Tag Archives: Traitors

BREAKING: Durham Criminal Investigation Zeros In On Brennan, Communications With Comey

By  Ryan SaavedraDailyWire.com

John Brennan James Comey
Getty Images: Alex Wong / Alex Kraus/Bloomberg

FacebookTwitterMail

United States Attorney John Durham’s criminal investigation into the origins of the FBI’s Russia investigation is reportedly taking a close look at former CIA Director John Brennan.

Durham has “requested Mr. Brennan’s emails, call logs and other documents from the C.I.A., according to a person briefed on his inquiry,” The New York Times reported. “He wants to learn what Mr. Brennan told other officials, including the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, about his and the C.I.A.’s views of a notorious dossier of assertions about Russia and Trump associates.”

In October, The Times reported that the investigation had shifted from an administrative review into a full-fledged criminal investigation based on evidence that had allegedly been uncovered.

Durham is also reportedly taking a close look at whether Brennan made contradictory statements between his private and public remarks about the anti-Trump Steele dossier and about “any debate among the intelligence agencies over their conclusions on Russia’s interference.”

The Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz’s report on the FBI’s misconduct in surveilling the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign found that the CIA informed the FBI not to rely on the Steele dossier because they viewed it as being as credible as an “internet rumor.”

The New York Times added:

Mr. Brennan has come into Mr. Durham’s sights as he has focused on the intelligence community assessment released in January 2017 that used information from the F.B.I., the C.I.A. and the National Security Agency to detail Russia’s meddling. They concluded that President Vladimir V. Putin ordered an influence campaign that “aspired to help” Mr. Trump’s chances by damaging his opponent, Hillary Clinton.

Officials and analysts who worked on that assessment disagreed on how to treat two pieces of intelligence: the assertion that Mr. Putin wanted to help Mr. Trump win rather than simply sow chaos, and the contents of the dossier of salacious, unproven allegations about links between Russia and Trump associates compiled by a British former spy, Christopher Steele.

Mr. Durham’s investigators also want to know to more about the discussions that prompted intelligence community leaders to include Mr. Steele’s allegations in the appendix of their assessment.

Attorney General William Barr told Fox News on Wednesday that Durham was “not just looking at the FBI. He is looking at other agencies and also private departments and also private actors and so it is a much broader investigation. And also he is not just looking at the FISA aspect of it. He is looking at all the conduct – both before and after the election.”

Barr also slammed disgraced former FBI Director James Comey, saying, “One of the things that I object to is the tact being taken by Comey, which is to suggest that people who are criticizing or trying to get to the bottom of the misconduct are somehow attacking the FBI. I think that’s nonsense. We’re criticizing and concerned about misconduct by a few actors at the top of the FBI and they should be criticized if they engaged in serious misconduct. That doesn’t mean we are criticizing the FBI and I think the tact of trying to wrap yourself in the institution and say gee, people who are criticizing the decisions I made are attacking the institution. I notice people don’t do that as far as I’m concerned. People feel free to criticize me and I don’t say gee you’re attacking the honest men and women of the Department of Justice. I think leaders have to own their decisions and are fair game if they make bad decisions.”

This article has been updated to include additional information.

Here are Just Two More Names to Throw In the Traitor Pile!

Liberal Fact Checker Catches Schiff in TWO Lies | Dan Bongino

Source: Liberal Fact Checker Catches Schiff in TWO Lies | Dan Bongino 

Liberal Fact Checker Catches Schiff in TWO Lies

by Matt Palumbo
Debunk This by Matt Palumbo When it comes to the Democrats latest faux-scandal, this one regarding a phone call President Donald Trump had with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, the man leading the charge (Adam Schiff) just can’t stop lying.There was already reason to be skeptical of the whistleblower complaint against Trump because it’s a second hand account, and because the rules for submitting a whistleblower complaint were lowered right before this one was submitted. Why couldn’t these U.S. officials who heard Trump’s call firsthand (and there were multiple) simply submit a complaint themselves? Why the need to launder the information through an intermediary? Surely the answer to those questions isn’t good news for Schiff and his cabal. Even liberals are catching him in lies now. Schiff said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe during an interview on September 17that that “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to. But I am sure the whistleblower has concerns that he has not been advised, as the law requires, by the inspector general or the director of national intelligence just how he is supposed to communicate with Congress, and so the risk to the whistleblower is retaliation.” He also said on the 19th that  “we might not have even known there was a whistleblower complaint alleging an urgent concern” if the inspector general hadn’t contacted the House Intelligence Committee. But both those claims are nonsense. As the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler noted regarding the September 17th comment:

This is flat-out false. Schiff… says the committee had not spoken to the whistleblower. Now we know that’s not true.

“Regarding Chairman Schiff’s comments on ‘Morning Joe,’ in the context, he intended to answer the question of whether the Committee had heard testimony from the whistleblower, which they had not,” a committee spokesman told The [Washington Post] Fact Checker. “As he said in his answer, the whistleblower was then awaiting instructions from the Acting DNI as to how the whistleblower could contact the Committee. Nonetheless he acknowledges that his statement should have been more carefully phrased to make that distinction clear.”

The spokesman pointed to an interview with Schiff by the Daily Beast, in which he said that he “did not know definitively at the time if the complaint had been authored by the same whistleblower who had approached his staff.” But he added that he “should have been much more clear.”
Of the September 19th comment:

Schiff says that if not for the IG, the committee might never have known about the complaint. But his committee knew that something explosive was going to be filed with the IG. As the New York Times put it, the initial inquiry received by the committee “also explains how Mr. Schiff knew to press for the complaint when the Trump administration initially blocked lawmakers from seeing it.”

Schiff, however, does qualify that this was a complaint alleging “an urgent concern,” and it’s not clear whether the initial inquiry had tipped off the committee staff that it would rise to that level. Still, Schiff’s phrasing was misleading because he gives no hint that the committee was aware a potentially significant (“privileged”) complaint might have been filed.

As a result, Kessler gave Schiff’s comments “Four Pinocchios,” their fact checkers worst rating. Before this whistleblower complaint was made public it’s a strong possibility that Schiff had leaked information to the media from it, as evidenced by his tweets in early August paying keen attention to Ukraine out of the blue. Schiff’s alleged leaks here are reminiscent of Christopher Steele’s dossier, parts of which were leaked to the media before the dossier was made public, which was then used as “proof” of those prior claims when it was really circular reasoning at work. A new question now remains – is there anything that Schiff has been truthful about?

Bill Clinton and the Selling of US Security

Updated: 8:00 AM ET July 8, 2016

For the Clinton crime family, selling out US national security is a family business

This may be the greatest scandal in 50 years of American history.

It makes Watergate look like a jay walking charge. It makes the Iran Contra affair look like a small time operation. This is what House Republicans should have Impeached Bill Clinton for instead of lying about a White House Intern giving him head in the Oval Office. It’s called treason.

PART ONE: RUSSIA

Bill Clinton is at the center of the greatest foreign policy deceit ever perpetrated on the American people. He used the power of his office to allow the selling and delivery of high tech missile defense components to governments of countries that are listed as threats to this country and the stability of the world. Russia was one of the benefactors of deals Clinton made without proper authorization from Congress. Ignoring CIA and Pentagon reports that showed how Russia was continuing a major and secretive modernization program for its strategic nuclear missile systems, Clinton allocated over $1 billion to “help” the Soviets “dismantle” their nuclear weapons. In 1995 the General Accounting Office (GAO) wrote that Moscow refuses to permit American audits of the $1.25 billion disarmament aid. This is an important issue because it allowed the Russians to use American taxpayer’s money to build new offensive nuclear weapons that directly threaten the United States.

Under U.S. law, no money could be spent in Russia until the Clinton administration certified that Moscow is not engaged in any military modernization program that exceeds legitimate defense requirements. The Clinton administration along with U.S. Air Force General Eugene Habiger, the commander of U.S. Nuclear forces signed off on the Russian aid package after returning from an exploratory trip to Russia to investigate construction of a huge secret underground base in the Ural mountains. True, the base is as big as the entire area of Washington D.C. and is defensive in purpose. In addition to the base, the Russians built two cities to house the more than 30,000 workers involved in the project. By 1996 authorities had barred defense attaches from going into the facility.

Known as Yamantau Mountain (translates to ‘evil mountain’), the facility is being constructed to offer a safe place to retaliate in the event of an American nuclear attack. To me, this represents a direct conflict of interest. Clinton gives the Russians over one billion dollars to help them take down their nuclear weapons but instead they use that money to build a huge bunker where they can wage nuclear war on the U.S.

Not only that, the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces issued a statement suggesting that nuclear missiles can be secretly deployed at the base as part of what is being called the “dead-hand doomsday system” where nuclear missiles can still be fired automatically by a command program. This means even after Russian leadership is destroyed, and no one is there to push the ‘button’, missiles will be fired automatically against the perpetrators allowing for complete destruction on a world wide scale. By April 1996, reports confirmed the automatic nuclear attack system listing it as being in the final stages of operation.

It’s more than a coincidence that 1996 saw a massive Russian military build up including major improvements to the Tu-95 and Tu-160 strategic nuclear bombers as well as the long range cruise missiles they carry. Money had also made it possible to design and construct a new class of nuclear submarines called “the Borei-class strategic missile boat.” At least part of Russia’s miraculous financial bonanza is the direct result of United States money. As usual, all the public knows is that the U.S. is helping Russia to “dismantle” some of its nuclear programs.

Bill Clinton wants Americans to know that he has worked very hard to show that Russia and the United States are together in making the world a safer place. In a speech to Moscow University students, he said; “Look what our partnership has already produced. We reversed the dangerous build up of nuclear weapons. We’re two years ahead of schedule in cutting nuclear arsenals under START 1 ( Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). START 2, which still awaits ratification in the Duma, will reduce our nuclear forces by two-thirds from Cold War levels. President Yeltsin and I already have agreed on a framework for START 3 to cut our nuclear arsenal even further.”

Clinton also announced that the two super powers agreed to share warning information on worldwide launches of ballistic missiles and space launchers. Clinton referred to an agreement by which Russia and America would no longer target each others missiles. Yet in a secret CIA report to Congress, “detargeting” is purely symbolic and does nothing to affect the targeting of strategic nuclear missiles. Placing nuclear missiles in a non target status is like putting your DVD player on pause. When you’re ready to launch, just hit the retarget button and bombs away. What’s more, there is no way of verifying if Russian missiles are in detargeted mode or not.

President Clinton went to great lengths to satisfy political debts. Of this there is no doubt. As Governor of Arkansas he saw to it that cash donors to his political campaign were given special consideration and awarded with lucrative contracts, and that same pattern stayed with him throughout his entire political career and beyond.

In 1998, CIA Director George Tenet testified that the radical Muslim regime in Iran was getting a great deal of technical assistance and materials from Russia. The year before he had testified that along with Russia, North Korea was providing technology to Iran and that it wouldn’t be more than a year before Iran would have their own medium range nuclear missiles. In 1999 Tenet once again told the Senate that the flow of missile technology had not stopped and in the last six months Russian expertise and material was flowing to Iran’s missile construction allowing them to develop more sophisticated weapons and longer range missiles. Before sanctions could be brought against various Russian companies, Iran conducted the first test flight of its new medium-range missile. This act of aggression clearly showed that Iran was now capable of destroying any threat in the Middle East as well as most of Central Europe with chemical and biological weapons.

In no uncertain terms, Clinton had helped Russia modernize her weapons systems to the tune of billions of dollars, while at the same time and behind our backs, Russia continued a secret campaign to weaponize Iran. Clinton, for all his attempts at marginalizing the seriousness of Russia’s nuclear weapons programs had failed to properly assess the Russian threat.

That Russia was involved in nuclear proliferation to our enemies was a national security failure of monstrous proportions. That a United States President would willfully and knowingly sell, trade, or supply nuclear weapons technology to our oldest adversary is one of the greatest crimes committed against the people he is sworn to protect. It gets worse. Clinton was aware that Russia had been supplying highly sensitive technology and materials to our enemy, the Iranians.

In a closed door meeting held at the Kremlin, in May of 1998, White House National Security Adviser Samuel Berger told Russian Security Council Secretary Andrei Kokoshin: “One and a half years after President Yeltsin told President Clinton that ballistic missile technology transfers to Iran would stop, it still continues… Now time is running out; the stakes are great… Unless this problem is solved we see a potential trainwreck in our relations.” Why was it up to Yeltsin to end the transfers? Why was Clinton allowing Russia to give defense secrets to Iran? Did Clinton have something to gain from allowing this? The answer can be found in a shocking conversation. On March 13, 1996, Clinton and Yeltsin met in Egypt. The minutes of this meeting were recorded in a classified document called “a memorandum of conversation.”

The document was obtained by Bill Gertz of the Washington Times and discloses President Yeltsin saying to Clinton that because of his global stature he should “support Russia and that means supporting Yeltsin.” Clinton responds by raising an issue: Russia’s refusal to allow imports of American chicken. At the time Russia was importing about 40% of America’s chickens. The major supplier of chickens in the U.S. comes from Tyson Foods of Arkansas. Owner Don Tyson, just so happens to be one of Bill Clinton’s biggest financial donors. The Russian ban on chicken imports was not without reason: the U.S. had been flooding Russia with poor quality chicken. With the ban in effect, Tyson’s profits were suffering and he needed Clinton to do something about it. Clinton, according to the classified document, assured Yeltsin that the situation was being handled. Yeltsin agreed to resume imports for continued support from Clinton. Within one week, the chicken dispute was settled and Tyson was back in business.

It was less than 50 years ago that two American citizens were tried, convicted and executed for passing information about the atomic bomb to the Russians. Their names were Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. A co-conspirator, Harry Gold was sentenced to 15 years for being the courier. They were convicted under Section 2 of the Espionage Act of 1917, 50 U.S. Code 32 (now 18 U.S. Code 794) which prohibits transmitting or attempting to transmit to a foreign government information “relating to the national defense.” In my opinion, Bill Clinton violated the same statute and should suffer the same consequences.

PART TWO: CHINA

In 1996 President Bill Clinton, at a fund raising dinner in New York City said this: “There are no more nuclear missiles pointed at any children in the United States. I’m proud of that.” But by 1998, the CIA’s National Intelligence Daily stated that “thirteen of China’s 18 long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles are targeted on the United States.” How could such a discrepancy occur? When did Clinton know and what did he do to prevent this dangerous situation? These are valid questions and in light of Clinton’s involvement in Russia’s nuclear weapons advancements, I shudder to think that this too was a result of Clinton’s business dealings.

CNN reported how China has been stealing our most sensitive nuclear secrets in an article dated May 25, 1999 and posted on their website. The article was called: China stole U.S. nuke secrets to ‘fulfill international agenda.’ The article reveals that China has been stealing the most sensitive nuclear secrets for several decades and despite high-level knowledge of the thefts, security at U.S. nuclear labs still “does not meet even minimal standards.” The CNN article goes on to state that President Clinton had known since 1995 and yet little was done about it. In April 1998 Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-California) disclosed detailed information that U.S. aerospace companies had helped China improve its strategic nuclear missiles as part of a major ICBM modernization effort. The named companies were listed as Loral Space & Communications Ltd., Hughes Electronics, and Motorola as supplying the Chinese with space launch technology which China used to improve its nuclear missiles.

Congressman Rohrabacher went on to say: “There is ample evidence that American technology was transferred to this hostile potential enemy of the United States… (providing) the Communist Chinese the guidance needed to upgrade and perfect highly sophisticated weapons systems, increasing the reliability and capability of Communist Chinese rockets… This has given, what anyone has to admit is at least a potential enemy of the United States, a better ability to deliver nuclear warheads to our country, to American cities, to incinerate millions of our people.” Was there a connection between Bill Clinton and any of the three corporations named as supplying China with materials that improved the lethality of their missiles? I’m glad I asked that question.

The chairman of Loral Space &Communications was a heavy financial donor to Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party in general. His name is Bernard Schwartz and in a six year period between 1992 and 1998 he donated over $1.1 million to Clinton and the party. To show his appreciation, President Clinton allowed Schwartz to travel to China with U.S. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. Clinton loosened export controls which enabled Schwartz to purchase Chinese booster rockets for use in launching Loral’s satellites. The relaxing of controls was a two way street and gave the Chinese an avenue with which to import hi tech materials from Loral and other U.S. corporations that dealt in sophisticated electronics.

Hughes Electronics was also named in Rohrabacher’s report. Its CEO, C. Michael Armstrong lobbied Clinton to relax the export controls of sensitive technology. An internal White House memo dated December 8, 1993 and originating from the National Security Council, detailed how Armstrong pressured the administration into easing the trade restrictions with China. Armstrong had threatened to launch a major publicity campaign against the administrations sanctions if the controls were not relaxed. In 1996, a Chinese rocket (missile) carrying a $200 million Loral satellite exploded on its launch pad. Loral and Hughes put together a team of scientists to investigate the problem. The problem(s) were identified and the information was given to the Chinese consortium Great Wall Industry, a subsidiary of China Aerospace Corporation. Armed with the information supplied by Hughes and Loral, the Chinese were able to upgrade their nuclear ICBM’s.

Why did President Clinton allow this? Well it was determined that the Chinese were secretly funneling large donations to the Clinton campaign. Federal investigators found that China Aerospace Corporation had given $300,000 to Democratic fundraiser Johnny Chung for Clinton’s election. In 1993, it was discoverer that China was selling missile technology to Pakistan. Under tremendous pressure from Congress, Clinton banned U.S. space industry from using Chinese rockets to launch their satellites. The ban didn’t last long and in October 1994, Clinton lifted the ban. Despite reports that China had continued to sell nuclear technology to Pakistan and missiles to Iran, Clinton signed waivers for four U.S. satellites to be launched by Chinese rockets. Clinton did this over strong objections from the State and Defense Departments. Johnny Chung and Loral’s Schwartz donated another $100,000 each to Clinton. The fact that Clinton personally issued the waivers to allow shipments of U.S. technology that greatly improved the accuracy and reliability of Communist China’s missiles is grounds for impeachment, regardless of whether or not there was any quid pro quo for those decisions.

President Bill Clinton did more to damage U.S. national security than anyone else in American history. He is a traitor to our interests and he is guilty of espionage. He should have been arrested, impeached and convicted. The question is, how did this story escape mass media attention?


I would like to credit these sources from which I have acquired information.

Stone books

ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY

THE CLINTONS’ WAR ON WOMEN: AmazonBarnes & NobleIndiebound.org

CLINTON CASH: AmazonBarnes & NobleIndiebound.org

– See more at: http://stonezone.com/article.php?id=753#sthash.CeTJ48oI.dpuf

‘Black Power’ Public Event Ejects White Woman After She Challenges “Donald Trump is Racist” Statement » Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!

‘Black Lives Matter’ activists try to force cameraman to leave for bringing

Source: ‘Black Power’ Public Event Ejects White Woman After She Challenges “Donald Trump is Racist” Statement » Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!

Who’s Hillary Trying To Kid?

3/30/2016

Picture

By Chris Rossini
Presidential campaign seasons are a free-for-all. Candidates can say whatever they want to get votes. Nothing that is said is binding. Nothing promised ever has to be implemented. Candidates don’t know who votes for them. Voters can’t say: “But you promised…” Actually, they can say it, but it doesn’t matter. They’ll still vote the next time. Election campaigns are the ultimate swindle.
Here’s a quick 34 second YouTube clip of Hillary Clinton making a very common and deeply flawed statement. She tells a complete lie, but lies are just as valuable as the truth to politicians. They can both be used to get votes.
Hillary says:

“There is no evidence that the minimum wage being raised costs jobs.”

Common statement. Totally untrue. Gets votes.
So if the minimum wage is $10/hr, it means that all individuals without the skills or productivity to earn $10/hr are forced into unemployment. They cannot get a job (by law) even if they are ready and willing to work for less.
If government raises the minimum to $15/hr, the squeeze is put on even more. Now, even if you really want to work, but only have the skills to earn $10, or $9, or $8/hr, you’re out of luck. Even if employers would have gladly paid you, government had different plans for you … unemployment.
That’s really all the minimum wage does – it creates unemployment for individuals of a certain skill and productivity level. The minimum wage doesn’t create anything. It only destroys.
If, as Hillary states, “there is no evidence” that raising the minimum wage costs jobs, why be so stingy? Why not raise the minimum wage to $50/hr? If it won’t cost jobs, what’s the holdup?
If the minimum wage was raised to $50/hr, a vast majority of the people reading this would be instantly thrown out of work. If your skills and productivity can only fetch $20 or $25/hr, why would someone pay you $50? Because the government says so?
Ha!
Government has no problem throwing the lowest skilled people out of work, which is why they move so slowly in raising the minimum wage. They don’t care about the poor and low-skilled. Instead of working, those people can just go on the government dole. They can become loyal dependents who will then vote to keep the their welfare coming in the next election.
The minimum wage (any minimum wage) is strictly and exclusively a job killer.
The only determination is which jobs will be killed. If you’re poor, low-skilled, a teenager, or not very productive, Hillary is coming for you.
​Get your unemployment forms ready.

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/whos-hillary-trying-to-kid

What Killed The Middle Class?

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/24/2016 09:02 -0400

Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

If the four structural trends highlighted below don’t reverse, the middle class is heading for extinction.

Everyone knows the middle class is fading fast. I’ve covered this issue in depth for years, for example: Honey, I Shrunk the Middle Class: Perhaps 1/3 of Households Qualify(December 28, 2015) and What Does It Take To Be Middle Class? (December 5, 2013)

This raises an obvious question: what killed the middle class? While many commentators try to identify one killer cause (for example, the U.S. going off the gold standard in 1971), the die-off of the middle class is more akin to the die-off in honey bees, which is the result of the interaction of multiple causes (factors that increase the toxic load dumped on bees and other pollinators by modern agriculture).

Longtime collaborator Gordon T. Long and I discuss the decline of the middle class and other key topics in a new 29-minute video How did that work out for you?

So where do we begin this detective story? With the engine of all real prosperity, productivity. This chart reveals that wages stopped rising with productivity around 1980.

Here’s another look at the same phenomenon:

Productivity has been slipping since around 2003: Alan Greenspan:”Productivity is Dead”

Cause #1: declining productivity, which means the pie of real wealth is no longer expanding.

Exhibit #2: middle class wage earners have not received any of the gains. Wages as a percentage of GDP have been falling for decades, with occasional blips up in tech/housing bubbles:

Inflation-adjusted household income has dropped back to levels first reached in the 1980s:

More recently, wages have actually declined, regardless of educational attainment:

Income gains have all flowed to the top 10%, with most of the gains being concentrated in the top 5% and top 1%:

If the middle class didn’t receive any of the gains, who did? Corporate profits have soared to unprecedented levels:

Cause #2: all the gains in the economy have flowed to corporations and the top 10% of financiers, managers and technocrats.

But wait a minute–hasn’t the rising stock market enriched the middle class?Short answer: no. Middle class household wealth has absolutely cratered since the top of the housing bubble in 2007, and hasn’t recovered.

Why? Middle class wealth is based not in stocks but in the family home. The middle class does not own enough financial assets to have participated in the latest stock market bubble, while the majority did not recover the wealth lost in the housing bubble bust. This is the cost of allowing the financial sector to financialize housing and mortgages in the 2000s.

Cause #3: the middle class doesn’t own the “right” assets to benefit from systemic financialization and financial speculation.

How about rising costs? The federal agencies tasked with measuring inflation assure us inflation is near-zero. But these measures underweight big-ticket costs like healthcare and higher education, where costs have exploded higher, greatly increasing the burden on the middle class:

Cause #4: soaring costs of big-ticket expenses such as higher education and healthcare. Saving $10 on cheap jeans imported from Asia does not make up for 135% jumps in tuition and college fees, and $100 decline in the cost of a laptop computer does not make up for healthcare insurance and out-of-pocket expenses in the tens of thousands of dollars per household.

Correspondent Kevin K. submitted this article and accompanying note: Colleges with the biggest tuition hikes (my ala mater University of Hawaii-Manoa clocked in with an increase of 137% since 2004.)

“It looks like the article linked above didn’t do much research since:
University of California Davis
2004 in-state tuition $5,684
2015 in state tuition $13,951
Percentage increase 145.44 percent”

There is no way middle class households with declining real incomes can pay soaring costs imposed by state-enforced cartels and gain ground financially. If the four structural trends highlighted above don’t reverse, the middle class is heading for extinction, the victim of financialization, the glorification of financial speculation via central bank-central state policies, the decline of productivity and rising costs imposed by state-enforced cartels.

Gordon T. Long and I discuss the decline of the middle class and other key topics:

Average:

Friday Night News Dump: FAA Establishes a No Fly Zone Over the Bundy Ranch Area

 

Click image to enlarge

Kimberly Paxton
Activist Post
Let the cover-up begin. Last night at 9:38, the Federal Aviation Commission established a no-fly zone over the Bundy Ranch and a 3 nautical mile area.
No pilots may operate an aircraft in the areas covered by this NOTAM (except as described)
ONLY RELIEF AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS UNDER DIRECTION OF BLM ARE AUTHORIZED IN THE AIRSPACE
This means that the only helicopters that will be allowed to fly overhead will belong to the government. News helicopters that might be filming will be strictly off-limits. The Bureau of Land Management can do whatever it wants to protesters without fear of their actions appearing on CNN.
This is not a good sign. In fact, with this occurring on a Friday night, anything that occurs in the protest area can be carefully swept under the rug. This is commonly referred to in the press industry as a “news dump”.
Bad news is released on a Friday afternoon or evening in an attempt to avoid media scrutiny. Fewer people pay attention to the news on Friday nights, Saturdays, and Sundays, so this information can be quietly doled out with far less hullabaloo. That also makes the weekend a “perfect” time for an assault on protesters.

Yesterday Clark County Tom Collins said that those traveling to the area to support the Bundy family “better have funeral plans.” This may not have just been bluster, but ominous foreshadowing of a planned event. Make no mistake, the stage is being set for this to be another Waco or Ruby Ridge: a government-propelled slaughter of those who refuse to comply. Without witnesses, they can spin the story just like they did in those two tragedies, putting the onus on the victims.

Here’s a hint: this has nothing to do with turtles. It has nothing to do with grazing cattle. It has to do with money and privileges for the elite.
If you can’t physically get to the Bundy Ranch to show your support, make sure that those involved know that we are watching. Please take the time to call or email the contacts below.
Point of Contact for No-Fly Zone:
Telephone 702-335-3191
Clark County Sheriff’s Office
301 Clark Avenue, 6th Floor
Las Vegas, NV 89101
(702) 671-5822
(702)-828-3394
Fax (702) 671-3658
BLM Nevada State Office
1340 Financial Blvd.,
Reno, NV 89502
Front Desk: 775-861-6400
Fax: 775-861-6601
Email: nvsoweb@blm.gov
State Director: Amy Lueders
Associate State Director: Marci Todd
Phone: 775-861-6590
Deputy State Director, Natural Resource,
Land & Planning
Raul Morales
Phone: 775-861-6464
Deputy State Director, Minerals Management
Gary Johnson
Phone: 775-861-6576
Deputy State Director, Support Services
Bob Scruggs (Admin. Officer)
Phone: 775-861-6644
EEO Manager
DeAnna Garrett
Phone: 775-861-6584
Office of Communications Chief
Erica Haspiel-Szlosek
Phone: 775-861-6586
Great Basin Restoration Initiative Coordinator
Linda Kelly Lynne
Phone: 775-861-6400
Kimberly Paxton, a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared, is based out of upstate New York. You can follow Kimberly on Facebook and Twitter.

Friday Night News Dump: FAA Establishes a No Fly Zone Over the Bundy Ranch Area
Activist
Sat, 12 Apr 2014 15:06:00 GMT

Unfiltered Conservatism