Liberals to the rescue: “Take knives and forks away from skinny people”.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9949134/jane-moore-obesity-mass-shootings/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9949134/jane-moore-obesity-mass-shootings/
Posted in Uncategorized
Dudley Brown
President
National Association for Gun Rights
Putting a stop to this gun control madness in the Senate may be our only hope to defending the Second Amendment against these attacks
So while delivering over one million petitions in person to Congress and the White House is a great start to defeating these gun control packages, we must do more and continue applying pressure.
But we can do more.
So please sign your “Vote NO on Gun Control” Petition right away along with your most generous contribution TODAY!
Just chipping in $20 or $10 today will go a long way towards us defend our Second Amendment rights at all costs.
https://nagr.org/2019/1041_NoGunControl-p.aspx?pid=38a
Posted in Uncategorized
Thanks to X22 report and Project Matrix Watchman
Posted in Uncategorized
Oldie but always true. Please comment and send it to all you know. Maybe some liberal may see it and understand that they are bein hood winked by the demorats.
Posted in Uncategorized
HAARETZ
It appears that even Trump – liberator of the American Embassy in Jerusalem and conqueror of Trump Heights in the Golan – realizes that a deal with Iran is preferable to war.
After three years during which Netanyahu’s influence on Trump and his entourage on the Iran issue prevailed, there are growing signs of a change of approach in Washington. A few weeks ago, the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, was invited to the G-7 meeting in Paris, where Trump was also in attendance. Last week in London, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said that it appeared as if Iran was “inching toward that place where we could have talks,” adding that he hoped they would really happen. Two days ago, Trump himself said he had no problem meeting Iran’s president, and that such a meeting could take place.
>> No ‘dramatic’ words from Israel, only from Washington | Analysis ■ For second day running, Trump – and Hamas – rain on Netanyahu’s grandstanding parade ■ Trump ready to meet Rohani without preconditions, Pompeo says hours after Bolton fired
Moreover, Trump chose to deliver this message only a few hours after Netanyahu had convened a special press conference – similar to the one he convened in order to push Trump into withdrawing from the accord – in which he declared that Israel had identified more sites that were part of Iran’s nuclear program. Netanyahu called on the international community “to wake up, to understand that they’re constantly lying, and join the U.S. and Israel.”
Trump’s words are a rejection of Netanyahu’s call. His willingness to meet Rohani places him on the side of the international community, led by France, which wishes to resume negotiations. On Tuesday evening, Trump went ever farther and fired his national security adviser, John Bolton – his most hawkish advisor on Iran.This shift should not be taken lightly. Netanyahu’s approach saw the accord with Iran as something akin to the 1938 Munich agreement, with Rohani as another Hitler. Netanyahu viewed any attempt to negotiate with the Iranian regime as a sign of defeatist appeasement in the Neville Chamberlain mode. Netanyahu presented Rohani as a leader one cannot negotiate with, just as Hitler could not be negotiated with. The fact that Trump publicly declared that he has no problem meeting Rohani is a rebuttal of the “Munich paradigm” touted by Netanyahu. The change in Trump’s position pulls the rug out from under Netanyahu’s campaign, which presents Iran as a Nazi monster while at the same time putting Israel’s trust in the hands of an American president who is willing to negotiate with it.
Posted in Uncategorized
By Mark Nestmann • September 10, 2019
Tomorrow is the 18th anniversary of four coordinated attacks in the US by Al Qaeda operatives that killed nearly 3,000 people. While these deaths are tragic beyond words, it’s worth remembering what the world was like before September 11, 2001, and what we’ve lost since then.
The most obvious change since 9/11 has been at the airport. Before then, you didn’t have the security theater charade now in place. Today, you must empty your pockets, take your electronic devices out of your carry-on, and remove your shoes to enter the boarding area (unless you’re enrolled in the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) PreCheck).
You could take liquids through security screening and weren’t subjected to endless announcements warning you to report suspicious bags or people to authorities. You could even lock your suitcase with a non-TSA-approved lock. Indeed, the TSA itself didn’t exist until after 9/11.
You didn’t need a ticket to walk to the gate to see off a friend or family member. And when you picked them up, you could park in front of the arrivals building without being chased off by police.
These changes are just the tip of the iceberg. The truly significant changes occurred behind the scenes in the surveillance infrastructure that was installed at breakneck speed in the days and weeks after 9/11.
Less than two hours after the 9/11 attacks began, Uncle Sam set in motion an initiative called “Continuity of Government” (COG). The COG was originally a contingency plan set up in the 1980s to put America under martial law during a nuclear war. According to a 1987 article in the Miami Herald, the plan called for “suspension of the Constitution…emergency appointment of military commanders to run state and local governments and declaration of martial law during a national crisis.”
Late in 1988, in the final months of his administration, President Ronald Reagan expanded the COG plan to include any “national security emergency,” not only one caused by a nuclear war. This change was suggested by Lt. Colonel Oliver North. According to former Boston Globe reporter Ross Gelbspan, North “urged President Reagan to draw up a secret contingency plan to surveil political dissenters and [detain] hundreds of thousands of undocumented aliens in case of an unspecified national emergency.”
Thus, more than a decade before 9/11, the legal infrastructure was in place for an unprecedented expansion of Uncle Sam’s surveillance and detention authority in a national emergency.
And that’s exactly what we got after 9/11. Vice President Richard Cheney quickly took control of the COG apparatus. Within days, the key features of Oliver North’s expanded COG plan started coming into existence.
On September 14, 2001, three days after 9/11, President Bush signed Proclamation 7463. This was a declaration of national emergency giving him sweeping powers to use military force against Al Qaeda. That authority must be renewed annually and is supposed to be reviewed every six months by Congress. But Bush and all his successors, including President Trump, have now renewed this emergency declaration 17 times. And Congress has never reviewed Proclamation 7463 despite the legal requirement to do so.
A few days later, Bush signed Executive Order 13224, another declaration of national emergency. The order authorizes the president to confiscate – without trial – the property of anyone believed to support terrorism. Initially, the target list accompanying the order contained 27 names. It now contains more than 1,300 pages of names.
Cheney was instrumental in persuading Congress to enact the USA Patriot Act without meaningful debate. Among other provisions, the law greatly expanded the government’s civil forfeiture authority. And while Cheney justified the law as an anti-terror measure, it was first used in an anti-fraud investigation, a crime far removed from terrorism.
The Cheney team also created a series of legal opinions justifying the expansion of the president’s authority in a national emergency. One argued the president had the right to deploy military force without the consent of Congress. Another claimed the US had the right to disregard international agreements for the humane treatment of prisoners when alleged terrorists were captured. This document laid the groundwork for a Constitution-free zone in which suspected terrorists could be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime.
Four weeks after 9/11, Bush established the Office of Homeland Security, which eventually became the Department of Homeland Security. Bush also issued a series of directives to expand terrorist screening, leading to the creation of the No Fly List and the terrorist watchlist. As of 2014, the No Fly List contained 64,000 names. If you’re on it, you can’t board a flight leaving or entering the US or even passing over its territory. The terrorist watchlist is much larger, with about 1.16 million names as of June 2017. If you’re on this list, you can still fly. Just be prepared for a body cavity search when you try to clear security and to be handcuffed when you cross a US border.
In keeping with the original vision of Oliver North, criticizing the government is one way to wind up on the terrorist watchlist. Constitutional Law Professor Walter F. Murphy, a prominent critic of President Bush, learned this firsthand in 2007. He asked an airline employee why he was detained when trying to board a flight. The employee asked, “Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that.” Murphy responded that he had not marched but he had given a lecture that criticized Bush for violating the Constitution. “That’ll do it,” the employee responded.
Another COG initiative that found its way into post-9/11 America was the militarization of law enforcement. A new military command, NORTHCOM, was tasked with creating “fusion centers” to consolidate all possible data sources to identify potential threats. According to the Department of Homeland Security, fusion centers serve as “focal points in states and major urban areas for the receipt, analysis, gathering and sharing of threat-related information between state, local, tribal, territorial, federal and private sector partners.”
The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the military from acting as a domestic police force, but according to internal military documents leaked on WikiLeaks, fusion centers are an ideal way for the military to conduct domestic espionage without breaking the law. Thus, it should come as no surprise that “terrorist” groups like the Quakers, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Greenpeace, the Arab American Anti-Defamation Committee, and the American Civil Liberties Union have come under surveillance since 9/11.
A key focus of COG from its outset has been warrantless surveillance. To expand the government’s role, President Bush signed another executive order in 2002 to establish the Terrorist Surveillance Program. The targets were individuals allegedly connected to terrorist groups or otherwise of interest to intelligence officials. Surveillance was carried out by the secretive National Security Agency, which gained direct access to the infrastructure of America’s largest telecommunications companies. When the program was challenged in court, Bush persuaded Congress to authorize it formally in 2008. Since then, Congress has dutifully renewed this authority every five years.
Yes, America is a very different place than it was before 9/11. And we now take it for granted that in peacetime Uncle Sam needs the emergency powers originally intended to be used only after a nuclear war.
Maybe it’s time to consider your Plan B.
Posted in Uncategorized

Posted in Uncategorized
Ben Swann
Published on Sep 10, 2019
What really happened to World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11th, the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District Commissioners’ historic resolution calling for a new investigation, University of Alaska Fairbanks’ bombshell multi-year, $300K study of WTC 7 and how it collapsed, and an interview with Richard Gage of AE911 in episode #2 of Truth in Media with Ben Swann.
MY THOUGHTS:
THIS HAS TO BE UNCOVERED. ALL OF OUR TODAYS TROUBLES STEM FROM THIS EVENT AS LONG AS WE ARE NOT TOLD THE TRUTH. UNTIL THE GOVERNMENT SPELLS OUT THE TRUTH AND PROSECUTES THE GUILTY, WE WILL NEVER AGAIN BE FREE.
I MOURN WITH ALL THE PEOPLE WHO LOST LOVED ONES AND FRIENDS THIS DAY 18 YEARS AGO. I REMEMBER IT WELL
THERE ARE MANY MEMORIAL EVENTS AROUND THECOUNTRY, BUT ALL THE SPEECHES WITH OUT TELLING THE TRUTH, ARE LIKE THEY WERE POKING US IN THE EYE WITH A SHARP STICK. GOD BLESS US ALL.
Posted in Uncategorized
Jarmo Ekman from Tampere, thank you for sharing such great news to us. I am originally from Helsinki, 60 vuotta sitten.
Posted in Uncategorized
American Thought Leaders – The Epoch Times
Premiered 22 hours ago
Just what are some of the methods that tech giants like Google and Facebook can use to shift their users’ attitudes, beliefs, and even votes?
How do search engine rankings impact undecided voters?
How powerful of an impact can search engine algorithms have on our perceptions and actions, without us even knowing?
And why aren’t more people researching these things?
This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.
Today we sit down with Dr. Robert Epstein, the former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today. He is currently a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and a leading expert on search engine bias.
We explore his meticulous research into tech giant bias, and the startling discoveries he has made. We also look at Dr. Epstein’s ambitious plans to monitor and track search engine bias in the months leading up to the 2020 election.
Posted in Uncategorized
Posted in Uncategorized
QUESTION: Is there a pattern? C ANSWER: For whatever reason, these people have been promoting that the cities will all sink and we are the cause of it all. They have been touting this scenario since the 1930s when there was the Dust Bowl. It resurfaced after World War II when they were trying to…
via Climate Change Has been a Routine Scare Tactic Since the 1930s — Armstrong Economics

JC Collins
This is an analysis of the development and purpose of Bitcoin. The mystery surrounding Bitcoin, and its unknown developer Satoshi Nakamoto, is like something ripped right out of the pages of the most bizarre thriller. An analysis such as this one would appear conspiratorial and fictional on the surface, but when considered in relation to the real-world bizarreness of Bitcoin itself, it takes on a semblance of realism and probability.
Since producing some of the earlier writings on how the digital asset XRP would be fitting into the international monetary system and bridging the gaps which had developed in that system since 1944, I had little else to share on the matter. There were plenty of others with a deeper understanding of the technology than me who could provide that service to an ever growing community of digital asset champions. After providing some thorough monetary history, and direct predictions on how the end XRP service would look (which is beginning to take shape), I felt there was no other value I could add to the discussion.
For the most part, this remains the case. But there is a much bigger picture emerging as other world events begin unfolding on multiple fronts.
This work will be focused on the broad strokes and patterns which weave through the whole storyline. As with my previous articles, I’ll leave it up to others to continue the work and unearth further details and evidence to support the analysis. There will be plenty.
Before moving on I should validate the seriousness and accuracy of my own unique personal method of analysis. The sole purpose of sharing this is not to build up my own character but to lend support to the analysis being presented in this article. Since the beginning of 2014, through the use of my own unique analysis, which is built on pattern recognition and conceptual logic, I have made numerous predictions which have been accurate.
Predicted the de-dollarization which is taking place today and is now widely accepted as fact.
Predicted the increasing momentum to re-organize the international monetary system towards a true multilateral framework. This is continuing today with XRP, and other digital assets, serving in the Chinese proposed role for the SDR.
Predicted the inclusion of the Chinese currency RMB in the Special Drawing Right (SDR) composition alongside the dollar, pound, euro, and yen.
Predicted the 2014 crash in crude prices during a boardroom roundtable of peers. The ask was to bring forth what each of us thought was an upcoming challenge to the business in the next 6 to 12 months. The room disagreed with my assessment, but 6 months later my words became factual.
Predicted the rise of the new modern nationalism which has been sweeping the world and replacing aging liberal order governments and policies.
Predicted the election of Donald Trump more than a year before the election, and when everyone else still thought it was impossible. Also predicted a second term at the same time. This is looking likely at this stage of the election cycle.
Predicted the collapse of Communist China which is now quickly becoming an accepted possibility, even though when I first made the prediction most thought it impossible.
There are many other accurate predictions that weave themselves into my works over the last 6 years but these core predictions should suffice to make the point and gain reader confidence on the validity of the analytical approach used.
The obvious aspect of Bitcoin and its creator Satoshi Nakamoto which needs to be considered first and foremost is the lack of knowing and facts. As strange as it is, very little is known during a time when almost everything is known. Outside of the exchanges between Satoshi and the Cypherpunks on message boards and emails about the creation of Bitcoin, there is nothing else which can be documented or proven to exist. Except the network itself and the original crypto wallet held presumably by Satoshi.
This wallet has been abandoned and is worth billions today. In this fact there is a vital clue which marks the beginning of our conceptual analysis. Satoshi clearly didn’t want to reveal who he was and claiming the wallet years after the fact could lead to exposure. But the fact that no one has claimed a wallet worth billions strongly suggests that an individual is not in fact the owner. Looking through a different lens, a case can made that a large state actor in fact owns the wallet and can allow the billions to sit there unclaimed without causing much human stress or desire.
The lack of evidence around the creation of Bitcoin and who Satoshi Nakamoto really was is not detrimental to our understanding of what in fact was happening. More to the point, it is this lack of evidence which is strongly supportive of a state actor being involved as a single individual would have very little motivation to remain hidden and not claim billions in wealth.
Once we accept that a state actor had to be involved it becomes rather obvious to consider the two largest players in the world monetary system, being the United States and China. America is the world’s largest debtor nation and China is the world’s largest creditor nation. But based on the international dominance, or exorbitant privilege of the dollar, being the world’s largest debtor nation gives America the stronger position over China.
This complex relationship between both needs to be addressed and re-arranged before any fundamental shift will happen in the global system. Truth be told, it will be the re-arranging of this relationship which will cause the global shift, such as we are witnessing now with the ongoing trade war being waged against China. All other nations, economies, and central banks are trapped between these two giants.
Facts are beginning to emerge that the Chinese miracle and large economy are nothing but a fraud built on illusions and massive corruption. Western banks and officials have allowed for the funding and support of Communist China and the game is quickly coming to an end. Just today the Chinese currency experienced its largest crash in the last 25 years. Major banks are failing in China and hundreds of companies are now moving manufacturing to Vietnam and other places. The whole worlds supply chain is shifting away from China.
The growing protests in Hong Kong are threatening the false economy within China as that is where it connects with the outside real economy. The Hong Kong protests and the trade war being waged by the Trump administration should be considered as two weapons being used for the same purpose.
Even though somewhere around 80% of the world’s Bitcoin mining takes place in China, we are seeing almost no capital outflows on the Bitcoin network from within China as its false economy begins to unravel. This is strange and suggests that all of the Bitcoin mining taking place within China is controlled outright by the Communist Party. All business and ventures within China are in fact controlled by the Party. It is now being stated that even Jack Ma of Alibaba was forced to sign over total control of the business to the Communist Party. Things are now moving fast in China.
The other aspect of Bitcoin mining taking place within China is the large amount of coal fired energy required to manage that level of mining. Like companies, information, and people, all things in China are tightly controlled, with nothing more controlled than energy itself. Are we to consider that the most controlling and tyrannical government on Earth is simply allowing massive Bitcoin mining to take place without any interest? That is simply absurd and unrealistic. Internet and communications in and out of China are some of the most tightly controlled and monitored areas.
Once we accept those facts then we can accept that the Communist Party of China is allowing Bitcoin and its mining to take place in the country while suffering no capital outflows as its domestic economy begins to teeter on the edge of collapse.
The first reference to a “Bitcoin like” network was in a white paper released by the American NSA on October 31, 1996. It should go without saying that such a concept was not a secret and it is entirely plausible that China began toying with the concept of a “Bitcoin like” network after the turnover of Hong Kong in 1997. Hong Kong is important because as stated above it allows the Chinese fake economy to connect with the global real economy through a peg between the Hong Kong dollar and the US dollar. When you add in the relationship between the onshore RMB and offshore RMB, the dynamic between all currencies becomes complex, which is exactly what you want if you are attempting to hide economic fundamentals and build a false domestic illusion.
Further areas of research for readers should be focused on Tether and its relationship with the USD and Bitcoin, but more attention given to how this dynamic influences the RMB and Hong Kong dollar movements in correlation with the USD. There is something here which needs to be extracted, or mined.
As written in my article The Coming Collapse of Communist China, a few months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, China was admitted into the World Trade Organization. Nothing is suggested here except to state that it is indeed a strange coincidence on timing. Western banks and elites supported this move and sold it on the assumption that it would cause China to liberalize both its internal structures and economic policies. This did not happen of course.
From 2001 to 2008 the China “miracle” was growing at an incredible rate while more and more manufacturing was allowed to shift from the West to the East. After the financial crisis China started discussing the replacement of the reserve USD with the SDR of the International Monetary Fund. China wanted a supra-sovereign asset which would dethrone the USD as the world’s primary reserve currency. The Triffin paradox was leveraged to gain support and market the concept to banks and world leaders.
Almost at the same time China started promoting SDR as a USD alternative, Bitcoin arrived on the scene and one of its first use cases was to fund the trade of drugs and illicit materials on the internet based Silk Road. Readers should make an association between this Silk Road and the New Silk Road, later called Belt and Road Initiative, by China to connect Eurasia under a trade and economic order which bypassed America.
During the recent Hong Kong protests the Triad criminal organization were targeting people on the streets in order to cause fear and intimidation. There is an obvious relationship between the Triad and the Communist Party of China which needs to be considered. You would naturally think that the interests of the Triad wouldn’t be aligned with the Communist Party of China, but yet these events strongly suggest they are. Much like the relationship between Western criminal organizations, such as the Hells Angles and mafia families, and the intelligence apparatus of Western nations, China uses the Triad to carry on specific programs which undermine the structures of its own civilization for the purpose of population control and cultural management.
I would recommend the well researched and referenced book Dope Inc. by Executive Intelligence Review for a mind shattering expose of such relationships between intelligence agencies and criminal organizations.
Even now, opium and fentanyl is being exported into Western nations by China and the Triad at an alarming rate. So much so in fact, that Trump has made it a part of any potential trade deal with China. The money from this drug trade is being laundered through real estate markets in some of the worlds largest cities, like Vancouver, British Columbia, and Sydney, Australia. We hear about such things but only briefly and seldom stop to think what it really means. Through the China Development Bank, the Belt and Road Initiative is one massive money laundering scheme for the Communist Party of China. The nations which have partnered on the Belt and Road Initiative are waking up to the reality that they have been fooled into taking on large debts simply to fund corruption and control in mainland China. This is also quickly coming to an end.
As the wealth is shifted away from the Communist Party, its global business’s will begin failing and wealth from the general Chinese population will be taken away to support the Party. This will compound the problem and the great Chinese people will eventually turn on their Communist controllers and take their civilization back from the most corrupt and vile organization on the face of the planet.
In the years after Bitcoin arrived its use spread outside of the Silk Road illicit trade and many around the world took up the task of building exchanges and moving Bitcoin towards official acceptance and adoption. Through fronts and party member interests, it should be assumed that China has control of major Bitcoin exchanges, which are used for further money laundering. This is a huge area I will leave for other researchers to explore, but it shouldn’t take much to determine which exchanges are controlled by China and which ones are not. I would expect to discover that any exchanges that list XRP are not controlled by China, though some China controlled exchanges may have listed XRP in an attempt to manipulate that particular digital asset, as XRP is in all matters the exact opposite of Bitcoin.
The history of XRP and the company Ripple can almost be interpreted as a response to the creation and spread of Bitcoin and its promotion as a USD alternative. The underground promotion of Bitcoin in this capacity has remained and has grown in momentum across internet forums and from within certain business interests. This “overthrowing the USD” aspect of Bitcoin and its creation by the Communist Party of China is extremely telling of the intrigue which is now playing out on the world stage. As is the creation of XRP as the response.
Ethereum, which was developed by a Russian, and most alt coins built on the Ethereum network, were most likely developed to work in unison with Bitcoin to undermine the USD and shift massive wealth from West to East. We get into a lot of speculation in this area and its best to just let the events further play out. But it would not be surprising in the years to come that we discover there is a lot of truth to it.
The parallel growth of XRP and Ripple business partners, including central banks, alongside the trade war being waged against China, and the collapse of the Chinese economy and banking system from within, should also not be considered a coincidence. There is clearly something transitioning in the world which we only get glimpses off from time to time.
In addition, no other digital asset has faced more online opposition and “trolling” than XRP and Ripple. It’s almost as if the Chinese Ministry of Security Services has a division specifically tasked with waging online psychological warfare against XRP and those who promote it. A conceptual conclusion can be made that Bitcoin and all other cryptos are aligned on one side against XRP and Ripple. It’s a curious arrangement to be sure. Why is XRP such a threat?
I’m attempting to steer this away from the conspiratorial aspect as much as possible, but in the past, for me, when pieces start to click into place, the conclusions usually end up being accurate, as presented at the beginning of this article. I’m not interested in making outrageous claims to grow readership or get more followers on Twitter, but when I have something to say it usually ends up being consequential and changes the conscious narrative of its target subject. As will be the case with this article. The information will be denied by some and embraced by others, but it will percolate and spread through the unconscious interests of much greater minds.
The invocation I have called forth here will not be the last word. The world is changing and time will reveal the broad strokes written here to be true. There may be small variations in the details but the overall theme will prove to be accurate. I will now leave it to others to further prove the conclusions or to disprove the conclusions.
Eventually the truth about Bitcoin will be known and the purpose of Satoshi Nakamoto will be revealed. The mystery will be solved and the anagram re-arranged. The patterns described here do follow a conceptual logic. That is all I have to offer the world.
Readers should also thoroughly understand the case I made in the article The Coming Collapse of Communist China, as it is directly related to the material covered here, and appears to be happening at an increasing pace.
– JC
JC Collins can be contacted at jcollins@philosophyofmetrics.com
This article is copyrighted by POM Media©2019. As non-Membership content, it can be shared and reposted without further permission.
Posted in Uncategorized
Why do all the Democrats want to raise taxes?
It isn’t to raise revenue, as it has been shown repeatedly that high taxes de-incentivize growth and incentivize the wealthiest to use tax shelters.
The real reasons:
* Punish people who generate wealth – punish the winners. (70% tax rates are economically unsound)
* Slow down or stop economic growth
* Reduce the means for ordinary people to solve their own problems (emergency funds, insurance, charitable giving)
* Reduce the number of available jobs (combined with minimum wage increase programs, increase despair, despondence, and next -> )
* Increase dependency on the Federal government (welfare programs, solving government created “crisis” situations)
* Lock in a dependent voter base
* Create “crisis” situations that the Left can be the national saviors to solve (and grab more power)
* Grow the Government as a percentage of economic output to maximize power
* Join with Paris Accords and “Green New Deal” efforts to stagnate or recess economic production
* Meet Club of Rome targets
* A weak, impoverished United States, and a weak, impoverished world is easy to control
The Democrat vision of America is a nation with no economic growth, plain and simple, where all is taken from the able, and none is given according to ne
Posted in Uncategorized
There are trends which have unfolded in politics that cannot be repaired and reflect the decline in confidence in the government which is dominating the future into 2032. We face not only the polarization of politics which is emerging into hate politics, but we are also witnessing the attempt to subvert the political system for…

Next up: Labor Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s no-confidence motion and a potential general election in November.
Queen Elizabeth II has agreed to let Prime Minister Boris Johnson shut down Parliament for an extra week in a bid to ensure Brexit on October 31st.
The Parliament will return from summer recess on Tuesday, and were scheduled to work until Sept. 12, when the annual three-week party congress break occurs. However, at Johnson’s request, the queen has agreed to extend that break by one additional week to Oct. 14th.
The monarch held a privy council at her country estate in Balmoral this morning with Commons Leader Jacob Rees-Mogg—who also serves as Lord President of the Privy Council—House of Lords Leader Baroness Natalie Evans, and House of Commons Chief Whip Mark Spencer. Following that meeting, the queen issued the following “order of council,” which has the effect of UK law by royal prerogative:
“Order proroguing Parliament no earlier than Monday 9th September and no later than Thursday 12th September 2019 to Monday 14th October 2019, and directing the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain to prepare a commission accordingly.”
Proroguing Parliament means discontinuing the current legislative session without dissolving the legislative body. This typically happens for a short time each year prior to the Queen’s Speech, which starts the new legislative session. However, under royal prerogative, the UK monarch has the absolute power to prorogue Parliament for any length of time, ruling without it, during that time.
While prorogued, MPs lose their rights and privileges and revert to common subjects of the queen. For Johnson’s purposes, this prevents Remain MPs from pushing any bills that can prevent a no-deal Brexit.
In a letter, the prime minister clearly spelled out his intentions:
“I hope that you had an enjoyable and productive summer recess, with the opportunity for some rest ahead of the return of the House.
“I wanted to take this opportunity to update you on the Government’s plans for its business in Parliament.
“As you know, for some time parliamentary business has been sparse.
“The current session has lasted more than 340 days and needs to be brought to a close—in almost 400 years only the 2010-12 session comes close, at 250 days.
“Bills have been introduced, which, while worthy in their own right, have at times seemed more about filling time in both the Commons and the Lords, while key Brexit legislation has been held back to ensure it could still be considered for carry-over into a second session.
This cannot continue.
“I therefore intend to bring forward a new bold and ambitious domestic legislative agenda for the renewal of our country after Brexit.
“There will be a significant Brexit legislative program to get through but that should be no excuse for a lack of ambition!
“We will help the NHS, fight violent crime, invest in infrastructure and science and cut the cost of living.
“This morning I spoke to Her Majesty The Queen to request an end to the current parliamentary session in the second sitting week in September, before commencing the second session of this Parliament with a Queen’s speech on Monday 14 October.
“A central feature of the legislative program will be the Government’s number one legislative priority, if a new deal is forthcoming at EU Council, to introduce a Withdrawal Agreement Bill and move at pace to secure its passage before 31 October.
“I fully recognize that the debate on the Queen’s Speech will be an opportunity for Members of Parliament to express their view on this Government’s legislative agenda and its approach to, and the result of, the European Council on 17-18 October.
“It is right that you should have the chance to do so, in a clear and unambiguous manner.
“I also believe it is vitally important that the key votes associated with the Queen’s Speech and any deal with the EU fall at a time when parliamentarians are best placed to judge the Government’s program.
“Parliament will have the opportunity to debate the Government’s overall program, and approach to Brexit, in the run up to EU Council, and then vote on this on 21 and 22 October, once we know the outcome of the Council.
“Should I succeed in agreeing a deal with the EU, Parliament will then have the opportunity to pass the Bill required for ratification of the deal ahead of 31 October.
“Finally, I want to reiterate to colleagues that these weeks leading up to the European Council on 17/18 October are vitally important for the sake of my negotiations with the EU.
“Member States are watching what Parliament does with great interest and it is only by showing unity and resolve that we stand a chance of securing a new deal that can be passed by Parliament.
“In the meantime, the Government will take the responsible approach of continuing its preparations for leaving the EU, with or without a deal.
“The Leader of the Commons will update the House in the normal fashion with regard to business for the final week.
“For now, I can confirm that on Monday 9 September both Houses will debate the motions on the first reports relating to the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019 (NIEFA).
“Following these debates we will begin preparation to end the Parliamentary session ahead of a Queen’s Speech.
“The Business Managers in both Houses will shortly engage with their opposite numbers, and MPs more widely, on plans for passing a deal should one be forthcoming.
“Decisions will also need to be taken about carrying over some of the bills currently before the House, and we will look to work constructively with the Opposition on this front.
“If agreement cannot be reached we will look to reintroduce the bills in the next session, and details on this will be set out in the Queen’s Speech.
“As always my door is open to all colleagues should you wish to discuss this or any other matter.”
The prime minister now likely faces a no-confidence vote led by Opposition Leader Jeremy Corbyn. If it were to succeed, senior Downing Street officials have told The Sun newspaper that Mr. Johnson will not resign, but rather would call for a general election to be held shortly after October 31st.
Reaction among Remainers was immediate and forceful. Protesters have taken up shop outside the Palace of Westminster to express their outrage. Corbyn has also addressed the issue, demanding an audience with Queen Elizabeth II to protest the decision. In a statement outside the Palace of Westminster, he added:
“We will work will all MPs to take steps to ensure that the prorogation doesn’t happen, or move very quickly to a vote of no confidence in the government. If it is impossible to prevent prorogation it is going to be difficult for people like myself to keep confidence in the government.
“I am appalled at the recklessness of Johnson’s government. It’s a threat to our democracy.”
He later told the BBC the opposition will attempt to launch legislation to prevent not just the prorogation, but a no-deal Brexit. He added that if those attempts fail, a confidence motion would follow.
Speaker of the House John Bercow, who was a known Remainer, despite centuries of convention that the office holder should no longer take political positions, also expressed his fury at the prorogation order. He said it was “blindingly obvious” the move was meant to “stop Parliament debating Brexit and performing its duty.”
Remainer Tories Philip Hammond, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, and former environment minister Dominic Grieve also expressed their dismay, calling the prorogation “undemocratic” and “outrageous.” And Scottish Tory Leader Ruth Davidson resigned in protest over the move—although party insiders said the openly lesbian politician had been considering a resignation for several weeks due to the birth of her first child last year and the new demands motherhood have created for her.
But for some say Johnson’s moves haven’t quite gone far enough. A number of Brexiteers are concerned the prime minister is only interested in scrapping the much-hated Irish Backstop, sharing their concerns for many other parts of Theresa May’s negotiated withdrawal agreement with the EU.
They have argued that failing to scrap the whole agreement and starting from scratch with the EU will still be a disaster for the UK. Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage went so far as to say failing to do so would be the political end of Johnson as his party would challenge the Tories for “every seat up and down the country.”
Posted in Uncategorized