Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
The Bloom is Off The Ruse – Tom Donohue and U.S. Chamber of Commerce Announce Support for Far-Left Democrats in 2020…
Posted on August 28, 2020 by sundance
A fifteen year argument is finally over…. We win. Most CTH readers probably don’t even remember the reason for the name: “The Last Refuge” upon this little corner of the internet. However, for well over a decade we have tried to share the truth behind the financial mechanisms that run Washington DC; and the primary machine has always been a completely corrupt, deceptive and anti-American U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Against the entirety of the conservative media; and against the entirety of every organized group that ever attended CPAC; this website has attempted to educate people about the genuinely fraudulent purposes of the U.S. CoC and their President Tom Donohue. I have written hundreds of articles over the years outlining “there are trillions at stake” and the elements of importance behind that statement. Every single mainstream conservative voice has denied the truth; and likely most of them are probably on the CoC payroll.
Every former administration took massive payments from the CoC and allowed the Chamber to write trade agreements language for decades. The CoC business model was to take payments from Wall Street multinationals and then write the agreements to their benefit. Politicians were paid to keep quiet and support the CoC. The chamber is the largest lobby organization in DC. The chamber spends more money on influence than any other lobbying group by a massive amount. The CoC is at the heart of DC corruption.
President Trump knew about the CoC business model; that’s why he never allowed them a seat at the ‘America First’ table. That was the original source of our support for candidate Donald Trump. And now, after a decade of our trying to highlight the CoC scheme and the reason for it; yesterday, the U.S. Chamber dropped their pretense and admitted they were now supporting democrats because the CoC effort can only succeed by destroying Main St.
WASHINGTON DC – The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is poised to endorse nearly two dozen freshmen House Democrats for reelection, triggering a revolt within the right-leaning organization and drawing fierce push-back from the group’s powerful GOP donors.
The decision represents a sharp departure for the traditionally conservative Chamber, which has spent over $100 million backing Republican candidates during the past decade, and it threatens to further complicate the party’s prospects in the November election while driving a split in the business community.
Chamber leaders — including President Suzanne Clark, Chief Executive Officer Tom Donohue and Executive Vice President Neil Bradley — have been pushing the proposal ahead of a Thursday committee vote to finalize a slate of 2020 endorsements.
But the group’s donors and members are up in arms, with some threatening to pull funding and others openly venting their frustration. Some are raising the prospect that Chamber board members will quit in the weeks to come.
[…] The internal fight is just the latest headache for the Chamber, which for decades was regarded as a giant in the lobbying world. The group has recently generated headlines for its frosty relationship with the White House and alleged lavish spending on private jets.
The clash also provides a window into a growing rift in the business community over its place in the Donald Trump-dominated Republican Party, which has at times embraced policies the corporate world opposes. While the Chamber has almost exclusively endorsed Republicans over the past decade, it has collided with the president over everything from tariffs to immigration. (read more)
The CoC was never a “right wing organization”, nor was it a “republican organization”; it was always a multinational globalist organization structured to support Wall Street and destroy Main Street. It was always a feature, not a flaw…. but no-one would believe it.
Well, now… believe it.
If you understand the basic elements behind the new dimension in American economics, you already understand how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. The intentional shift in monetary policy is what created the distance between two entirely divergent economic engines.
REMEMBER […] there had to be a point where the value of the second economy (Wall Street) surpassed the value of the first economy (Main Street).
Investments, and the bets therein, needed to expand outside of the USA. hence, globalist investing.
However, a second more consequential aspect happened simultaneously. The politicians became more valuable to the Wall Street team than the Main Street team; and Wall Street had deeper pockets because their economy was now larger.
As a consequence Wall Street started funding political candidates and asking for legislation that benefited their interests.
When Main Street was purchasing the legislative influence the outcomes were -generally speaking- beneficial to Main Street, and by direct attachment those outcomes also benefited the average American inside the real economy.
When Wall Street began purchasing the legislative influence, the outcomes therein became beneficial to Wall Street. Those benefits are detached from improving the livelihoods of main street Americans because the benefits are “global”. Global financial interests, multinational investment interests -and corporations therein- became the primary filter through which the DC legislative outcomes were considered.
There is a natural disconnect. (more)
As an outcome of national monetary policy blending commercial banking with institutional investment banking something happened on Wall Street that few understand. If we take the time to understand what happened we can understand why the Stock Market grew and what risks exist today as trade policy is reversed to benefit Main Street.
President Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin have already begun assembling and delivering a new banking system.
Instead of attempting to put Glass-Stegal regulations back into massive banking systems, the Trump administration created a parallel financial system of less-regulated small commercial banks, credit unions and traditional lenders who can operate to the benefit of Main Street without the burdensome regulation of the mega-banks and multinationals. This really is one of the more brilliant solutions to work around a uniquely American economic problem.
[You saw direct evidence of this at work with the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) in the COVID rescue package. Small and medium lenders were responsive to Main Street and the large institutional (Big Bank) lenders were not.]
♦ When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.
Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their traditional role as traded stocks on the U.S. Stock Market and were evaluated accordingly. However, over time investment instruments -which are secondary to actual company results- created a sub-set within Wall Street that detached from actual bottom line company results.
The resulting secondary financial market system was essentially ‘investment markets’. Both ordinary company stocks and the investment market stocks operate on the same stock exchanges. But the underlying valuation is tied to entirely different metrics.
Financial products were developed (as investment instruments) that are essentially wagers or bets on the outcomes of actual companies traded on Wall Street. Those bets/wagers form the hedge markets and are [essentially] people trading on expectations of performance. The “derivatives market” is the ‘betting system’.
♦Ford Motor Company (only chosen as a commonly known entity) has a stock valuation based on their actual company performance in the market of manufacturing and consumer purchasing of their product. However, there can be thousands of financial instruments wagering on the actual outcome of their performance.
There are two initial bets on these outcomes that form the basis for Hedge-fund activity. Bet ‘A’ that Ford hits a profit number, or bet ‘B’ that they don’t. There are financial instruments created to place each wager. [The wagers form the derivatives] But it doesn’t stop there.
Additionally, more financial products are created that bet on the outcomes of the A/B bets. A secondary financial product might find two sides betting on both A outcome and B outcome.
Party C bets the “A” bet is accurate, and party D bets against the A bet. Party E bets the “B” bet is accurate, and party F bets against the B. If it stopped there we would only have six total participants. But it doesn’t stop there, it goes on and on and on…
The outcome of the bets forms the basis for the tenuous investment markets. The important part to understand is that the investment funds are not necessarily attached to the original company stock, they are now attached to the outcome of bet(s). Hence an inherent disconnect is created.
Subsequently, if the actual stock doesn’t meet it’s expected P-n-L outcome (if the company actually doesn’t do well), and if the financial investment was betting against the outcome, the value of the investment actually goes up. The company performance and the investment bets on the outcome of that performance are two entirely different aspects of the stock market. [Hence two metrics.]
♦Understanding the disconnect between an actual company on the stock market, and the bets for and against that company stock, helps to understand what can happen when fiscal and monetary policy is geared toward the underlying company (Main Street MAGAnomics), and not toward the bets therein (Investment Class).
The U.S. stock markets’ overall value can increase with Main Street policy, and yet the investment class can simultaneously decrease in value even though the company(ies) in the stock market is/are doing better. This detachment is critical to understand because the ‘real economy’ is based on the company, the ‘paper economy’ is based on the financial investment instruments betting on the company.
Trillions can be lost in investment instruments, and yet the overall stock market -as valued by company operations/profits- can increase.
Conversely, there are now classes of companies on the U.S. stock exchange that never make a dime in profit, yet the value of the company increases. This dynamic is possible because the financial investment bets are not connected to the bottom line profit. (Examples include Tesla Motors, Amazon and a host of internet stocks like Facebook and Twitter.) It is this investment group of companies that stands to lose the most if/when the underlying system of betting on them stops or slows.
Specifically due to most recent U.S. fiscal policy, modern multinational banks, including all of the investment products therein, are more closely attached to this investment system on Wall Street. It stands to reason they are at greater risk of financial losses overall with a shift in fiscal policy.
That financial and economic risk is the basic reason behind Trump and Mnuchin putting a protective, secondary and parallel, banking system in place for Main Street.
Big multinational banks can suffer big losses from their investments, and yet the Main Street economy can continue growing, and have access to capital, uninterrupted.
Bottom Line: U.S. companies who have actual connection to a growing U.S. economy can succeed; based on the advantages of the new economic environment and MAGA policy, specifically in the areas of manufacturing, trade and the ancillary benefactors.
Meanwhile U.S. investment assets (multinational investment portfolios) that are disconnected from the actual results of those benefiting U.S. companies, and as a consequence also disconnected from the U.S. economic expansion, can simultaneously drop in value even though the U.S. economy is thriving.
Federal law enforcement stops and seizes truck loaded with supplies for Kenosha protestors
Posted by: Chris Elliot|August 29, 2020 |CategoriesEditorial,
The editorial statements are brought to you by a staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.
–
KENOSHA, WI – The feds have had enough. Now they’re starting to make busts of those supplying the rioters in Wisconsin.
Almost a week ago, Jacob Blake, a man wanted in connection to a rape, was shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Blake, admitted that he was armed with a knife to investigators after the shooting, yet protests and riots commenced that left the city looking like a war zone.
For some reason, a church, the Zao MKE church, thought it was a great idea to supply the rioters food and snacks. But the truck they used to deliver it was just seized by federal authorities.
In Kenosha, riots, looting, and arson had become an every night occurrence and many historical buildings were lost in acts of arson.
Business owners were beaten because they dared to defend their property, and yet, ignorant people still believe and maintain that Black Lives Matter and other people in that area are ‘peacefully protesting.’
President Donald Trump recently deployed federal forces to the area in order to restore calm. As a result, the nightly riots have seem to have ended, but there are still many who would do violence if given the opportunity.
The Reverend Jonah Overton, of the Zao MKE Church, for whatever reason, thought it was a great idea to provide those in the crowd supplies to keep going.
And, shockingly enough, they cannot understand why federal authorities seized the shipment and arrested the occupants of the U-Haul truck.
Think of it this way, if Joe Blow Dirtbag is getting ready to give up his decimation campaign of said city, but, with new supplies begins again, is it a good idea to give he and his companions a renewed reason to fight?
The answer would be no.
Let us stop the issue and let the Blake shooting investigation play out in court, where it belongs.
However, Overton said that they “happily loaded it up [the U-Haul truck] with what we had.”
Why anyone would “happily” load up a truck to be sent to a group of people that has caused millions of dollars’ worth of damage to a city is beyond logic.
Why would anyone believe that giving militants anything that helps to enable them to exact more carnage is beyond comprehension.
It certainly is not a Christian based mission, for the bible says in Romans 13:1, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.”
The Milwaukee based church says that they are aware of the seized supplies and the arrest of the two people that tried to provide them, however, they have be given no explanation as to why the shipment was intercepted.
Although, there should be no need to explain why the shipment was intercepted, WISN 12 News did ask the Kenosha Police Chief why the $1,000 worth of food, drinks, and snacks were intercepted instead of being allowed to be given to those that have destroyed the city.
Police Chief Daniel Miskinis said that he was not aware of the seizure.
For some reason, this church is demanding answers as to why their shipment of supplies to those people who have been destroying the town was seized.
The simple answer, although they will not accept it, is because that shipment would enable more property damage and/or violence.
Overton argues that their shipment provided food, snacks, Gatorade, water, fire extinguishers, and band-aids.
Why he would think that people that are intentionally setting buildings on fire would want fire extinguishers is curious.
However, maybe the band aids could be used for the people that the protesters and rioters beat up.
Overton said:
“I have no idea how the police could interpret water, Gatorade, bags of chips and fire extinguishers as a threat. And the fact that even after seeing all of that they confiscated it and continued to proceed to arrest the driver and passenger is absolutely beyond me.”
Maybe, just maybe, Overton needs to worry more about preaching the word of God instead of supplying those that are committing crimes.
Renegade Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi was the only journalist on his side of the barricades to say what should have been obvious to everyone in the media: “Being on any team is a bad look for the press, but the press being on team FBI/CIA is an atrocity, Trump or no Trump.”
How The CIA Used The Media to Ensnare Michael Flynn
Posted on August 29, 2020 by sundance
A GUEST CONTRIBUTION: Authored By Jack Cashill
If Vladimir Putin was willing to help President Barack Obama seal the misbegotten Iranian nuclear deal, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, then chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA),was not. His resistance made him a target, especially once he started advising candidate Donald Trump. As to who launched the disinformation campaign against Flynn, the jury is still out. Best evidence, however, suggests forces within the CIA working in tandem with its friends in the media.
The co-conspirators started publicly setting the trap with a February 2016 Reuters article teasingly titled, “Trump being advised by ex-U.S. Lieutenant General who favors closer Russia ties.” https://reut.rs/2EwzoEL This was a bold gambit. As recently as July 2015 Obama was telling Tom Friedman of the New York Times, “We would have not achieved this [Iran nuclear] agreement had it not been for Russia’s willingness to stick with us and the other P5-Plus members in insisting on a strong deal.” https://nyti.ms/3jaDTnz
Obama praised Putin a year after Putin annexed the Crimea. That invasion was so much water under the bridge for Obama but apparently not for Flynn. Just months later, it was considered newsworthy that Flynn would advise Trump to “work more closely with Russia to resolve global security issues.”
“Flynn raised eyebrows among some U.S. foreign policy veterans,” wrote Steve Holland and Mark Hosenball of Reuters, “when he was pictured sitting at the head table with Putin at a banquet in Moscow late last year celebrating Russia Today, an international broadcasting network funded by the Russian government.” The reporters’ “three sources,” all said to be “former foreign policy officials,” failed to mention that Flynn had been briefed by the DIA before the dinner and debriefed afterwards.
What made me suspicious about this article was the Mark Hosenball byline. Hosenball appears to have been carrying water for the intelligence community (IC) for at least twenty years, maybe twice that long. To say the least, he has a curious background.
Hosenball moved to England when he was 17 to attend school. After spending a year in England and three in Ireland, he moved back to England to become a reporter. This information comes from a 1977 British appeals court document explaining why the United Kingdom chose to deport the 25-year-old Hosenball “in the interests of national security.”
“The Secretary of State believes that Mr. Hosenball is a danger to this country. So much so that his presence here is unwelcome and he can no longer be permitted to stay,” reads the document. Reportedly, Hosenball was one of a group of people who were “trying to obtain information of a very sensitive character about our security arrangements.” The document does not identify on whose behalf Hosenball was allegedly spying, but it affirms the government’s decision to deport him nonetheless.
The American intelligence community did not appear troubled by Hosenball’s actions. As the New York Times reported at the time, “A United States Embassy spokesman said that he knew of no United States pressure on Britain to discipline Mr. Hosenball.” https://nyti.ms/3jeLgdO Nor did the deportation seem to hurt Hosenball’s career. By 1993, he was working for Newsweek. By 1997, he was using Newsweek to spread CIA disinformation.
In 2003, I met Hosenball at the Newsweek office. At the time, I was promoting First Strike, a book I co-authored with James Sanders on TWA Flight 800, the 747 that mysteriously exploded off the coast of Long Island on July 17, 1996.
In that pivotal election year, surely with a nod from the Clinton White House, the CIA quietly masterminded the disinformation campaign that followed TWA 800’s destruction. After sixteen months of behind-the-scenes chicanery, the CIA assured America that what the eyewitnesses actually saw was not a missile streaking toward the 747, but the fuselage of the burning, climbing 747 rocketing upwards some three-thousand-plus feet after its fuel tank had blown up spontaneously. As would happen again in 2016, the FBI publicly fronted for the CIA. In a presidential election year, the media, of course, played along.
At the time, no reporter endorsed the CIA’s fraudulent scenario more enthusiastically than did Hosenball. His Newsweek article on the subject began with a dig at “conspiracy theories” and went nowhere positive from there. https://bit.ly/3lk50OM CIA analysts had convinced Hosenball that “infrared images captured by spy satellites” proved its theory of the plane’s demise. This revelation came as news to the FBI. Its comprehensive summary issued just a week before Hosenball’s November 1997 article did not once mention the word “satellite.”
The NTSB’s final report made only vague mention of “infrared sensor information from a U.S. satellite” and that in reference to the CIA’s video recreation. The New York Times avoided the subject altogether. Yet here was Hosenball saying that the CIA had “spy satellites designed to monitor unfriendly foreign countries pointed at the Eastern Seaboard.”
This was bunk. If the satellites showed what Hosenball claimed, federal officials would not have needed the CIA’s trumped up zoom climb animation. Surely, too, the FBI and NTSB would have used the data to buttress their shaky, inconclusive summaries. In a letter to then congressman John Kasich two months after the press conference, the CIA quietly buried the subject: “No satellite imagery of the disaster exists.” This translates, “No satellite imagery exists that would help us make our case.”
Hosenball uncritically embraced the CIA video. Under his byline, Newsweek ran a fully affirmative, nine-frame, full-color recreation captioned with the unlikely boast, “CIA Photos.” For Hosenball, the video provided a necessary rebuttal to “speculation about a mystery missile.” As he told the story, “some” of the “244” FBI witnesses claimed to have seen a streak of light arcing across the sky. In reality, 258 of the 736 official FBI witnesses claimed to have seen a missile or missiles attacking the plane, several of whom were pilots.
Had Hosenball been sporting a CIA nametag he could not have done more to legitimize the agency’s crude rewrite of history. As it happens, his Newsweek writing partner at the time was Michael Isikoff. I met with both of them. Neither had any interest in seeing the information Sanders and I had gathered.
Oh, yes, that was the same Michael Isikoff who in September 2016 first revealed that intelligence officials were investigating Trump adviser Carter Page’s “private communications with senior Russian officials.” Christopher Steele was Isikoff’s direct source. A few weeks after the article’s publication in Yahoo News, the DOJ and the FBI packaged the Isikoff article along with the Steele dossier in their application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), specifically to monitor Carter Page.
Renegade Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi was the only journalist on his side of the barricades to say what should have been obvious to everyone in the media: “Being on any team is a bad look for the press, but the press being on team FBI/CIA is an atrocity, Trump or no Trump.”
6
