TRUMP.

[Joel]

I wonder if he thinks Wikileaks should have named sources too?

[Joel]

White House adviser asked FBI to dispute Russia reports

WASHINGTON (AP) — White House chief of staff Reince Priebus asked a top FBI official to dispute media reports that President Donald Trump's campaign advisers were frequently in touch with Russian intelligence agents during the election, a White House official said late Thursday.

The official said Priebus' request came after the FBI told the White House it believed a New York Times report last week describing those contacts was not accurate. As of Thursday, the FBI had not stated that position publicly and there was no indication it planned to.

The New York Times reported that U.S. agencies had intercepted phone calls last year between Russian intelligence officials and members of Trump's 2016 campaign team.

Priebus' discussion with FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe sparked outrage among some Democrats, who said he was violating policies intended to limit communications between the law enforcement agency and the White House on pending investigations.

"The White House is simply not permitted to pressure the FBI to make public statements about a pending investigation of the president and his advisers," said Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

A 2009 memo from then-Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department is to advise the White House on pending criminal or civil investigations "only when it is important for the performance of the president's duties and appropriate from a law enforcement perspective." When communication has to occur, the memo said, it should involve only the highest-level officials from the White House and the Justice Department.

The White House official would not comment when asked if the administration was concerned about the appropriateness of Priebus' communications with McCabe. The official was not authorized to disclose the matter publicly and insisted on anonymity.

The FBI would not say whether it had contacted the White House about the veracity of the Times report.

CNN first reported that Priebus had asked the FBI to weigh in on the matter.

Trump has been shadowed by questions about potential ties to Russia since winning the election. U.S. intelligence agencies have also concluded that Russia meddled in the campaign to help Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Last week, Trump fired national security adviser Michael Flynn because he misled Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Flynn, who was interviewed by the FBI about his contacts, is said to have talked with the ambassador multiple times during the transition, including about U.S. sanctions policy.

Still, Trump and his advisers have denied contacts with Russian officials during the election. Last week, Trump said "nobody that I know of" spoke with Russian intelligence agents during the campaign.

Priebus alluded to his contacts with the FBI over the weekend, telling Fox News that "the top levels of the intelligence community" have assured him that the allegations of campaign contacts with Russia were "not only grossly overstated, but also wrong."

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said Priebus' comments opened the door for FBI Director James Comey to discuss the bureau's investigation publicly.

"If the White House chief of staff can make public claims about the supposed conclusions of an FBI investigation, then Director Comey can come clean with the American people," Wyden said.

Justin Shur, a former Justice Department public corruption prosecutor, said it was imperative that Justice Department investigations not be swayed by political considerations.

"As a general matter, investigations and prosecutions should be about gathering the facts and the evidence and applying the law," Shur said.

During the campaign, Trump and other Republicans vigorously criticized a meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton, husband of Trump's general election opponent. The meeting came as the FBI — which is overseen by the Justice Department — was investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private email address and personal internet server.

Trump blasts FBI 'leakers' after reports on Priebus conversation

President Trump, after a brief hiatus, returned to throwing Twitter bombs Friday morning to accuse his own FBI of failing to crack down on leaks – on the heels of reports about a conversation his chief of staff had with the bureau about Russia-related allegations.

Reports surfaced overnight that Reince Priebus had asked a top FBI official to dispute media reports that Trump's campaign advisers frequently were in touch with Russian intelligence agents during the election.

The White House pushed back, claiming in response that while Priebus did speak with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, McCabe initiated the contact to inform Priebus that The New York Times report about campaign contacts with Russia was incorrect.

Trump, who has been battling leaks in several federal agencies since his inauguration, on Friday blasted the bureau for apparently letting that conversation go public.

“The FBI is totally unable to stop the national security 'leakers' that have permeated our government for a long time. They can't even......find the leakers within the FBI itself. Classified information is being given to media that could have a devastating effect on U.S. FIND NOW,” he wrote.

Priebus' reported discussion with McCabe sparked outrage among some Democrats, who said that the chief of staff was violating policies intended to limit communications between the law enforcement agency and the White House on pending investigations.

"The White House is simply not permitted to pressure the FBI to make public statements about a pending investigation of the president and his advisers," said Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

But Politico reported that, according to White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, Priebus had merely asked the FBI “to inform journalists of the same point that they were making to us."

Fox News has learned that McCabe indeed had initiated the conversation, asking to speak with Priebus for a few minutes at the end of an intelligence meeting last week. During that conversation, McCabe informed the chief of staff that the Times story was wrong.

Priebus wanted to know what he could do, but apparently was told later by McCabe that the FBI couldn’t be calling balls and strikes on every news story. FBI Director James Comey later told Priebus he could go out and refute the story, which he did.

CNN first reported that Priebus had asked the FBI to weigh in on the matter.

The report marked the latest damaging leaks out of the Trump administration.

Trump, meanwhile, has been shadowed by questions about potential ties to Russia since winning the election. U.S. intelligence agencies earlier concluded that Russia meddled in the campaign to help Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Last week, Trump fired national security adviser Michael Flynn because he misled Vice President Pence and other White House officials about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Flynn, who was interviewed by the FBI about his contacts, is said to have talked with the ambassador multiple times during the transition, including a discussion about U.S. sanctions policy.

Still, Trump and his advisers have denied having had contacts with Russian officials during the election. Last week, Trump said "nobody that I know of" spoke with Russian intelligence agents during the campaign.

[Joel]

[Joel]

[larsenb]

Look Silver, I can see where you're coming from. And you're welcome to it. But there is a LOT of evidence to the contrary, in my currently held view, not the least of which is the incredible opposition mounted against him. But that's just my take . . . for what its worth.

I simply cannot square what you're saying with what my own eyes and a study of history tell me. With a large majority of Mormons and virtually all Americans unaware of the power of secret combinations, I think the Gadiantons have plenty of wiggle room left. Of course, many people are not happy with the way things are going but they know not where to focus their frustrations other than the gubmint in a 5 minute discussion at the water cooler. Thus, the secret combinations can set up a man like Trump who says all the right things to get elected, but ol' Crooked Hillary is still walking around free, ain't she? There is no justice while the wicked reign.

Ah, Silver. You still miss the point. Let it go.

Those are easy words to toss out and I can easily direct them to you as well.

But you're obsessed with Trump and anything negative you can find about him. Just look at all of your threads and posts that plow this negative ground. I think you would be better off to let it go. But on the other hand, maybe you need this outlet.

I'm not obsessed with the man. I like a lot of what he's doing and hope he continues. But If he doesn't, he doesn't. Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the show for the most part. You aren't, unless you feel glee in him failing, being blocked, or taking the wrong turn at this or that. That's the difference.

[Silver]

I simply cannot square what you're saying with what my own eyes and a study of history tell me. With a large majority of Mormons and virtually all Americans unaware of the power of secret combinations, I think the Gadiantons have plenty of wiggle room left. Of course, many people are not happy with the way things are going but they know not where to focus their frustrations other than the gubmint in a 5 minute discussion at the water cooler. Thus, the secret combinations can set up a man like Trump who says all the right things to get elected, but ol' Crooked Hillary is still walking around free, ain't she? There is no justice while the wicked reign.

Ah, Silver. You still miss the point. Let it go.

Those are easy words to toss out and I can easily direct them to you as well.

But you're obsessed with Trump and anything negative you can find about him. Just look at all of your threads and posts that plow this negative ground. I think you would be better off to let it go. But on the other hand, maybe you need this outlet.

I'm not obsessed with the man. I like a lot of what he's doing and hope he continues. But If he doesn't, he doesn't. Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the show for the most part. You aren't, unless you feel glee in him failing, being blocked, or taking the wrong turn at this or that. That's the difference.

Do you psychoanalysts make a lot of money reading people's minds on the Internet?

[Silver]

So how would you categorize Trump. One guy on zerohedge attempted to put him in a box.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... nald-trump" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For many people, President Donald Trump presents an enigma.

Our brains seek to put labels on other humans. The labels we have readily available to us can come from nature (black, male, old, fertile, weak, etc.) and from nurture (liberal, Republican, foreign, racist, wealthy, ignorant, lazy, dangerous, etc.). This labeling, categorizing, or naming, is part of the normal mental process of stereotyping, and is a valuable survival skill and evolutionary advantage, despite what you may have been taught.

For some cognitive psychologists, stereotyping describes a value-neutral psychological mechanism that creates categories and enables people to manage the swirl of data presented to them from their environment. This categorizing function was recognized in 1922 by Walter Lippmann, who first coined the term "stereotyping." For him, this was a necessary, useful, and efficient process, since "the attempt to see all things freshly and in detail, rather than as types and generalities, is exhausting, and among busy affairs practically out of the question."

https://www.asu.edu/courses/lia294a/tot ... --Categori.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

When we do not have enough information to stereotype others, it can make us quite uncomfortable. Is this person a threat to me? A potential mate or friend? Trustworthy? So, our senses gather information to help our brains analyze the data to fill in the blank label. We also work very hard at trying to fill in these blanks for other people, and even harder at changing them, especially the media, but that is a future topic.

Yesterday, I read an article on ZeroHedge describing how one of the world's most successful investors allegedly used a financial ratio to analyze the data and then label Trump.

On one hand, there was RenTec's chain-smoking billionaire founder (in 2015 alone he made $1.7 billion) Jim Simons, who had donated some $10 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign, second only to Saban Capital. In a June 2016 interview with CNBC, Jim Simons said that "if you compare the presidential candidates using the Sharpe ratio, presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump is 'not a good investment.'"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... ide-worlds.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

This caused me to remember that I, too, had labeled Trump just a few days earlier.

hedgeless_horseman Feb 16, 2017 2:33 PM

"I do know one thing. Donald Trump is not a libertarian."

I asked myself, is that really true? How did I come to that conclusion? What is a libertarian? This article is merely one attempt to answer those questions.

I like to tell people that libertarian is the political label for someone that simply wants two things: 1) maximum freedom, and 2) minimum government, and who prioritizes those two over the other political values he or she may hold. Years ago, I posted a much longer answer here on ZeroHedge in the form of the Libertarian Party Platform. Unfortunately, the comments appear to have been lost in one of the many DNS/hacking battles fought by Sacrilege in defense of this good and valuable web site. At the time of that post, I had learned of the The World's Smallest Political Quiz, and had posted the link in the comments, along with my score, and an invitation for readers to take the test.

Today, I invite you, dear reader, to join me in taking the test on behalf of President Trump, in the hope of determining if he is, or is not, a libertarian. I provide links, below, to a small number of pertinent items that I feel support my answers.

The World's Smallest Political Quiz

Government should not censor speech, press, media, or internet.

Based on Trump's comments about Snowden and Manning, I am going with DISAGREE.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/sta ... 92?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-2 ... l-traitor-.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... nyt-partic.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Military service should be voluntary. There should be no draft.

Based on Trump's five draft deferments, one medical, I am chosing MAYBE.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/us/p ... aft-record.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

There should be no laws regarding sex for consenting adults.

Considering Trump's actual statements and actions, I am picking AGREE for our POTUS.

http://gaysfortrump.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Repeal laws prohibiting adult possession and use of drugs.

This seems to be a clear DISAGREE.

http://hightimes.com/news/president-tru ... war-on-dru.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.


There should be no National ID card.

This also seems to be a clear DISAGREE.

https://www.rt.com/usa/373890-mlks-son- ... iscuss-id/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



End "corporate welfare." No government handouts to business.

This also seems to be a clear DISAGREE.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-0 ... mp-carrier.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.



End government barriers to international free trade.

This also seems to be a clear DISAGREE.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-2 ... sue-execut.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.



Let people control their own retirement; privatize Social Security.

I am selecting DISAGREE for Trump, based on his campaign statements.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... leave-soci.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.



Replace government welfare with private charity.

It appears Trump would AGREE.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/835156280029372416" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Cut taxes and government spending by 50% or more.

Any actual tax cuts will likley not come close to 50%, and Trump says he is going to spend bigly, so I clicked DISAGREE for the President.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... -timeline-.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... p-pledges-.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.



Here is the result of my test. Donald Trump is a Big Government Statist.

Statists want government to have a great deal of power over the economy and individual behavior. They frequently doubt whether economic liberty and individual freedom are practical options in today's world. Statists tend to distrust the free market, support high taxes and centralized planning of the economy, oppose diverse lifestyles, and question the importance of civil liberties.


Apparently, I had already done a similar analysis in my mind, because according to this test, Donald Trump is the polar opposite of a libertarian. This label fits with the personal interactions I have had with Donald Trump, years ago, at his then private home in Florida and on vacation in Aspen.

It should be interesting to learn, below, how your answers on behalf of Trump are different from mine, and why.

I am looking forward to seeing many of you at the First ZeroHedge Symposium and Live Fight Club in Marfa this June...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-1 ... ters-scarc.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-1 ... erohedge-s.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Peace and prosperity,

h_h

[Joel]

[larsenb]

So how would you categorize Trump. One guy on zerohedge attempted to put him in a box.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... nald-trump" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For many people, President Donald Trump presents an enigma.

Our brains seek to put labels on other humans. The labels we have readily available to us can come from nature (black, male, old, fertile, weak, etc.) and from nurture (liberal, Republican, foreign, racist, wealthy, ignorant, lazy, dangerous, etc.). This labeling, categorizing, or naming, is part of the normal mental process of stereotyping, and is a valuable survival skill and evolutionary advantage, despite what you may have been taught.

For some cognitive psychologists, stereotyping describes a value-neutral psychological mechanism that creates categories and enables people to manage the swirl of data presented to them from their environment. This categorizing function was recognized in 1922 by Walter Lippmann, who first coined the term "stereotyping." For him, this was a necessary, useful, and efficient process, since "the attempt to see all things freshly and in detail, rather than as types and generalities, is exhausting, and among busy affairs practically out of the question."

https://www.asu.edu/courses/lia294a/tot ... --Categori.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

When we do not have enough information to stereotype others, it can make us quite uncomfortable. Is this person a threat to me? A potential mate or friend? Trustworthy? So, our senses gather information to help our brains analyze the data to fill in the blank label. We also work very hard at trying to fill in these blanks for other people, and even harder at changing them, especially the media, but that is a future topic.

Yesterday, I read an article on ZeroHedge describing how one of the world's most successful investors allegedly used a financial ratio to analyze the data and then label Trump.

On one hand, there was RenTec's chain-smoking billionaire founder (in 2015 alone he made $1.7 billion) Jim Simons, who had donated some $10 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign, second only to Saban Capital. In a June 2016 interview with CNBC, Jim Simons said that "if you compare the presidential candidates using the Sharpe ratio, presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump is 'not a good investment.'" . . . . .

Apparently, I had already done a similar analysis in my mind, because according to this test, Donald Trump is the polar opposite of a libertarian. This label fits with the personal interactions I have had with Donald Trump, years ago, at his then private home in Florida and on vacation in Aspen.

It should be interesting to learn, below, how your answers on behalf of Trump are different from mine, and why.

I am looking forward to seeing many of you at the First ZeroHedge Symposium and Live Fight Club in Marfa this June...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-1 ... ters-scarc.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-1 ... erohedge-s.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Peace and prosperity, h_h

Some of your links were broken.

My view is that if you can categorize him as a statist, he is far less of a statist than Hillary would have been. Hillary was hell bent on tyranny, in my view. Trump isn't.

And I think some of the categories presented are somewhat off the mark, with this article ignoring some of the most important issues Trump has taken a stance on. For instance, illegal immigration is simply a national issue. It demands a national solution. The state needs to get involved at the Federal level.

Trump has also taken the stance that our recent foreign wars were wrong and should not have been entered into. This is would be considered a libertarian issue, and a non-statist one at that.

He also took a strong stance against government overreach in the BLM/Western rancher conflict. This is a non-statist approach.

And there are other stances he has taken that don't fit into the statist category. Getting rid of the Johnson Ammendment is one of these, and could be regarded as strongly anti-statist. He has also vowed to greatly reduce business regulations and even environmental regulations. Again, a strong non-statist position.

So, in my view, who ever wrote your article is ignoring important categories and issues and doesn't do well in looking at the nuances of each of them . . . . he's too either or. But of course, this is just my opinion.

[freedomforall]

So how would you categorize Trump. One guy on zerohedge attempted to put him in a box.

dr;tl

[freedomforall]

He also took a strong stance against government overreach in the BLM/Western rancher conflict. This is a non-statist approach.

Please provide the link of the source of this info. Elizabeth has been posting great info on the Bundy trials but I don't know where to find info on the stance of Trump. He could help break or make the outcome of Government overreach and whether or not Americans can feel secure on their own property.
Article 1, Section 8, Claus 17

Thank you.

[Sirocco]

[larsenb]

He also took a strong stance against government overreach in the BLM/Western rancher conflict. This is a non-statist approach.

Please provide the link of the source of this info. Elizabeth has been posting great info on the Bundy trials but I don't know where to find info on the stance of Trump. He could help break or make the outcome of Government overreach and whether or not Americans can feel secure on their own property.
Article 1, Section 8, Claus 17

Thank you.

I''ve posted this before, but will do it again here. He took the time to write an article for the Reno Gazette discussing the BLM/Rancher issue. I'm not aware that any other candidate even addressed this issue. Here is the link: http://www.rgj.com/story/opinion/voices ... /78422530/" . Just this little item really increased my sense that Trump was on the up-and-up.

Trump: Nevada, US need a president who obeys rule of law
Donald J. Trump Published 12:29 p.m. PT Jan. 7, 2016 | Updated 12:31 p.m. PT Jan. 28, 2016

The United States of America is a land of laws, and Americans value the rule of law above all. Why, then, has our Congress allowed the president and the executive branch to take on near-dictatorial power? How is it that we have a president who will not enforce some laws and who encourages faceless, nameless bureaucrats to manage public lands as if the millions of acres were owned by agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of Energy? In Nevada, the lack of enforcement of immigration laws and the draconian rule of the BLM are damaging the economy, lowering the standard of living and inhibiting natural economic growth. The only way to change these circumstances is to bring to Washington a president who will rein in the federal government and get Congress to do its job. It’s not that we don’t have talented people in D.C. It’s that we have no leadership there.

The BLM controls over 85 percent of the land in Nevada. In the rural areas, those who for decades have had access to public lands for ranching, mining, logging and energy development are forced to deal with arbitrary and capricious rules that are influenced by special interests that profit from the D.C. rule-making and who fill the campaign coffers of Washington politicians. Far removed from the beautiful wide open spaces of Nevada, bureaucrats bend to the influence that is closest to them. Honest, hardworking citizens who seek freedom and economic independence must beg for deference from a federal government that is more intent on power and control than it is in serving the citizens of the nation. In and around Clark County, the situation is even worse.

Reno neighborhood stung by sage grouse rules

Huckabee: Republican debates providing little substance: http://www.rgj.com/story/news/politics/ ... /77320004/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Because the BLM is so reluctant to release land to local disposition in Nevada, the cost of land has skyrocketed and the cost of living has become an impediment to growth. Where are the city and county to get the land for schools, roads, parks and other public use areas if they have to beg Washington for the land and then pay a premium price for it? How are people who see a future in Nevada to find housing and employment if the federal government is inhibiting economic development? How are businesses to find the employees to fill the jobs that could be created if there were better leadership in Washington? Unfortunately, many of the jobs are filled by those who came to this country illegally.

Illegal immigration costs the people of Nevada over $1.2 billion a year. That is nearly $6,000 for every man, woman and child in the state. Those are tax dollars that could go to build those schools, roads, sewers, water treatment plants and all the other services needed for a growing economy. Illegal immigrants absorb tax dollars from public schools, public health and public safety. Illegal immigration suppresses wages and undermines the ability of workers to organize and seek better working conditions. Illegal immigration is an affront to the very rule of law valued by all Americans and most assuredly by all Nevadans.
ADVERTISING

What is needed in Washington is a president who will rein in the executive branch and work with Congress to make sure the legislative branch does its job. What is needed in Washington is a president who has the will, strength and courage to lead. What is needed in Washington is a president who is not beholden to special interests and who is only interested in putting America and Americans first.

When I am elected president, I will bring the executive branch back inside the Constitution and will work with Congress to put America first. I will lead the effort to gain meaningful tax reform, trade reform and education reform. I will lead the effort to protect your right to worship as you see fit and your right to protect your family and property with the right to keep and bear arms. Together, we will make America great again.

Donald J. Trump, a Republican, is a businessman and a candidate for president of the United States

[freedomforall]

I''ve posted this before, but will do it again here. He took the time to write an article for the Reno Gazette discussing the BLM/Rancher issue. I'm not aware that any other candidate even addressed this issue. Here is the link: http://www.rgj.com/story/opinion/voices ... /78422530/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . Just this little item really increased my sense that Trump was on the up-and-up.

All I can say is....WOW
I am concerned about the Hammond's here in Oregon, imprisoned under double jeopardy by corrupt judges. If crooked judges are left in place, and decisions can go back to states, however this is phrased, I'm afraid nothing will help the cause in getting the Hammond's out and allowing them to ranch in peace.
There are Youtube videos showing us that many politicians here are guilty of having hedge funds geared to take lands away from people so Uranium can be taken and somehow made profit from.

Sorry for any repeated info, I just wanted to get the info out so people can glean from it enough info to know what is actually going on here and abroad.

[Joel]

[Silver]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... grind-halt

Former Reagan Administration White House Budget Director David Stockman says financial pain is a mathematical certainty. Stockman explains, “I think we are likely to have more of a fiscal bloodbath rather than fiscal stimulus. Unfortunately for Donald Trump, not only did the public vote the establishment out, they left on his doorstep the inheritance of 30 years of debt build-up and a fiscal policy that’s been really reckless in the extreme. People would like to think he’s the second coming of Ronald Reagan and we are going to have morning in America. Unfortunately, I don’t think it looks that promising because Trump is inheriting a mess that pales into insignificance what we had to deal with in January of 1981 when I joined the Reagan White House as Budget Director.” (close quote, emphasis mine)

This is just another way of saying that Trump will be held responsible for the financial crash, as Brandon Smith has been warning for months. Get ready for conservatives and "hoarders" to get a bad name.

Then, Stockman drops this bomb and says:

“I think what people are missing is this date, March 15th 2017. That’s the day that this debt ceiling holiday that Obama and Boehner put together right before the last election in October of 2015. That holiday expires. The debt ceiling will freeze in at $20 trillion. It will then be law. It will be a hard stop. The Treasury will have roughly $200 billion in cash. We are burning cash at a $75 billion a month rate. By summer, they will be out of cash. Then we will be in the mother of all debt ceiling crises. Everything will grind to a halt. I think we will have a government shutdown. There will not be Obama Care repeal and replace. There will be no tax cut. There will be no infrastructure stimulus. There will be just one giant fiscal bloodbath over a debt ceiling that has to be increased and no one wants to vote for.”

[freedomforall]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-2 ... grind-halt

Former Reagan Administration White House Budget Director David Stockman says financial pain is a mathematical certainty. Stockman explains, “I think we are likely to have more of a fiscal bloodbath rather than fiscal stimulus. Unfortunately for Donald Trump, not only did the public vote the establishment out, they left on his doorstep the inheritance of 30 years of debt build-up and a fiscal policy that’s been really reckless in the extreme. People would like to think he’s the second coming of Ronald Reagan and we are going to have morning in America. Unfortunately, I don’t think it looks that promising because Trump is inheriting a mess that pales into insignificance what we had to deal with in January of 1981 when I joined the Reagan White House as Budget Director.” (close quote, emphasis mine)

This is just another way of saying that Trump will be held responsible for the financial crash, as Brandon Smith has been warning for months. Get ready for conservatives and "hoarders" to get a bad name.

Then, Stockman drops this bomb and says:

“I think what people are missing is this date, March 15th 2017. That’s the day that this debt ceiling holiday that Obama and Boehner put together right before the last election in October of 2015. That holiday expires. The debt ceiling will freeze in at $20 trillion. It will then be law. It will be a hard stop. The Treasury will have roughly $200 billion in cash. We are burning cash at a $75 billion a month rate. By summer, they will be out of cash. Then we will be in the mother of all debt ceiling crises. Everything will grind to a halt. I think we will have a government shutdown. There will not be Obama Care repeal and replace. There will be no tax cut. There will be no infrastructure stimulus. There will be just one giant fiscal bloodbath over a debt ceiling that has to be increased and no one wants to vote for.”

Tell us, who really cares? President Benson said that, in essence, no matter who takes office, they will be of little to no use. Even if Hillary, or Castle, or the Greatest Patriot of all Time were to take office, they won't be able to fix the problems that even Trump had dumped on him. Info has come out that indicates Obama to have been a traitor to the country. The spending of Obama's family was over the top like it was their entitlement at the expense of the American people. Both Bush's wanted the NWO to overtake America, as did some previous Presidents. Did Americans put a stop to it? No! And the problems have exponentially increased until we're smothered with them...and many people are still doing nothing except sitting back and complaining all the while getting their freebies from the Government...just like socialism intends and has planned until it wraps us into a nice little ball and eats us up. And there goes freedom and liberty as set up by God through men he raised up to bring this about. The proof is in the pudding, and this indictment will not go away without a fight from true and faithful Americans who are angry and putout with all the crap going on...another claim by ETB.

Rumors are like tumors, they are bread and then spread. FFA

[larsenb]

I''ve posted this before, but will do it again here. He took the time to write an article for the Reno Gazette discussing the BLM/Rancher issue. I'm not aware that any other candidate even addressed this issue. Here is the link: http://www.rgj.com/story/opinion/voices ... /78422530/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . Just this little item really increased my sense that Trump was on the up-and-up.

All I can say is....WOW
I am concerned about the Hammond's here in Oregon, imprisoned under double jeopardy by corrupt judges. If crooked judges are left in place, and decisions can go back to states, however this is phrased, I'm afraid nothing will help the cause in getting the Hammond's out and allowing them to ranch in peace.
There are Youtube videos showing us that many politicians here are guilty of having hedge funds geared to take lands away from people so Uranium can be taken and somehow made profit from. . . . . . .

Sorry for any repeated info, I just wanted to get the info out so people can glean from it enough info to know what is actually going on here and abroad.

Amen. It's beyond disgusting what they've done to the Hammonds. And I think the evidence shows very clearly that the death of Lavoy Finicum was premeditated, cold-blooded murder.

And wasn't it Hillary that arranged the Uranium deal?

[freedomforall]

I''ve posted this before, but will do it again here. He took the time to write an article for the Reno Gazette discussing the BLM/Rancher issue. I'm not aware that any other candidate even addressed this issue. Here is the link: http://www.rgj.com/story/opinion/voices ... /78422530/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . Just this little item really increased my sense that Trump was on the up-and-up.

All I can say is....WOW
I am concerned about the Hammond's here in Oregon, imprisoned under double jeopardy by corrupt judges. If crooked judges are left in place, and decisions can go back to states, however this is phrased, I'm afraid nothing will help the cause in getting the Hammond's out and allowing them to ranch in peace.
There are Youtube videos showing us that many politicians here are guilty of having hedge funds geared to take lands away from people so Uranium can be taken and somehow made profit from. . . . . . .

Sorry for any repeated info, I just wanted to get the info out so people can glean from it enough info to know what is actually going on here and abroad.

Amen. It's beyond disgusting what they've done to the Hammonds. And I think the evidence shows very clearly that the death of Lavoy Finicum was premeditated, cold-blooded murder.

And wasn't it Hillary that arranged the Uranium deal?

Yes. And crooked officials here in Oregon using hedge funds to take property away from ranchers where Uranium is suspected of being found.

Harry Reid was in on the Bundy horror show. He wanted to allow the Chinese to build a nuclear power plant right where the Bundy ranch is.
And yet he was such a good Moron and upholder to the Constitution that he labeled all the supporters of the Bundy's as "domestic terrorists" Is he not a traitor to the country and to his church in his words and actions?

[Joel]

[Elizabeth]

"Donald Trump, acting through the attorney general and the secretary of education, has rescinded a horribly misguided Obama-era directive on transgender bathrooms.
Obama’s directive financially punished schools which did not allow boys to go into the girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and shower rooms any time they wanted. It would be hard to imagine a presidential directive that could be more obscene, grotesque, and dangerous.
It was published under the guise that it would provide “protections” for transgendered individuals, by allowing them to use whatever bathroom they wished regardless of whose privacy they might be invading. And now that President Trump has rescinded this misbegotten decree, he is being accused of stripping “protections” from transgendered students. Former Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said darkly that President Trump’s act represented a “thoughtless, cruel and sad rollback of transgender rights.”
But it’s just the reverse. The president is not removing protections, he is restoring them. He is returning to the states the right to reinstate safeguards for the sexual integrity, modesty, and privacy of the girls and young women under their charge. They will no longer have to fear who’s in the next stall or who will sidle up to them in the shower.
Transgenderism, or as it used to be known, transvestism, is a mental disorder. Until just recently, it was universally regarded by psychiatrists and psychologists as a form of mental illness which called for treatment. It was not something to be celebrated and protected and promoted at all costs.
Transvestites, or transgenders if you prefer, are seriously confused about their God-given sexual identity. God has created just two genders, or sexes, male and female. There are two and only two, not three, or five (LGBTQ), or 58 (as Facebook wants us to believe).The Scriptures are quite unambiguous about this. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27).
No rational society which cares about the mental health of its citizens, especially its youngest ones, should ever regard a mental disorder as something which ought to be celebrated or treated as normal or desirable. Rather, this condition, now euphemistically described as “gender dysphoria,” should arouse in us a compassion which moves us to help those afflicted with it to adjust to reality.
If you have a family member who thinks that aliens are talking to him through his radio, it does not help him to accept his version of reality. It does not help him to regard this imagined form of communication as just as normal and healthy as a chat with family members over dinner. It does not help him to punish those who try to help him face the reality that aliens are not in fact talking to him at all.
But this is what we have done with transvestism. We are now being told we must accept this condition as normal and even celebrate it as part of the rich diversity of the human sexual spectrum. No, no, and no.
Why must we refuse to indulge this gross distortion of human sexuality? We must if we care about people, because research indicates that 41% of transgenders try to kill themselves and 30 percent succeed. No compassionate, caring society would ever choose to normalize a lifestyle that leads predictably to suicidal ideation. That’s not compassion, that’s cruelty.
A rational culture will root its public policy in truth and scientific fact, not in science fiction. Every human being (with an infinitesimally small number of exceptions) is either a male or female according to the DNA found in every single cell of their bodies. It’s scientific fantasy of the “Mars Attacks” variety to believe otherwise.
Now to be sure we do not want any student to be bullied. We do not want Christian students to be pushed around, harassed, and physically intimidated on campus and we do not want that for transgendered students either. Each student is a human being made in the image of God and is entitled to courteous treatment.
But what all this all means is that our effort as a truly compassionate society must be to help afflicted individuals escape the prison house of their own distorted view of themselves and help them adjust their sexual identity to biological reality rather than the other way around.
It’s one thing to have mentally disordered people in a society. But it’s a special form of crazy to force everybody under threat of punishment to accept such a distorted view of sexuality as normal.
A return to sexual sanity in America is long overdue, and President Trump, by rescinding the transgender bathroom directive, has taken the first step in that journey. Good for him."
http://www.gopusa.com/?p=21242?omhide=true

[larsenb]

"Donald Trump, acting through the attorney general and the secretary of education, has rescinded a horribly misguided Obama-era directive on transgender bathrooms. . . . . . .

It’s one thing to have mentally disordered people in a society. But it’s a special form of crazy to force everybody under threat of punishment to accept such a distorted view of sexuality as normal.
A return to sexual sanity in America is lhttp://www.gopusa.com/?p=21242?omhide=true

Good post. Thanks.

[Joel]

[freedomforall]

"Donald Trump, acting through the attorney general and the secretary of education, has rescinded a horribly misguided Obama-era directive on transgender bathrooms. . . . . . .

It’s one thing to have mentally disordered people in a society. But it’s a special form of crazy to force everybody under threat of punishment to accept such a distorted view of sexuality as normal.
A return to sexual sanity in America is lhttp://www.gopusa.com/?p=21242?omhide=true

Good post. Thanks.

After all, isn't Obama gay? Would not this explain his very loose moral code?

[Elizabeth]

It does indeed.