http://www.allenbwest.com/michele/numbers-shut-liberals-electoral-college
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Saturday, November 26, 2016
Is Donald Trump already committing impeachable offenses? [feedly]
----
Is Donald Trump already committing impeachable offenses?
// Personal Liberty Digest™
Headlines blared on Tuesday with the news that Donald Trump wouldn't pursue charges against Hillary Clinton.
President-elect Donald Trump won't subject Hillary Clinton to a criminal inquiry — instead, he'll help her heal, his spokeswoman said Tuesday.
"I think when the president-elect who's also the head of your party … tells you before he's even inaugurated he doesn't wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone and content, to the members," Kellyanne Conway told the hosts of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," who first reported that the president-elect would not pursue his campaign pledge to "lock up" Clinton, his Democratic opponent.
What does this mean, exactly? Is this another patented Trump head-fake? Or are sinister, globalist forces at work protecting their own?
Back during the last presidential debate, when Trump threatened that if elected he would appoint a special prosecutor to look into Hillary's "situation," Hillary responded that "It's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country."
The Witch from Chappaqua knew, or should have known, the president is "not in charge of the law in our country," at least not according to the Constitution. Of course, presidents of late have acted as if they are and congress and the courts have been loath to stop them.
And under a constitutional government, Trump would have no say over whether SHillary is prosecuted. That's a job for an independent FBI and Department of Justice.
But the Department of Justice has under Barack Obama become the Department of JustUs. Trump was elected, in part, to fix that.
But if Trump intervenes and orders — either overtly or covertly — a criminal investigation into Hillary's emails or the Clinton Foundation be stopped, that's obstruction of justice. It's essentially what Obama had Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch do.
And it's an impeachable offense. Or at least it was when Richard Nixon was president.
The post Is Donald Trump already committing impeachable offenses? appeared first on Personal Liberty®.
----
Shared via my feedly newsfeed
Friday, November 25, 2016
Thursday, November 24, 2016
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Monday, November 21, 2016
Sunday, November 20, 2016
Friday, November 18, 2016
Thursday, November 17, 2016
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Millennials: baby boomers’ biggest bungle [feedly]
----
Millennials: baby boomers' biggest bungle
// Personal Liberty Digest™
"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." — John F. Kennedy, inauguration address, January 1961.
As election night ran towards its miraculous conclusion I had to pinch myself. Against my earlier predictions, and against all odds, Hillary Clinton and the entire Clinton-political machine that dominated the political landscape for three decades were on their death beds, and I couldn't have been happier. I thought America got it right. They said they wanted change and they went out and got it.
I did something I hardly ever do; I turned the television to CNN. A shock wave began to reverberate in their studio. Anchors and expert analysts took on a look that I have only seen in World War II photographs — Parisians on June 14, 1940, when Hitler's Wehrmacht marched unopposed into the city.
"How do I explain this to my children," asked CNN political analyst Van Jones. The Washington Post the next morning ran a headline: "Van Jones gives voice to the 'nightmare'."
Jones, who is African American, questioned how parents could explain to their children how Americans elected a man widely labeled as a bigot, a racist.
Perhaps Jones can get some answers from another frequent CNN guest, Professor Marc Lamont Hill of Morehouse College who in July, just four days after a black racist in Dallas killed five officers and injured nine others who were protecting black protestors, said black people do not have the ability to be racist because they lack the "institutional power" necessary to "deploy racism."
One thing Van Jones says he knows for sure is that President-elect Donald Trump was elected by angry whites.
Doing nothing to tamp down the idea of an angry young black man, Jones was insistent on shutting up CNN analyst Kayleigh McEnany who dared to repeat some of Jones's radical comments about Trump.
McEnany continued to interrupt Jones.
"You need to back off," said Jones. "You need to have a little bit of empathy and understanding for people who are afraid because your candidate has been one of the most explosively provocative candidates in the history of our country and there is a price to be paid for that."
Jones said the next day that Trump's victory was a "whitelash."
Please mommy, make the bad man go away
I may not understand black anger but I realize being black in the 1970s and earlier was, in many places, daily humiliation and persuasive fear. Their reaction to the election of Trump was similar to the way many whites felt when Barack Obama was elected president in 2008.
What amazes me is the reaction and participation in the protests of white millennials, many of them well-to-do spoiled kids born between 1980 and 2000. Their reaction to the election is inexplicable. Some have even said that Trump was going to hunt down homosexuals the way Hitler hunted down Jews. Trump has been labeled everything from anti-Semitic to a racist, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, a xenophobe, a gynophobe and every other type of "phobe," including the kitchen sink (remarkably, a name for that also exists — arachibutyrophobia).
Thousands of millennials were suffering near-nervous breakdowns the day after the election and were in much need of affirmation and a hug. I am talking about the generation aged 16 to 36. And unless you were in a coma over the past three decades, you must have noticed that baby boomers were going to meet their child's every need and want.
My wife and I had our first baby in 1982 and our third in 1987. They are natural-born American millennials who didn't like Presidents Bill Clinton or George W. Bush. They are curious to see if Trump can rejuvenate America; bring back that country that they have read about that existed under Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. All three are gainfully employed and are raising their own children with money they earned.
Many parents at that time ate up Dr. Spock and every new baby book published. Many believed that a child needs constant praise, attention and positive reinforcement. More than that, they weren't going to raise their children the way they were raised.
Unfortunately, the 30-year-old still living in the basement and sporadically going to college is prevalent. According to a 2016 study by the Pew Research Center, for the first time in 130 years, living with parents is the most likely living arrangement for 18- to 34-year-olds.
In 1960, 62 percent of the nation's 18- to 34-year-olds were living with a spouse or partner in their own household. In 2013 less than one third of this age group was living with a spouse or a partner.
Of course, the hands-on boomers selected the very finest universities for their children, not necessarily in terms of securing a job after graduation, but one that would cater to their child's psychological needs.
If you think I exaggerate consider last week's MailOnline:
Students at colleges across the country have started petitions urging their professors to cancel classes due to their emotional distress after Donald Trump won the election.
Petitions to cancel classes at Loyola University New Orleans, Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania and Johns Hopkins University in Maryland have attracted hundreds of signatures.
'Loyola students are exhausted and exasperated from this election and no one wants to go to class,' wrote the creator of the petition, which has attracted 341 signatures so far.
And don't dare try and sell tough love at Rutgers University. PJ Media reported that Breitbart tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos made an appearance at Rutgers. His reality speech so traumatized the delicate children who heard him that many attended a "group therapy" session afterward.
What happened was a fear and loathing that sounds more appropriate for the Warsaw Ghetto in 1943 than a top ranked university. According to Rutgers Daily Targum, students at the cultural center described "feeling scared, hurt and discriminated against." One student told the newspaper, "It is upsetting that my mental health is not cared about by the University. I do not know what else to do for us to be heard for us to be cared about. I deserve an apology, everyone in this room deserves an apology."
It was like a five alarm fire. First responders included Psychiatric Services, the Office for Violence Prevention and Victim Assistance and the Rutgers University Police helped the emotionally traumatized.
According to Targum:
Rutgers students are displaying clear-cut signs of the crybully phenomenon, whereby the regressive left feels victimized, traumatized and attacked even while they are viciously attacking others. In the case of Milo's talk at Rutgers, there is no question that their behavior encompassed vandalism at the very least. Yet the students still believe themselves to be victims — so much so that they set up therapy sessions and complain about their mental health.
I was reading this nonsense while the television in the background was showing a documentary about charging Omaha Beach, June 6, 1944, and it made me angry. These sniveling crybabies don't have any idea of what goes on in the world and their parents never told them of the sacrifices that were made by their forefathers, many who came back from wars without their minds and limbs. Tens upon tens of thousands never came back from those wars at all.
I saw some baby boomer parents who never put their child in a challenging sport where you have to get back up after you have been knocked down. While coaching youth sports, I saw a lot of overprotective parents who shouted at referees, coaches and teammates.
Many millennials have finally done something with their lives — they have turned to protesting. Large groups have gathered in major cities and been enjoined by Black Lives Matter and any group lamenting over their laundry list of entitlements that a Clinton administration was certain to increase.
What are they protesting, an election where their candidate didn't win? These things happen, and even her loyalists admit that Clinton is probably the most flawed presidential candidate in decades.
That takes us back to the Kennedy quote at the top, "ask what you may do for your country." So many millennials have made it clear they are not going to do anything for America. They will continue to live high on mom and dad's hog or, if necessary, collect from the government. And as any six year old will tell you, having your allowance cut back just ain't fair.
Yours in good times and bad,
— John Myers
The post Millennials: baby boomers' biggest bungle appeared first on Personal Liberty®.
----
Shared via my feedly newsfeed
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
World suffers from Trump shell shock — here’s what will happen next [feedly]
----
World suffers from Trump shell shock — here's what will happen next
// Personal Liberty Digest™
I've been saying this for a long time, and I'll say it again here — in life there are only two kinds of people: those who know and those who don't. Some might claim there is a third option: those who don't want to know. In any case, if you want to be able to foresee geopolitical and social trends, you have to be one of the people who know.
Above all else, in order to know you must be willing to step outside of the confusion and theater of the circus and look at developments from above. If you are biased and retain too many sacred cows you will never understand how the world works. You will be too busy trying to reinforce your own fantasies to see anything else.
Beyond this, you must also understand that political and social developments are not random; they are either reactions to deliberate policies of special interests or they are driven by policies of special interests. Therefore, these developments are predictable and can be calculated (to a point).
I usually refer to these "special interests" as global elites, or globalists, because that is how they often refer to themselves. The point is, most of the events you see in the political world are engineered events designed to elicit a specific psychological response from you and the people around you. You are not a human being to these people; you are either an asset to be molded or an obstacle to be disposed of. This is how our world works. Period. And until we fully understand this and accept it, things will never change.
So, to be clear, if you understand the minds of globalists and understand what they want, you can understand the basic direction of the future.
It is this philosophy which has allowed me to consistently and accurately predict geopolitical and economic events that very few other people have been able to predict. For example, I correctly predicted the Federal Reserve taper of QE, I predicted the inclusion of China in the IMF's Special Drawing Rights years in advance, I predicted the exact timing of the first Fed rate hike, I predicted the success of the Brexit referendum when most of the world and the liberty movement said it was never going to happen, I predicted that the Saudi 9/11 bill would pass, that Barack Obama would veto it and that congress would override his veto, I predicted that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic candidate and that Donald Trump would be the Republican candidate for president of the U.S. and, for the past five months, I have been predicting that Donald Trump would win the 2016 election.
People can either attribute these series of successful predictions to pure "luck," or they can consider the possibility that I know what I am talking about. I'll leave that to them.
The real issue, though, is not that my predictions were correct. What is more important is why they were correct. To begin with, I am often correct because it is a fact that globalists influence events. Globalists are human (at least partially); thus, they are predictable, making events predictable. If you can see from the perspective of a globalist, you will know what they want and what they are likely to do to get it.
In a world without globalists I would have a hard time successfully predicting anything.
I never make a cold prediction without a concrete rationale for why I hold that view. I always break down the reasons and evidence that bring sense to them. Some analysts might be content to simply flip a coin and make a call without explanation; I am not.
As far as the Trump election win is concerned, this is what I said in June of this year:
"In light of the Brexit I'm going to have to call it here and now and predict that the most likely scenario for elections will be a Trump presidency. Trump has consistently warned of a recession during his campaign and with the Brexit dragging markets lower over the next few months, he will probably be proven "prophetic."
… Even if Trump is a legitimate anti-establishment conservative, his entry into the Oval Office will seal the deal on the economic collapse, and will serve the globalists well. The international banks need only pull the plug on any remaining life support to the existing market system and allow it to fully implode, all while blaming Trump and his conservative supporters.
The mainstream media has been consistently comparing Trump supporters to Brexit supporters, and Trump himself has hitched his political wagon to the Brexit. This fits perfectly with the globalist narrative that populists and conservatives are killing the global economy and placing everyone at risk."
All of my predictions are rooted in a particular premise; that the global elites have been, since 2008 at least, deliberately setting the stage for an evolving international financial crisis greater than any other seen in modern history. This crisis is a means to an end. Globalists use one strategy above all others to achieve their goals — the Hegelian Dialectic; problem, reaction, solution.
As I have documented for years, the elites openly call for the ultimate eradication of national sovereignty and the formation of a single world economy, a single world currency and, eventually, a single world government. In order to make this omelet, they intend to break a few eggs (and collapse a few economies). You can read my in-depth analysis and evidence of this in my article "The Economic End Game Explained."
I also specifically predicted the Brexit and the Trump win based on another premise; that the elites are allowing conservative movements to take political power in certain regions, only to remove stimulus support from the global economy afterward. That is to say, I successfully predicted the Brexit and the Trump win because I understand and accept the reality that conservatives and liberty activists are not "winning;" we are being set up as scapegoats for a financial crash that the globalists already created.
Again, people can either say I am lucky or that there is something to my position, but the fact of the matter is I have been right and I will probably continue to be right. This brings us to what will happen going into 2017.
The election of Donald Trump signals a sea change in not only global politics, but more importantly, global economic stability and social developments. As frenetic and insane as 2016 has been, 2017 will be drastically more chaotic. Some of these changes will be obvious, some of them will once again only be visible to a handful of people in the world. Lets start first with my happier predictions…
The death of the mainstream media
This is an easy one. The mainstream media with its insane regressive-progressives and elitist bias misrepresented the "Alt-Right," the Trump campaign and anti-social justice movements during the entirety of the election process. Not only this, but through Wikileaks the leftist media was made naked as numerous journalists and outlets were exposed; colluding directly with the DNC and the Hillary campaign to first bushwhack Bernie Sanders and then rig debates and polling numbers to show Clinton in a farcically superior position to Trump.
The mainstream media is now seen by the majority of Americans on the left and right as a lumbering rotting propaganda corpse that needs to be decapitated before it spreads its disease to anyone else. I predict MSM outlet readership and viewership (with the exception of FOX News) will collapse even further than it already has and that they will be forced to consolidate until they fade out of existence.
As I have said for years, the mainstream media is dead, they just don't know it yet. Well, after this election, everyone knows. The alternative media will take the place of the mainstream media. We will be adopting their viewership and growing explosively over the next year while they shrivel.
They decided that their job was not to report the facts, but to manipulate public opinion. They are liars and a disgrace to true journalism. Good riddance.
That said, some people will argue that my position that the elites wanted a Trump presidency is not tenable exactly because the liberal media worked so hard to rig public opinion against Trump. I will explain in my next article why these people are missing the bigger picture.
The crippling of social justice warriors
The SJW cult is not dead, but it has been crippled. It is now a drooling bedridden quadriplegic eating its meals through a straw; a malfunctioning shell of a movement destined to be put out of its misery.
When I think of social justice warriors I think of the Island of Misfit Toys; nobody wants these people. They are a detriment to everything they touch, including the Democratic party. It was the zealotry of SJWs that caused conservatives to rally in anger around Trump. It was they that awakened the sleeping giant.
One reason I was so certain Clinton had set herself up for a loss was her insistence that the Democrats adopt these hell spawn and their ideology. By embracing politically correct rhetoric and accusing all opposition of being "deplorable" racists, sexists and homophobes, Clinton doomed her campaign from the very beginning. Anyone with any sense could see the massive tide against SJWs growing on the internet. In fact, I propose that the globalists, using the advanced web analytics at their disposal, saw it even before the rest of us did.
SJWs are a tiny minority in American society. Their only strategy has been to use Alinsky tactics to make their movement appear much larger than it really is. Through mutual aid in popular media, SJWs presented a fabricated consensus. They made it appear as though they were the majority view and, thus, the superior view.
One fantastic result of the 2016 election has been the realization by conservatives that they are not isolated on the fringes of society. In fact, in America at least, we are a considerable force to be reckoned with. There is an old story of a Roman Senator 2,000 years ago who suggested the idea of forcing slaves to wear armbands to make them easily identifiable. Another senator admonished the idea, stating "No, if they realize how many of them there really are, they may revolt."
This is what Election 2016 did for conservatives — we have now seen that millions of us have arm bands and we are now in revolt.
I rarely comment on race issues because I don't really see race as very relevant in most cases; but it has been the tactic of social justice cultists to constantly and brutally target straight white males as the monsters of history and therefore responsible for the ills and failures of every minority group today. At this point I think it is safe to say that we will not continue to be scapegoats for the problems of people clamoring for victim group status any longer.
The end of polling
I was also confident in my prediction of a Trump win based on my knowledge of inconsistencies in modern polling methods. The fact of the matter is, polling suffers from the same lack of objectivity that any other "science" can at times suffer from — the results will always be vulnerable to influence from the observer. If the observer wants a particular outcome for the numbers, they will consciously or unconsciously rig their method to produce the desired result.
I saw this happen time and time again during the Brexit polls leading up to the referendum, and, as I stated many times before the U.S. election, the campaign polls seemed to be behaving the same way. This is how you get media sources like Reuters claiming a 90 percent chance of a win by Hillary Clinton just before the election. When pollsters weight their polls with far more democrats than republicans and when they poll the same groups repeatedly they are not going to get varied or honest data.
In the end, polls become propaganda tools rather than litmus tests. The mainstream has tried desperately to explain why their polls were so utterly wrong, but it is too late for them. After the Brexit and the U.S. election, no one is going to trust these numbers again.
Liberty groups will get some breathing room (for a little while)
The steady drum beat of government antagonism for "patriot groups" is probably going to subside for a short time. I happen to know that many militia groups and preparedness networks are breathing a heavy sigh of relief today after eight years of a hostile Obama presidency, the IRS sniping at liberty organizations and individual activists based purely on political reasons, the DHS profiling liberty activists as terrorists and the SPLC frothing at the mouth like rabid animals looking to use their ties to the feds as a means to sink their teeth into any conservatives with the guts to refuse participation in the system.
With conservatives launching into 2017 with complete control of government and a Trump mandate, it would seem that liberty groups have "won the fight" and have nothing to worry about.
That said, don't get too comfortable, folks, because now we are going to discuss my negative predictions going into next year…
The final stage of economic collapse
Most Americans' only relation to the economy is through the daily rise and fall of the Dow Jones. If they see the Dow in the green, they go on with their day. If they see the Dow in the red, they stop and question what is happening. The election of Donald Trump has surprised many with a sudden rise, rather than fall, in stock markets. But, as I told my readers before the election, it would be wise to wait a couple of weeks before trying to analyze these markets.
I predict first that central banks around the globe will further cut stimulus measures and that the Fed is now guaranteed to raise interest rates, probably in December before Trump even enters the White House. I also believe that the process of initiating a market crisis will take approximately six months to become widely visible to the public. As a consequence, I predict Trump and the Fed will enter into open hostilities against each other, which will erode faith in the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency.
By extension, Trump's presence in the White House will exacerbate already-existing tensions with Saudi Arabia. The Saudi 9/11 bill is just the beginning. As a result, I believe Saudi Arabia will dump the U.S. dollar as the petro-currency, influencing numerous other OPEC nations to do the same. I believe this will happen by early 2018.
In my view, for now, oil prices will be the best indicator for where stocks are headed in the next few months.
This is not something many Trump supporters want to hear. Of course, the response in the liberty movement to my prediction that the elites would allow Trump into office was rather predictable as well. In my article "Why the U.S. election has the entire world confused" I stated:
"I have not taken this position just to be contrary. If I think about it honestly, my position is truly a losing position. If I am mistaken and Clinton wins on the 8th then I'll probably never hear the end of it, but that's a risk that has to be taken, because what I see here is a move on the chess board that others are not considering. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.
That said, if I am right, then I still lose, because Trump supporters and half the liberty movement will be so enraptured that they will probably ignore the greater issue — that Trump is the candidate the elites wanted all along."
This seems to be the response from about half the liberty movement so far; a general blind faith and bias, clinging to the idea that the election (just like the Brexit) was a victory, and that conservatives had just won the culture war and defeated the globalists. It's funny how it wasn't much of a controversy when everyone thought I was wrong about Trump winning in the first place.
There are two primary arguments that come up with these people. First, that my view on the influence of the elites is "unrealistic" and that the elites would have to be "omnipotent" in order to succeed in directing the outcome of these events so effectively. I will address this argument in detail in my next article on the Trump presidency and what the consequences will be for us all if Trump turns out not to be a constitutionalist.
The second argument is that the elites "will never succeed" in blaming Trump and conservatives for an economic crisis that was decades in the making. To the people that make this argument I say — I understand mass psychology far better than you do.
The reality is, half of America is already primed to blame Trump for everything that happens over the next four years (if we even make it that long). Possession is nine-tenths of the law in the minds of many. Beyond that, every meme in the global media and on the left is promoting the idea that Trump is an apocalypse in the making. Even Germany's Der Spiegal published its after-election magazine with a cover depicting Trump's head as a giant comet hurtling towards the Earth. Don't tell me that Trump cannot be blamed for an economic crisis. Only a complete idiot would suggest that he is anything other than the perfect scapegoat.
At bottom, it does not matter whether people believe the above predictions or not. I have hundreds of emails from readers who called me a "tinfoil hatter" in the past and are now apologizing. So, if you plan to react in a knee-jerk fashion to the notion that Trump and conservatives are being set up by the elites for a final financial flagellation, be sure to write two emails — one for today saying I've lost touch, and the other for tomorrow when you find out I was right once again.
— Brandon Smith
The post World suffers from Trump shell shock — here's what will happen next appeared first on Personal Liberty®.
----
Shared via my feedly newsfeed
Monday, November 14, 2016
Friday, November 11, 2016
This is the wrong way for a CEO to respond to Donald Trump’s election win [feedly]
----
This is the wrong way for a CEO to respond to Donald Trump's election win
// The Verge

Tech company CEOs have all responded to Tuesday's election results in similar ways, with letters, memos, and emails to employees reminding them to stay the course and reiterating the power of an inclusive and diverse environment. Grubhub CEO and co-founder Matt Maloney happens to be an outlier. Instead of offering employees a series of vague platitudes, he came out and said the president elect is a hateful step backwards.
GrubHub CEO is walking a fine line in asking for employee resignations
In a controversial company-wide email sent out yesterday and obtained by Fox News, Maloney wrote, "I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can." He goes on to say that any employee who is scared or feeling vulnerable in the current political climate should know that he and Grubhub will "fight for your dignity and your right to make a better life for yourself and your family here in the United States."
Then there's the part getting Maloney in hot water. He writes that, "If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here." At first glance, it appears Maloney is telling pro-Trump supporters among his ranks to resign — and that is how many headlines have interpreted the letter.
However, if you carefully parse the note, that sentence technically is referring to fighting for his employees dignity and right to make a better life for themselves, not supporting Trump. Whether Maloney intended for that kind of careful parsing of grammar or not is immaterial — the fact that it's necessary to read so closely to not assume he wants Trump supports to quit is a problem.
"I did not ask for anyone to resign if they voted for Trump."
Many chose to interpret the email not as a repudiation of Trump, but as an open call to excise any Republican voters from his company. A fierce backlash has already begun on Twitter with the hashtag #boycottgrubhub, and it does not look as if it will subside any time soon. Maloney apparently stands by the letter, telling Fox News that about 20 percent of his staff has personally thanked him for it.
In a press release posted to Grubhub's website this evening, Maloney tried to address the criticism. "I want to clarify that I did not ask for anyone to resign if they voted for Trump. I would never make such a demand," he wrote. "To the contrary, the message of the email is that we do not tolerate discriminatory activity or hateful commentary in the workplace, and that we will stand up for our employees." Maloney added that he accepts employees with all political beliefs and reiterated that Grubhub "does not discriminate on the basis of someone's principles, or political or other beliefs."
You could argue that regardless of Maloney's follow-up statement, he waded into legally murky territory with his initial email. He isn't promising retaliation against Trump voters, or promising to suss out Trump sympathizers and fire them. He is, however, outlining a cultural workplace attitude he would like see excised from Grubhub, and asking those employees who share that attitude to remove themselves at their own discretion. The jury appears to still be out on whether he crossed a legal line.
Mini-lawsplainer: maybe @Grubhub isn't safe with that "resign if you support Trump's politics" email after all. /1
— (((Popehat))) (@Popehat) November 10, 2016
Nonetheless, it's a remarkable step to take, even in today's divisive political climate, for the boss of hundreds of employees to lay out such a transparent distaste for one side of the political aisle. It's also not exactly smart to word things in such a way as to let them be purposefully, or even accidentally, misinterpreted as political discrimination.
Update 7:46PM ET, 11/11: Added quotes from Maloney's follow-up press release issued this evening.
- Source: Fox News
----
Shared via my feedly newsfeed
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Tuesday, November 8, 2016
Brace for a post-election financial death rattle [feedly]
----
Brace for a post-election financial death rattle
// Personal Liberty Digest™
It doesn't matter who wins the presidential election Tuesday night, say financial experts who are warning investors to prepare for market turmoil in the months ahead.
That's because this year's election comes at the end of a lengthy list of unprecedented economic and geopolitical occurrences. And, unlike past U.S. presidential elections, experts throughout the world who spend their time carefully studying global political and financial events aren't so sure the changing of the guard here will change much about what has already been set into motion.
Some are saying the stock market will crash if Donald Trump is elected. Others worry that the global economy is already collapsing; we just aren't admitting it yet.
And they're all right.
Despite what many U.S. voters would prefer to believe, the most important bad bit of economic news following the election centers on the fact that the next president will be powerless to reverse the extraordinary amount of damage done to the U.S. economy via the Federal Reserve's more than a half decade of quantitative easing. Quantitative easing (QE) is the easy money policy that's made Wall Street happy over the years, but done little to strengthen small business or the average American's retirement account.
Republican Donald Trump has been talking about QE for years. In fact, he even explained why a guy like himself would be in favor of easy government money way back in September 2013.
"Selfishly, as a developer, I love cheap money," he told Fox's Neil Cavuto at the time.
But he also noted why it's no good for average folks, saying: "The only people that get money are people like me that don't need it…"
And while Trump has talked a great deal on the campaign trail about how the nation's growing debt and shrinking assets are going to cause big trouble, there's absolutely no indication that he has a revolutionary fix in mind.
That's why the political mainstreamers, for all their Trump-bashing, have declared the GOP candidate "sane" at least on federal monetary policy.
He's said he'd replace Fed chair Janet Yellen; but noted that she isn't so bad.
After all, a President Trump is likely to call on the Fed to pull a Hail Mary even the Obama administration hasn't yet been brazen enough to greenlight: full on helicopter money. Helicopter money is what it sounds like, creating however much is needed out of thin air.
Don't take my word for it.
"This is the United States government. You never have to default— because you print the money, I hate to tell you. So there's never a default." Trump said during an interview in May.
That is, technically, true. But that money must then be backed by something, I hate to tell you.
This isn't, of course, a denouncement of Trump. But only because a Hillary Clinton administration would mean the continuance of Obama administration economic policy at the macro level. In other words, you never have to default… you print the money. The end result is the helicopter.
Increasing interest rates and ratcheting down on the Fed's money printing is an unworkable solution for either administration—because it will result in too much blame and too much pain at all levels of the economic house of cards.
You see, the big guys who love that easy money do put it to some use. They build things. They finance things. And they buy all sorts of products.
How they spend that money affects how you spend your days… Working versus looking for jobs that aren't there. Driving to work versus taking a cab until you can make the money to pay off the repo man and what you owe the bank. And, after chasing the American dream all day, retiring to your home with the white picket fence versus your mother-in-law's house, where you've been living since the first round of easy money bit everyone in the ass.
Whoever gets elected, they don't want another housing crisis… or an automobile loan bubble… or massive corporate layoffs because they shut off the spigot to the too-big-too-fails.
If they'd done it eight years ago, Obama would have been a one-term president. But I bet you'd like him better today.
That's because after the initial pain, the market would've eventually begun to right itself in a real way.
But politics is the art of prolonging death. And the current iteration of our economy isn't quite dead yet.
So, rather than a quick death and an economic rebirth, our next president will continue us on the slow path toward the inevitable.
It's that tired trope about boiling frogs…
Helicopter money, or just a little more QE… is what we'll get. And things will feel about the same for a few years. If your job is to get elected every few years, that's good news.
The runaway inflation… That'll be the next guy's (or gal's) problem.
And it'll be our problem… and our children's.
There are just a couple of major differences between how we'll deal with it and the people who pushed us there— our paychecks and retirement accounts are going to disappear long before any living former president sees a pay cut. And guess who usually gets the first of the government rations in countries where governments destroy their economies via inflation?
I'll give you a hint, "People like me that don't need it."
The post Brace for a post-election financial death rattle appeared first on Personal Liberty®.
----
Shared via my feedly newsfeed
Friday, November 4, 2016
Video: Elect Clinton to hand over the keys to the nation [feedly]
----
Video: Elect Clinton to hand over the keys to the nation
// Personal Liberty Digest™
A political action group working to sour millennials on Democrat Hillary Clinton has released a video reminding voters that all of the money the Clintons have taken from foreign donors over the years will dictate how the nation is run if she is elected.
The video, out from the Future45 Super PAC, suggests that Clinton's message to foreign donors has been clear: "Pay my foundation for the keys to the nation."
"Money, money, money, you keep it gushin.' Don't care if you're Arab, Wall Street or Russian," a rapper sings as an actress portraying Clinton dances to the track.
"She's got a number in her cranium and you're going to get your uranium," another line goes.
In another video the PAC highlights news reports the Clinton campaign would probably rather voters forget:
Related:
Clinton Foundation got millions from Saudi government
Hillary's 'fire sale' on White House access
The post Video: Elect Clinton to hand over the keys to the nation appeared first on Personal Liberty®.
----
Shared via my feedly newsfeed
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)