you have even experienced this at some point.  The professional politician will go to great lengths to convince you that he knows exactly where you are coming from, that he feels the same way that you do, and that he wants to do something about your particular issue.  It is the same conversation that he has had with a thousand other people, and of course the professional politician never actually intends to follow through on any of those conversations.

And once the professional politician gets into office, he conveniently forgets all of those promises that he privately made.  He knows that a few people will get upset, but he also knows that 99 percent of the population will not keep track of what he does after he is elected.

Buzzwords are another key tool that professional politicians like to use.  For example, Idaho is one of the most “conservative” states in the country, and so every politician up here uses that label to attract voters.  One member of the state legislature that won ten elections in a row would always portray herself as a “conservative” during election season, but the truth is that she was actually extremely liberal.  Year after year she has had a voting record that is worse than many of the Democrats in the state legislature, but she kept getting away with it because she knew how to be a professional politician.  Fortunately she is retiring from politics now, but she made an entire career out of conning the voters.

Another buzzword that is commonly used in political circles here in Idaho is “pro-gun”.  Everyone up here wants to be “pro-gun”, and yet if you really start digging into what many of these politicians actually believe, you will find out that they actually support “common sense restrictions” on the 2nd Amendment.

But if they say they are “pro-gun”, you may be tempted to believe that they see things the same way that you do.  That is why we really need to start getting professional politicians to define exactly what they mean when they use these terms.

Of course “pro-life” is another big one.  For years, “pro-life politicians” have been winning our votes but then betraying our values once they get into office.  On the national level, many “pro-life politicians” vote to fund Planned Parenthood year after year after year, but then they expect us to keep on voting for them every time election season rolls around.

No.

You cannot be pro-life and vote to fund Planned Parenthood.  This is why I am making an unbreakable pledge on this issue.  I will never, ever, ever vote for any bill that contains any funding for Planned Parenthood, and I am asking every other Republican all across the nation to make the same pledge.

But professional politicians never like to boxed into a corner like that.  They want the “flexibility” to vote in favor of a really important budget bill even if it funds Planned Parenthood for another six months.  It is this kind of hypocrisy that is destroying this nation.

Here is another way that you can spot a professional politician – a professional politician will be extremely, extremely hesitant to ever criticize a fellow member of his own party.  The only real exception to this rule is if there is a tightly contested race during election season.  When political careers are on the line, that is when the claws come out.  Otherwise, the goal is to play nice and move up the ladder.

For example, just look at what is going on in Congress right now.  Evidence of horrific sexual misconduct is coming out about members of both parties, and yet mostly what we see are Democrats trying to protect fellow Democrats and Republicans trying to protect fellow Republicans.

This must change.  For example, after what Rep. Joe Barton has admitted to doing, he must resign from the House of Representatives.

Read More @ EndOfTheAmericanDream.com

If RT Is Such Blatant Propaganda Why Does It Need to Be De-Ranked?

by Danielle Ryan, Russia Insider:

The truth is, if RT was spewing out nothing but falsehoods and lies every day Google wouldn’t need to “de-rank” it, because it would be totally irrelevant as a very limited number of people would choose to read it.”

Who is the true propagandist? The man who offers you information which you can freely choose to believe or disregard — or the man who tries to control what you see, for fear you might start using your own brain to distinguish truth from lies?

That is essentially what Eric Schmidt, the Executive Chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, is doing when it comes to news articles from this website, RT. Schmidt was closely involved in Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president, and in a recent interview he admitted that Google is creating special algorithms to filter RT’s news and make it appear less prominently in Google’s search results. In his own words, Google is trying to “engineer the systems” to make RT’s content less visible.

The ostensible goal of this search-engine-doctoring is to combat “propaganda” and “misinformation” from Russia. Its true purpose is to control the political narrative, in order to keep people from reading different perspectives and asking inconvenient questions.

The truth is, if RT was spewing out nothing but falsehoods and lies every day Google wouldn’t need to “de-rank” it, because it would be totally irrelevant as a very limited number of people would choose to read it. This brings us to the paradox inherent in the hysteria over RT: Its critics can’t seem to decide what they want you to believe.  Is RT an all-powerful entity with the ability to take over and fry your brain, or is its impact on our feeble minds totally insignificant?

Propaganda is not just about what you say, it’s also about what you don’t say. In Google’s case, it’s about what you choose to promote and what you choose to hide or obscure. The justification given for de-ranking RT is that it spreads lies – but Schmidt gave no examples.

In the same interview, Schmidt says he is “very strongly not in favor of censorship” and that Google would never outright “ban” RT. What Schmidt seems to miss is that banning something is not the only form of censorship. Google is using its immense power to control what people are seeing and – no surprises here – Google would prefer it if you saw more flattering coverage of itself and the US government institutions to which it is intimately linked. That is censorship, whether Schmidt wants to admit it or not.

It is not just Russian sites that Google is de-ranking either. The corporation which enjoys almost complete monopoly over the internet has already been criticized for censoring left-wing, anti-war websites like Alternet, Democracy Now, Truth-out.org, Counterpunch and Truthdig. Some of those websites have reported huge drops in traffic since changes were made to Google’s search algorithms to combat “fake news”. Nothing could demonstrate more clearly that Google is a cheerleader for American militarism and a loyal partner to war profiteers both in the arms industry and in Congress. Yet the corporation still enjoys a widespread reputation as a benign arbiter of truth.

Read More @ Russia-Insider.com

Bill Clinton Survivors to Headline D.C. Protest Demanding Resignation of Al Franken, John Conyers, Joe Barton

by Penny Starr, Breitbart:

Women speaking out about the men who have sexually assaulted, abused or harassed them will take to the national stage on Wednesday where organizers and past victims will call for Sen. Al Franken (D-MI) and Reps. John Conyers (D-MI) and Joe Barton(R-TX) to resign.

All three lawmakers have been accused of sexual misconduct, including unwanted sexual advances and groping, and, in Barton’s case, texting explicit messages and a photo of himself naked.

Some of the women who will be at the National Press Club in D.C. have been speaking out for years about former president Bill Clinton assaulting or abusing them, including Juanita Broaddrick (who said Clinton raped her), Paula Jones (whose suit against Clinton for sexual harassment was settled before a trial) and Leslie Millwee, (who said she was stalked and assaulted three times by Bill Clinton while she was a TV reporter in Fort Smith, Arkansas.

Melanie Morgan, a radio talk show host and co-founder of Media Equalizer, which organized the Media Equality Project and Wednesday’s event, will share her experience with Franken.

Morgan told Breitbart News that she met Franken in 2000 at a roundtable discussion about the federal budget. She said he got in her face several times and then, after getting her phone number from a producer of the event, Franken called here repeatedly.

“I felt very threatened, very intimidated by his behavior,” said Morgan, who finally stopped the harassment after she told Franken she was going to contact the police.

“He completely freaked me out,” Morgan said. And that’s also what resonated with her after hearing radio talk show host Leann Tweeden’s story about Franken groping her when she was sleeping and force kissing her while they were taking part in a USO trip abroad.

“I knew in that moment that her story was true,” Morgan said.

“Dozens of women and other victims of sexual harassment are joining together this Wednesday with this message:  #ShowUsTheList of representatives or staffers who received taxpayer-funded pay-outs,” the press release announcing the protest and press conference said.

The Media Equality Project wants to confront these abusers and hold them accountable.

Read More @ Breitbart.com