Ether's Avenue

[DesertWonderer2]

Rand Paul gets it:

"I ran for office because I was very critical of President Obama's trillion-dollar deficits. Now we have Republicans hand in hand with Democrats offering us trillion-dollar deficits. I can't in all honesty look the other way."

What's the real difference between a Democrat and a Republican?

It’s not as pronounced as it once was but look at the party platform and see if you don’t see a difference.

Regardless, you can vote for an independent / constitutionalist, etc...who will NEVER win or vote for a R who may get something done albeit an incremental improvement—pretty easy choice really.

[iWriteStuff]

Rand Paul gets it:

"I ran for office because I was very critical of President Obama's trillion-dollar deficits. Now we have Republicans hand in hand with Democrats offering us trillion-dollar deficits. I can't in all honesty look the other way."

What's the real difference between a Democrat and a Republican?

It’s not as pronounced as it once was but look at the party platform and see if you don’t see a difference.

Regardless, you can vote for an independent / constitutionalist, etc...who will NEVER win or vote for a R who may get something done albeit an incremental improvement—pretty easy choice really.

Don't take this the wrong way, but my observation has been that if you voted for either R or D over the last thirty years, you ended up with exactly the same things: socialized health care, more wars, more debt, more surveillance by the state, more corporate cronyism, etc. The only difference is which one you trusted to have your back before the knife plunged between your shoulder blades.

venn.jpg (87.78 KiB) Viewed 2158 times

Even Rand is calling it like it is - the difference is practically moot.

[EmmaLee]

Rand Paul gets it:

"I ran for office because I was very critical of President Obama's trillion-dollar deficits. Now we have Republicans hand in hand with Democrats offering us trillion-dollar deficits. I can't in all honesty look the other way."

What's the real difference between a Democrat and a Republican?

The Republicans of today are the Democrats of yesterday. And the Democrats of today are socialists. Socialists of today are communists. And Satan is at the root of it all.

[iWriteStuff]

R vs D = Farce

Rising Debt + Rising Rates

Have they all lost their collective minds? Look I get that some people are leaning Democrat versus Republican and vice versa and that’s fine, but what exactly are voters getting? If, on the one hand, you think Democrats tax and spend too much you get Republicans on the other hand who cut taxes with disproportional benefit to the top 1% and then spend even more. Fiscal conservatives? Please.

In early February the US government was already scheduled to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year.

A week later and that figure is already out the door as this week both parties agreed to expand spending caps seemingly preparing for World War III. An incremental hundreds of billions of dollars to the military budget alone in just 2 years. What for? To what end? It’s a bonanza for defense contractors surely and the president apparently wants a parade, but have we entered the math no longer applies zone?

Ok, if nobody will say it I will: This is insane. Just the increase alone is larger than Russia’s entire annual military budget.

“The budget deal would raise military spending by $80B through the rest of fiscal year and by $85B in fiscal year 2019”https://t.co/MAFzPYVvwv pic.twitter.com/2BzLsXUOpa

— Sven Henrich (@NorthmanTrader) February 7, 2018

The end result? Much, much more borrowing and deficits into the trillion+ range forever and ever amen:

2019? Looks lot be $1.4 Trillion.

I didn’t see these figures mentioned in any campaign brochures have you? And this is all pre-recession folks. We get a recession and you are looking at 2-3 trillion dollar deficits.

Think I’m going hyperbole on you?

These numbers don’t represent a slight increase, they represent a deficit explosion and the CBO forecast from 2016 for the 10 years into 2026 are already hopelessly outdated. At the current rate we’ll be hitting $24 trillion by the next presidential election.

In case nobody has noticed: Rates are going higher and any new borrowing will be at higher rates and old debt will have to be refinanced at higher rates. Reduce tax revenues in the process and you end up with a fiscal disaster.

Indeed rising interest payments will represent the fastest growth line item in the US budget:

“Interest On The Debt Will Be The Fastest Growing Part Of The Federal Budget…By Far. Forget Medicare, Social Security and the Pentagon: $1 trillion-plus deficits means massive increases in the national debt and that debt will have to be borrowed at higher interest rates (see #1). Add the need for the Treasury to roll-over existing debt at higher and higher rates and you get an immediate increase in the amount the U.S. will need to spend on interest each year.”

Some people may argue that tax cuts will bring in so much economic growth it will all pay for itself. There is precisely zero evidence for such an assertion.

If you know your tax cut history you know where in the chart above major tax cuts were passed. The debt continued to rise and will continue to rise as spending continues to be expanded.

But here’s the kicker: Never in modern times have we seen tax cuts being implemented and spending increased with debt to GDP north of 100%.

Many corporations are drowning in debt, as are consumers, and so are their interest payments:

This is so gonna hurt:
The prime rate is only at 4.5% versus the 2004 low of 4.0% yet personal interest payments are already higher compared to the 2007 peak when the prime rate was 8.25%. pic.twitter.com/NrMB6yDxqz

— Sven Henrich (@NorthmanTrader) February 10, 2018

People invariably argue and say: Yea well, but as a percent of disposable income it’s not so bad. Yes, it’s called artificial low rates, they can mask a lot, but what is currently the situation is not the point, it’s sustainability of debt loads in the very immediate future.

As you saw in the above data we are already seeing a vast increase in interest payments despite rates having barely moved off of the historic zero bound line.

We’ve barely scrapped off the bottom yet.

A sign to cut down on debt?

Nah, just keep charging it:

To fully grasp the depth of the insanity just follow the math:

“As for total debt, the CBO last predicted borrowings of $25.5 trillion by 2027. According to Riedl, the tax cuts, new discretionary outlays and additional interest on the extra spending could add $5 trillion to that number, bringing the total of $30 trillion. That’s 107% of the national income estimate projected by the CBO. The scariest unknown is what happens to interest expense. At $25.5 trillion, the CBO forecasts outlays for interest of $818 billion in 2027. Going to $30 trillion will raise the load to over $1 trillion. One dollar in seven in spending would be going to interest, versus one in 15 today.

And that scenario assumes that the yield on the 10-year Treasury increases to just 3.5% over the next decade, far below its historic average. “If rates go to their average in the 1990s,” warns Riedl, “the deficit will go not to $2 trillion, but to between $2.5 and $3 trillion.”

I must repeat: Not one of these projections assume a recession.

So I must ask again: Have they all lost their collective minds? I see no party even pretending to care anymore. Debt ceilings? Gimmicks. Fiscal conservatives? A slogan. Caring about the obligations of future obligations? Nobody cares.

https://northmantrader.com/2018/02/11/r ... ing-rates/

[Fiannan]

Rand Paul gets it:

"I ran for office because I was very critical of President Obama's trillion-dollar deficits. Now we have Republicans hand in hand with Democrats offering us trillion-dollar deficits. I can't in all honesty look the other way."

What's the real difference between a Democrat and a Republican?

The Republicans of today are the Democrats of yesterday. And the Democrats of today are socialists. Socialists of today are communists. And Satan is at the root of it all.

And western European Christians are the Atheists of yesterday while American Christians, for the most part, are the secular humanists of yesterday.

[iWriteStuff]

Trump loves Globalists! So says the man himself:

"This is Gary Cohn’s last cabinet meeting. He's been terrific - he may be a globalist, but I still like him. He's seriously a globalist there's no doubt about that but in other ways he's a nationalist because he loves our country. He's going to go out and make another couple of hundred million dollars and...I have a feeling you'll be back."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03- ... list-i-him

So globalists are good when they are working for nationalist interests?

Ok so one quit - how about we fire the rest of the globalists in the administration? Please?

[iWriteStuff]

Meet the new Director of the CIA, Gina Haspel! Gina hails from a tradition of rendition, torture, and pure psychopathic evil. Don't believe me? Here's a little snippet from her profile:

Haspel joined the CIA in 1985 and has held several top positions in the agency including deputy director of the National Clandestine Service. Haspel ran a "black site" CIA prison located in Thailand in 2002. The site was codenamed "Cat’s Eye" and held suspected al Qaeda members Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri and Abu Zubaydah for a time. The Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture specifies that during their detention at the site they were waterboarded and interrogated using no-longer-authorized methods. Declassified CIA cables specify that Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in a month, was sleep deprived, kept in a "large box", had his head slammed against a wall, and he lost his left eye. Zubaydah was deemed, by the CIA interrogators, to not be in possession of any useful intelligence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_Haspel

But really, folks, she's just honored to be able to serve her country.

When, exactly, would you like your country back?

[iWriteStuff]

Snowden weighs in:

The new CIA director was a key part of the torture program and its illegal cover-up. Her name was on the Top Secret order demanding the destruction of tapes to prevent them being seen by Congress. Incredible. https://t.co/HjVHCPCbpo https://t.co/VamIGa1A8w

— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) March 13, 2018

Interesting: The new CIA Director Haspel, who "tortured some folks," probably can't travel to the EU to meet other spy chiefs without facing arrest due to an @ECCHRBerlin complaint to Germany's federal prosecutor. Details: https://t.co/7q4euQKtm7

— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) March 13, 2018

Seriously? This was the best we could do?

[EmmaLee]

Same as it ever was. As long as the Gads are in control (and they very firmly are), things will never change.

[iWriteStuff]

Good news, folks!

U.S. national debt exceeds $21 trillion for first time

The national debt has exceeded $21 trillion for the first time, according to the U.S. government. It had hit $20 trillion in September. President Donald Trump signed a debt-limit suspension in February, allowing unlimited borrowing until March 1, 2019. Economists are expecting the U.S. to run wider budget deficits due to the tax cut Trump signed into law in December. The government had a monthly deficit of $215 billion in February, up 12% from the same month last year due to lower revenue and higher spending.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-na ... 2018-03-16

That's $1 trillion added in only six months! How did you spend your share of it?

Oh, wait.......

[iWriteStuff]

Dare you to read the whole article by Pat Buchanan:

Pat Buchanan Asks "Is Trump Assembling A War Cabinet?"

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

The last man standing between the U.S. and war with Iran may be a four-star general affectionately known to his Marines as “Mad Dog.”

Gen. James Mattis, the secretary of defense, appears to be the last man in the Situation Room who believes the Iran nuclear deal may be worth preserving and that war with Iran is a dreadful idea.

Yet, other than Mattis, President Donald Trump seems to be creating a war cabinet.

Trump himself has pledged to walk away from the Iran nuclear deal — “the worst deal ever” — and reimpose sanctions in May.

His new national security adviser John Bolton, who wrote an op-ed titled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran,” has called for preemptive strikes and “regime change.”

Secretary of State-designate Mike Pompeo calls Iran “a thuggish police state,” a “despotic theocracy,” and “the vanguard of a pernicious empire that is expanding its power and influence across the Middle East.”

Trump’s favorite Arab ruler, 32-year-old Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman, calls Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei “the Hitler of the Middle East.”

Bibi Netanyahu is monomaniacal on Iran, calling the nuclear deal a threat to Israel’s survival and Iran “the greatest threat to our world.”

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley echoes them all.

Yet Iran appears not to want a war. U.N. inspectors routinely confirm that Iran is strictly abiding by the terms of the nuclear deal.

While U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf often encountered Iranian “fast attack” boats and drones between January 2016 and August 2017, that has stopped. Vessels of both nations have operated virtually without incident.

What would be the result of Trump’s trashing of the nuclear deal?

First would be the isolation of the United States.

China and Russia would not abrogate the deal but would welcome Iran into their camp. England, France and Germany would have to choose between the deal and the U.S. And if Airbus were obligated to spurn Iran’s orders for hundreds of new planes, how would that sit with the Europeans?

How would North Korea react if the U.S. trashed a deal where Iran, after accepting severe restrictions on its nuclear program and allowing intrusive inspections, were cheated of the benefits the Americans promised?

Why would Pyongyang, having seen us attack Iraq, which had no WMD, and Libya, which had given up its WMD to mollify us, ever consider given up its nuclear weapons — especially after seeing the leaders of both nations executed?

And, should the five other signatories to the Iran deal continue with it despite us, and Iran agree to abide by its terms, what do we do then?

Find a casus belli to go to war? Why? How does Iran threaten us?

A war, which would involve U.S. warships against swarms of Iranian torpedo boats could shut down the Persian Gulf to oil traffic and produce a crisis in the global economy. Anti-American Shiite jihadists in Beirut, Baghdad and Bahrain could attack U.S. civilian and military personnel.

As the Army and Marine Corps do not have the troops to invade and occupy Iran, would we have to reinstate the draft?

And if we decided to blockade and bomb Iran, we would have to take out all its anti-ship missiles, submarines, navy, air force, ballistic missiles and air defense system.

And would not a pre-emptive strike on Iran unite its people in hatred of us, just as Japan’s pre-emptive strike on Pearl Harbor united us in a determination to annihilate her empire?

What would the Dow Jones average look like after an attack on Iran?

Trump was nominated because he promised to keep us out of stupid wars like those into which folks like John Bolton and the Bush Republicans plunged us.

After 17 years, we are still mired in Afghanistan, trying to keep the Taliban we overthrew in 2001 from returning to Kabul. Following our 2003 invasion, Iraq, once a bulwark against Iran, became a Shiite ally of Iran.

The rebels we supported in Syria have been routed. And Bashar Assad — thanks to backing from Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and Shiite militias from the Middle East and Central Asia — has secured his throne.

The Kurds who trusted us have been hammered by our NATO ally Turkey in Syria, and by the Iraqi Army we trained in Iraq.

What is Trump, who assured us there would be no more stupid wars, thinking? Truman and LBJ got us into wars they could not end, and both lost their presidencies. Eisenhower and Nixon ended those wars and were rewarded with landslides.

After his smashing victory in Desert Storm, Bush I was denied a second term. After invading Iraq, Bush II lost both houses of Congress in 2006, and his party lost the presidency in 2008 to the antiwar Barack Obama.

Once Trump seemed to understand this history.

[simpleton]

Dare you to read the whole article by Pat Buchanan:

Pat Buchanan Asks "Is Trump Assembling A War Cabinet?"

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

The last man standing between the U.S. and war with Iran may be a four-star general affectionately known to his Marines as “Mad Dog.”

Gen. James Mattis, the secretary of defense, appears to be the last man in the Situation Room who believes the Iran nuclear deal may be worth preserving and that war with Iran is a dreadful idea.

Yet, other than Mattis, President Donald Trump seems to be creating a war cabinet.

Trump himself has pledged to walk away from the Iran nuclear deal — “the worst deal ever” — and reimpose sanctions in May.

His new national security adviser John Bolton, who wrote an op-ed titled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran,” has called for preemptive strikes and “regime change.”

Secretary of State-designate Mike Pompeo calls Iran “a thuggish police state,” a “despotic theocracy,” and “the vanguard of a pernicious empire that is expanding its power and influence across the Middle East.”

Trump’s favorite Arab ruler, 32-year-old Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman, calls Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei “the Hitler of the Middle East.”

Bibi Netanyahu is monomaniacal on Iran, calling the nuclear deal a threat to Israel’s survival and Iran “the greatest threat to our world.”

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley echoes them all.

Yet Iran appears not to want a war. U.N. inspectors routinely confirm that Iran is strictly abiding by the terms of the nuclear deal.

While U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf often encountered Iranian “fast attack” boats and drones between January 2016 and August 2017, that has stopped. Vessels of both nations have operated virtually without incident.

What would be the result of Trump’s trashing of the nuclear deal?

First would be the isolation of the United States.

China and Russia would not abrogate the deal but would welcome Iran into their camp. England, France and Germany would have to choose between the deal and the U.S. And if Airbus were obligated to spurn Iran’s orders for hundreds of new planes, how would that sit with the Europeans?

How would North Korea react if the U.S. trashed a deal where Iran, after accepting severe restrictions on its nuclear program and allowing intrusive inspections, were cheated of the benefits the Americans promised?

Why would Pyongyang, having seen us attack Iraq, which had no WMD, and Libya, which had given up its WMD to mollify us, ever consider given up its nuclear weapons — especially after seeing the leaders of both nations executed?

And, should the five other signatories to the Iran deal continue with it despite us, and Iran agree to abide by its terms, what do we do then?

Find a casus belli to go to war? Why? How does Iran threaten us?

A war, which would involve U.S. warships against swarms of Iranian torpedo boats could shut down the Persian Gulf to oil traffic and produce a crisis in the global economy. Anti-American Shiite jihadists in Beirut, Baghdad and Bahrain could attack U.S. civilian and military personnel.

As the Army and Marine Corps do not have the troops to invade and occupy Iran, would we have to reinstate the draft?

And if we decided to blockade and bomb Iran, we would have to take out all its anti-ship missiles, submarines, navy, air force, ballistic missiles and air defense system.

And would not a pre-emptive strike on Iran unite its people in hatred of us, just as Japan’s pre-emptive strike on Pearl Harbor united us in a determination to annihilate her empire?

What would the Dow Jones average look like after an attack on Iran?

Trump was nominated because he promised to keep us out of stupid wars like those into which folks like John Bolton and the Bush Republicans plunged us.

After 17 years, we are still mired in Afghanistan, trying to keep the Taliban we overthrew in 2001 from returning to Kabul. Following our 2003 invasion, Iraq, once a bulwark against Iran, became a Shiite ally of Iran.

The rebels we supported in Syria have been routed. And Bashar Assad — thanks to backing from Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and Shiite militias from the Middle East and Central Asia — has secured his throne.

The Kurds who trusted us have been hammered by our NATO ally Turkey in Syria, and by the Iraqi Army we trained in Iraq.

What is Trump, who assured us there would be no more stupid wars, thinking? Truman and LBJ got us into wars they could not end, and both lost their presidencies. Eisenhower and Nixon ended those wars and were rewarded with landslides.

After his smashing victory in Desert Storm, Bush I was denied a second term. After invading Iraq, Bush II lost both houses of Congress in 2006, and his party lost the presidency in 2008 to the antiwar Barack Obama.

Once Trump seemed to understand this history.

But then Trump can't quit warring all over the world as he needs to continue fulfilling the prediction of Joseph:
The United States will spend her strength and means warring in foreign lands until other nations will say, "Let's divide up the lands of the United States", then the people of the U. S. will unite and swear by the blood of their fore-fathers, that the land shall not be divided. Then the country will go to war, and they will fight until one half of the U. S. army will give up, and the rest will continue to struggle.

So no, I do not think Trump will be any different than his predecessors in war, except to blow his " trump" more...

[iWriteStuff]

But then Trump can't quit warring all over the world as he needs to continue fulfilling the prediction of Joseph:
The United States will spend her strength and means warring in foreign lands until other nations will say, "Let's divide up the lands of the United States", then the people of the U. S. will unite and swear by the blood of their fore-fathers, that the land shall not be divided. Then the country will go to war, and they will fight until one half of the U. S. army will give up, and the rest will continue to struggle.

So no, I do not think Trump will be any different than his predecessors in war, except to blow his " trump" more...

Excellent application of news and prophesy! I'm going to have to save that in my "book of awesome notes" for future reference.

[Craig Johnson]

But then Trump can't quit warring all over the world as he needs to continue fulfilling the prediction of Joseph:
The United States will spend her strength and means warring in foreign lands until other nations will say, "Let's divide up the lands of the United States", then the people of the U. S. will unite and swear by the blood of their fore-fathers, that the land shall not be divided. Then the country will go to war, and they will fight until one half of the U. S. army will give up, and the rest will continue to struggle.

So no, I do not think Trump will be any different than his predecessors in war, except to blow his " trump" more...

Excellent application of news and prophesy! I'm going to have to save that in my "book of awesome notes" for future reference.

Since Trump ran as a Republican he is now assuming the role of a Republican, which is to have/gain power over the Democrats and the people - rather than to serve the people, if he managed to do that I would be startled. I have no opinion on what he actually is because I do not know him and can only surmise from what I have seen of the fruits of his life. I think his election is giving us some breathing room due to what I am certain what would have happened if Hitlery had been elected. The road is tilted down and there is no way to make it tilt up, even if we put Romney in office even if we put R. Paul in office, it will continue down the path it is going as predicted by God's Holy Prophets. There will come a time when it will be so bad we will be counseled or even commanded to gather, and that is what we must do, at that time, if we are to be strong enough to endure the tribulation. The end is coming and it looks to me like it is marching towards us faster than ever before.

[iWriteStuff]

What would you tell me if I said that for every $6.21 I borrowed from you, I could make a whole whopping $1 in return? Would you say I have an excellent business model? Or would you say I exceed at setting money on fire?

Welcome to our current economy:

debt vs GDP.png (100.77 KiB) Viewed 1165 times

For a total of $621 billion the Federal Government borrowed in the first quarter of 2018, the US economy returned $100 billion. We burned over half a trillion dollars trying to break even and failed. In three months. Consider that.

Here's what the GDP expansion would look like if you removed deficit spending:

less debt gdp expansion.png (67.1 KiB) Viewed 1165 times

Something tells me a day of reckoning isn't too far off.

[Craig Johnson]

That's worse than I thought.

[iWriteStuff]

That's worse than I thought.

Isn't it interesting how all the attention has been removed from deficit spending? It's only when you step back a notch and see how deficit spending has been contributing to GDP that the picture becomes clear. Without the massive deficit spending, which is increasingly less effective at stimulating the economy, we would already be in a recession.

So are conservatives pro-deficit spending now? Or do they just no longer care about deficits?

[iWriteStuff]

Netanyahu: Trump Is Very Likely To Order Attack On Syria

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu believes US President Trump is very likely to order an attack on Syria, a senior Israeli official tells Israel's Channel 10 news.

Bloomberg, however, reports that Trump is said to have not made a decision yet on Syria despite the fact that he canceled a trip to South America, citing the crisis in Syria.

And as we reported earlier, Trump is also deploying the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group (HSTCSG) to the Mediterranean Wednesday, where it will join the USS Donald Cook off Syrian territorial waters.

It is worth noting that it will take approximately 6-7 days for the group to cross the Atlantic at 30 knots, plus another 3-4 three days once it arrives in the Mediterranean, to reach Syria, suggesting a full-blown on attack may not take place until after April 22 or so.

Yesterday, guided missile destroyer USS Donald Cook armed with 60 Tomahawk cruise missiles anchored off of Syrian territorial waters, and has reportedly been "harassed" by low-flying Russian warplanes, which have buzzed the "Arleigh Burke" class warship at least four times according to CNN Turk.

This is all developing, but rest assured the drums of war are louder than they've been in a long time - all based on a questionable chemical attack on 80 rebels which has yet to be fully investigated.

The good news is that the US-Israel axis of middle eastern regime change now has two more members: France..

MACRON: FRANCE WON'T ACCEPT ANY YEMEN MISSILE RAIDS ON SAUDI
... and brand new entrant, Saudi Arabia:

SAUDI CROWN PRINCE SAYS IF CIRCUMSTANCES DEMAND IT SAUDI ARABIA COULD BE PART OF INTERNATIONAL SYRIA RESPONSE: RTRS
Meanwhile, Syrian state news agency SANA has reported that the Assad administration has invited the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to Douma, the site of the chemical attack, to investigate.

An official source at the Ministry said in a statement to SANA that in response to the false allegations made by some Western states against Syria regarding the alleged use of chemical weapons in the city of Douma on April 7th 2018, the Foreign and Expatriates Ministry sent an official invitation via its permanent mission at the Hague to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to send a team from the fact-finding mission to visit Douma and investigate claims related to the alleged use of chemical weapons there and identify the facts related to these allegations. -SANA

The source told SANA that the Syrian government welcomes the fact-finding team, and intends on providing all necessary support required to carry out their attack.

Of course, some think this is a delay tactic...

Why does Syria and Russia want the OPCW to investigate the Douma chemical attack? Because it'll take weeks, if not months, for them to investigate while Syria claims they're co-operating fully, then they'll just claim the final report is all fake and wrong if it blames Syria.

— Eliot Higgins (@EliotHiggins) April 10, 2018
And others, like Fox News host Tucker Carlson, are wondering aloud why the United States is contemplating risking World War III - based on an event which is far from having been thoroughly investigated.

Fox news host @TuckerCarlson calls out @RealDonaldTrump for appearing to flip on his no-more-war promises https://t.co/4P25Ak6pbX

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 10, 2018

Here's my interpretation:

Last week, Trump announced to the world his decision to start taking our troops out of Syria. I was shocked, since this is probably the best thing I've heard out of his mouth in a long time.

Exactly two days later, "Assad" gassed some people. (If you believe that lie, I've got a lifetime membership to the Trump Martian Casino to sell you). And, at about the same time, Trump's lawyers get raided and "new evidence is coming to light". Suddenly, Trump is back on the "attack Syria" theme, wanting to "punish" Assad. Coincidence? Yeah, right.

My theory: The dirt they've got on Trump is being used as leverage for policy decisions. Every time he looks to do something peaceful and promising, the Gads bring him back into alignment with their goals by threatening to dump on him. To help the decision along, they provide cover through false flags like this Syrian gas attack. Just like that, they've got political cover for a Syrian invasion and they've got a suddenly cooperative President.

He may have been the cleanest shirt in the dirty laundry, but he's still dirty enough that he's compromised. Expect the Gadianton agenda to proceed as planned. Either that, or expect to see Trump impeached. This train cannot be stopped.

[iWriteStuff]

Flashback of the Day:

@walaa_3ssaf No, dopey, I would not go into Syria, but if I did it would be by surprise and not blurted all over the media like fools.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2013

Flash Forward:

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 11, 2018

Which version of Trump do you actually believe?

[iWriteStuff]

Sasse says Trump has directed Kudlow and Lighthizer to look into rejoining TPP

Speaking outside the White House, Sen. Ben Sasse says President Donald Trump directed U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow to look about renegotiating entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the trade deal Trump withdrew from on his first day of office. "That's really good news for America," said the Nebraska Republican. Trump said it might be easier to come to an agreement now that 11 other nations have signed on, according to Sasse.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sasse ... 2?mod=bnbh

Looks like Globalism is back on the agenda!

#Winning?

[iWriteStuff]

not that anyone reads this any more, but I thought this was interesting:

Chart Of The Day: A Dramatic Visual Of 3 Years Of U.S. Strikes In Syria

On April 14, 2018, starting around 4 am Syrian time, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom conducted a missile bombardment with bombers, fighter jets, and ship-based cruise missiles against government sites in Syria. The U.S.-led assault on Syria was in response to an alleged chemical attack against civilians in Douma on April 07, which the West condemned the Syrian government for such atrocities, without providing proper evidence to the international community.

While the latest round of U.S.-led attacks marked a rare direct military confrontation with the Syrian Armed Forces, the U.S., and its allies have carried out “more than 14,000 strikes inside Syria since January 2015,” said Axios.

As the infographic below explains, the vast majority of strikes targeting ‘terrorist’ have occurred under the Trump administration. In mid-2017, a fourfold increase in attacks was due to the coalition’s campaign to re-take Raqqa, said Axios.

strikes.png (79.17 KiB) Viewed 550 times

Micah Zenko, a foreign policy and national security analyst, who worked at the State Department’s Office of Policy Planning, told Axios missile strikes in Yemen and Somalia have also surged since President Trump was inaugurated.

“Basically, Trump expanded U.S. military presence and/or airstrikes in every combat theater he inherited from Obama.”

chopper.jpg (99.87 KiB) Viewed 550 times

I wonder what the next President will promise vs deliver. More war?

[iWriteStuff]

Interesting article about the perception of choice:

How Technology is Hijacking Your Mind — from a Magician and Google Design Ethicist

“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they’ve been fooled.” — Unknown.

I’m an expert on how technology hijacks our psychological vulnerabilities. That’s why I spent the last three years as a Design Ethicist at Google caring about how to design things in a way that defends a billion people’s minds from getting hijacked.

When using technology, we often focus optimistically on all the things it does for us. But I want to show you where it might do the opposite.

Where does technology exploit our minds’ weaknesses?

I learned to think this way when I was a magician. Magicians start by looking for blind spots, edges, vulnerabilities and limits of people’s perception, so they can influence what people do without them even realizing it. Once you know how to push people’s buttons, you can play them like a piano.

And this is exactly what product designers do to your mind. They play your psychological vulnerabilities (consciously and unconsciously) against you in the race to grab your attention.

I want to show you how they do it.

Hijack #1: If You Control the Menu, You Control the Choices

Western Culture is built around ideals of individual choice and freedom. Millions of us fiercely defend our right to make “free” choices, while we ignore how those choices are manipulated upstream by menus we didn’t choose in the first place.

This is exactly what magicians do. They give people the illusion of free choice while architecting the menu so that they win, no matter what you choose. I can’t emphasize enough how deep this insight is.

When people are given a menu of choices, they rarely ask:

“what’s not on the menu?”
“why am I being given these options and not others?”
“do I know the menu provider’s goals?”
“is this menu empowering for my original need, or are the choices actually a distraction?” (e.g. an overwhelmingly array of toothpastes)

blah blah blah lots of examples of technology hijacking agency

Summary And How We Can Fix This
Are you upset that technology hijacks your agency? I am too. I’ve listed a few techniques but there are literally thousands. Imagine whole bookshelves, seminars, workshops and trainings that teach aspiring tech entrepreneurs techniques like these. Imagine hundreds of engineers whose job every day is to invent new ways to keep you hooked.

The ultimate freedom is a free mind, and we need technology that’s on our team to help us live, feel, think and act freely.

We need our smartphones, notifications screens and web browsers to be exoskeletons for our minds and interpersonal relationships that put our values, not our impulses, first. People’s time is valuable. And we should protect it with the same rigor as privacy and other digital rights.

Read the full thing here:
https://medium.com/thrive-global/how-te ... d62ef5edf3

How are you being programmed to follow the herd? Are you even aware?

Read the whole article. I dare ya.

[BeNotDeceived]

Slightly random topic that should be understood before the next market collapse:

Lemon Socialism
Lemon socialism is a pejorative term for a form of government intervention in which government subsidies go to weak or failing firms, often with the intent of preventing further, systemic damage to what might otherwise be considered a free marketplace. These subsidies can even take the form of a full or partial bail-out, as happened during the 2008 financial crisis. The pejorative comes from the perception among free-market economists that failing companies are defective lemons that a working free market would replace with better-functioning companies in response to market demand, and the public-sector involvement this type of state intervention shares with socialism.

Confusingly, lemon socialism may also refer to government efforts to transition from capitalism to actual socialism; in this case it refers to a deliberate strategy of absorbing the losses entailed in saving jobs within the worst-performing sectors of the economy — the lemons — before the nationalization of more profitable industries.

The sentiment was earlier expressed in the adage "Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor", which was in use by the 1960s, and the notion of privatizing profits and socializing losses dates at least to 1834 and Andrew Jackson's closing of the Second Bank of the United States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemon_socialism

The Gadiantons will shrug off the impossibly high debts of the financial collapse onto the backs of the poor, none of whom benefited from the financial shenanigans of the rich and empowered.

Where is your wealth? And where is your freedom? You do possess it in name only or have you claimed it for your birthright?

https://youtu.be/xquvX-3L9EM

Trumps Border Wall (History Lens)

Good summary about 1832, wounded knee, and false flags of the last two centuries. Bush’s weapons of mass destruction were false justification with unknown connection to OPEC while defunding OTEC, which funded ISIS, 911, etc.