It’s a fine pastime – I mean if you don’t have friends, hobbies, schedules, kids, housework, a yard, oil change, or other real chores to do – trying to figure out the “next Big Thing” that will show up in the MSM news flow.
Should be something big enough to cause panic, a sucking of the breath, massive above-the-fold headlines and a bump in viewership for the “alleged” news channels.
Thus far, the holiday has been fairly orderly.
In Syria, the government is showing how they don’t have an effing clue: They are trying to promote tourism while headlines like At least 38 killed in string of bomb blasts across Syria – Turkey says ISIS driven from Turkish-Syrian border are crossing.
Makes you wonder what’s been placed in the water over there, doesn’t it?
The Money-Go-Round
Markets in Asia were up modestly overnight. But that will blow around this week as the G20 is meeting in China. Carefully timed and staged: Seoul says N. Korea fires 3 ballistic missiles into sea. As luck would have it, they aimed at something big enough so they could hit it (The Pacific).
Putin’s Gimme Shelter
The war in Syria is having one effect, though it’s kind of hard to explain: The world axis of power around Oil is shifting.
The tip-off headline to study is Oil jumps as Saudi Arabia and Russia agree to work together.
Remember, the Saudis had this wet-dream idea of building a pipeline from the kingdom up through Syria and Turkey and then into Europe where they figured to make oodles of dough. Underselling Russia they could buy market share. We get that…
But, since the War in Syria (WiS) is going badly, they will go von Clausewitz: war by other means, which is what business comes down to.
But Russia isn’t trusting anyone. Having lost millions in WW II, the Russia mindset is very much in the Trust-but-Verify mode. So, just in case the commercial angle doesn’t pan out, they continue to make an incredible investment in Civil Defense.
Take this story out this weekend in the UK Sun: VLADIMIR SHOOTIN’ Russian president is gearing up for atomic war with the West by building top-secret nuclear shelters, security experts fear…
Not that the story should surprise anyone: It’s been part of our “Big Picture” view forever, Alex Jones on InfoWars has been harping on this for months. But the mainstream media controls are in place. The great unwashed are still snoozing – making mention of it in a column this early almost pointless.
What’s likely happened is that enough people have grokked the story on the Web that it has to appear in the MSM, so out it comes in the “edgy” Sun. We will let it percolate there and then see how far into the MSM it gets. When both the NY Times and the Washington/Amazon Post cover some aspect of Civil Defense in a three-day window, the it will have arrived.
For now it swirls around the edges of the stream of consciousness awaiting the leap to courant dominant.
Pass the Aspirin
Not too much on our business agenda this week. Gallup’s consumer spending ditty comes out tomorrow. The most exciting financial news is a bunch of Fed-speaks mouthing this and that. But the real action is the G20. The Global Picture will matter most for the next week or three, although presidential campaigning is in background.
Even that has become laissez faire: Trump is actually campaigning while Clinton is off raising still more money to buy the election.
Used to be people asked “Who did you vote for?”
As the media speed picked up, it became “Who are you planning to vote for?”
A ways further it becomes “Did you register?”
And this year it will come down to “Did you enter a bid?”
Not that it matters.
A sage reader of ours has already told us “You don’t need to actually win. You just need to count the votes….”
Considering Homeland Security has already been hacked, even the most reasoned person can see the high potential for wrong-doing of the highest order in this unconstitutional federalization of elections. By decree, not Law we notice.
Why?
Well, should be obvious: When young black voters are turning on Hillary, and when even music greats like Sean “Diddy” Combs says black people got short-changed by Obama, what’s a good decreeing and controlling central government going to do in order to compel its anointed successor into office?
Presactly…enforce the count their way of course!
Best part about this kind of fed-jack? We won’t need an October Surprise, after all, thank you.
It’s been done.
An d most recently in Detroit where Donald Trump receiving a shawl and a bible at a black church while getting an ovation was ordered shut down according to this report.
Done…and done.
Meantime the pro-Clinton press is trying to whip up the idea that Russia is meddling in US politics, but in truth it’s appearing very much like the usual list of necons and the richy-rich. They do have the high bid so far, you see?
Big-Picture-wise, the plan seems simple enough from out here in the woods: Have the FedGov make up hacked election stories, along with dire warnings about foreign influencers and then justify the pending DHS vote-jack in November. Easy-peasy.
Land of that who? Hand me my meds.
First rule of common sense. “Don’t believe anything that you hear and only half of what you see.”
Taking Ure advice about days off belonging to us an not the man I have a couple nifty little ham projects I am working on today. No phone, and once I scan through Urban Survival one last time the only pc getting any attention is in the shack.
I never thought I would live to see the USA stolen out from under our collective noses by the same gang of psychos who set up the Soviet Union. Kruschev said they would bury us, and sure enough, they have, only it wasn’t the Russians. All those sleeping sheeple out there will finally be shocked awake as the poleaxe strikes them between the eyes.
RE: Federalizing the election – you are ‘spot on’ George, although I believe the slight of hand being foisted upon the masses is not so much to protect our votes. Taking control of the polls will prevent the wrong candidate from winning, mortally wounding the globalista’s plans. Brexit was a serious setback. A Trump presidency could pretty much ‘stick a fork’ in the EU and perhaps the G-20. A tangential but none-the-less very real and serious concern is the release of State Dept classified material out into the wild, thereby irreparably damning Hillary and hugely embarrassing the Feds. Washington is no doubt sweating bullets.
And we confidently predict “hand picked” EU “observers” – which will be yet another bad joke.
As the “good” (ROTF ,LOL) ship ussa Titanic steams past 50 knots through a large field of deadly icebergs, hitting a new one every minute or so,
The ‘merican people debate kim kardashians thong size,which body part on QB tony romo will shatter next and weather or not Colon Crappernickles protest was justified.
You can’t fix stupid.
But history and the Karma wheel is gonna slap the ussa continuously about the head , just like one of those steam powered paddle wheelers thumped the Mississippi river.
Amen, brothers and sisters. But there’s something about an impending train-wreck that is oh so attention-arresting…
Perhaps the Russians would prefer that moronic bully Trump over Clinton, easy to see why…
We just had the discussion about fake handles and trolling! Once more and you’re banned
Here here
“Things that can’t work, won’t work.” I always say.
Many of us have become aware of the grand theft called captured government, and the outrages are mounting daily- but really it is only the alternative media which causes this, and the lifeblood of that is the Internet. Just as small printing presses with anonymous authors fueled the War of Independence.
But the corruption is seemingly always with us, as books like The Devil’s Chessboard, and Family of Secrets clearly show. It’s just that in the past, almost nobody had access to enough information to know what was really happening, much less stop it. Now some of us see the lizards behind the curtain, or “curtail” as one apt typo put it.
But no matter who they say won this election, the system is unsustainable, and the real people’s uprising is a few years off. And if Hillary wins blame will fall on Russia, Republicans, free speech, etc. if Trump wins, ditto, plus Trump.
So my ploy is to be thinking hard about what new structures we can build out of the rubble coming soon to a country near you. And voting for Johnson, because the smell of death and rot is hard to wash out my spirit. If I lived in a purple state, Trump’s choices of judges not approved by cultural Marxists would compel voting for him. And his semi-anti war with Russia position. But barely. So at least I have the luxury of being a sad observer, not jumping into the icy N. Atlantic. Those in purple states should look at the active, coordinated, suppression of speech embraced by the entire media/democrat/progressive/corporate/military complex, and ask yourselves how that can be part of a successful democratic republic.
Hey George-Since the NSA is out hacking everybody(probably including this note, hi there spook), wouldn’t you think they would have known about Hilliary’s not-so-secret server setup, having intercepted the missing e-mails real time? Could that be an October surprise?
Naw too many of the big bad corps have their cash on the scales…sorry – just skeptical
Only one thing to remember. If war starts with Russia/China, the USA will lose. The USAF can only get 40% of its planes in the air, and now the navy reports even worse statistics. No ground war can be fought and won without air support, so this means that the war will go nuclear almost immediately, and even if the USA won, it would no longer be a place that was livable. If the USA forces a confrontation, it will not be one of these Middle East skirmishes. It will be everything all in, instantly. The electricity will go off,the Internet will go down, and the economic system will seize, as in frozen. What you have in your possession and in your gas tank may be all you ever get for months, if not years. George will find his ham radios interesting for about a day, because the bad news will be devastating.
Hell Mic…Obama will just hand the Chinese the keys to the former WH and call it what it is.
Deed in lieu of foreclosure, lol
George, Ohio just mail out 6.6 million absence t ballet’s. This covers all registered voters in the state.never done before. Hey we might get an even election yet. One can hope.
Uh… I will be down at the airport waiting for the pigs to fly.
No use having paper ballots, they will b e considered void, fired, or lost enroute.
We will estimate her into office.
All of Oregon’s voting is by mail – and it has been very successful! Any fraud is such a small percentage of the total vote as to be of little consequence . . .
The fraud that I have noticed is when particular state’s election officials – try to affect access to voting by certain groups of people that they perceive likely to vote against their personal preference – such as during the 2012 election when Karl Rove was so ‘surprised’ that his candidate didn’t win.
Or in the election of 2000 and the problem with the votes in Florida – I don’t know if Jeb Bush believes in ‘Fate’ – but I do believe in ‘just deserts’ and his involvement in that particular brotherly ‘assist’ will be a stain on his reputation forever.
No, if Hilary Clinton wins – it will be because Donald Trump lost due to his too numerous faults.
didn’t wkrp in Cincinnati do that in the 80’s. Les nessman
What will happen if the US nukes Russia first? An interesting article from Russia Insider. The Dr. Strangelove Cold War Doomsday device was real. It has been vastly modernized since then, along with the shelters being put in place to protect the Russians.
http://russia-insider.com/en/scary-what-will-be-russian-answer-if-us-nukes-russia-first-dead-hand-moscow/ri16193
George, I tell people everyday to wakeup, no too involved in their phone, ect. Listened the other day to a show asking who Joe Biden is, the young kids didn’t know. They hear snippets on a MSN Network and decide who to vote for from that. Very few people are informed. Thanks for what you do.
This is an Interview with a banker about
a foreclosure. The banker was placed on
the witness stand and sworn in. The
plaintiff’s (borrower’s) attorney asked
the banker the routine questions
concerning the banker’s education and
background.
The attorney asked the banker, “What is
court exhibit A?”
The banker responded by saying, “This
is a promissory note.”
The attorney then asked, “Is there an
agreement between Mr. Smith
(borrower) and the defendant?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Do you believe the
agreement includes a lender and a
borrower?”
The banker responded by saying, “Yes,
I am the lender and Mr. Smith is the
borrower.”
The attorney asked, “What do you
believe the agreement is?”
The banker quickly responded, saying,
“We have the borrower sign the note
and we give the borrower a check.”
The attorney asked, “Does this
agreement show the words borrower,
lender, loan, interest, credit, or money
within the agreement?”
The banker responded by saying, “Sure
it does.”
The attorney asked, “According to your
knowledge, who was to loan what to
whom according to the written
agreement?”
The banker responded by saying, “The
lender loaned the borrower a $50,000
check. The borrower got the money and
the house and has not repaid the money.”
The attorney noted that the banker never
said that the bank received the
promissory note as a loan from the
borrower to the bank. He asked, “Do
you believe an ordinary person can use
ordinary terms and understand this
written agreement?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Do you believe you
or your company legally own the
promissory note and have the right to
enforce payment from the borrower?”
The banker said, “Absolutely we own it
and legally have the right to collect the
money.”
The attorney asked, “Does the $50,000
note have actual cash value of $50,000?
Actual cash value means the promissory
note can be sold for $50,000 cash in the
ordinary course of business.”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “According to your
understanding of the alleged agreement,
how much actual cash value must the
bank loan to the borrower in order for
the bank to legally fulfill the agreement
and legally own the promissory note?”
The banker said, “$50,000.”
The attorney asked, “According to your
belief, if the borrower signs the
promissory note and the bank refuses to
loan the borrower $50,000 actual cash
value, would the bank or borrower own
the promissory note?”
The banker said, “The borrower would
own it if the bank did not loan the
money. The bank gave the borrower a
check and that is how the borrower
financed the purchase of the house.”
The attorney asked, “Do you believe that
the borrower agreed to provide the bank
with $50,000 of actual cash value which
was used to fund the $50,000 bank loan
check back to the same borrower, and
then agreed to pay the bank back
$50,000 plus interest?”
The banker said, “No. If the borrower
provided the $50,000 to fund the check,
there was no money loaned by the bank
so the bank could not charge interest on
money it never loaned.”
The attorney asked, “If this happened, in
your opinion would the bank legally own
the promissory note and be able to force
Mr. Smith to pay the bank interest and
principal payments?”
The banker said, “I am not a lawyer so I
cannot answer legal questions.”
The attorney asked, ” Is it bank policy
that when a borrower receives a
$50,000 bank loan, the bank receives
$50,000 actual cash value from the
borrower, that this gives value to a
$50,000 bank loan check, and this
check is returned to the borrower as a
bank loan which the borrower must
repay?”
The banker said, “I do not know the
bookkeeping entries.”
The attorney said, “I am asking you if
this is the policy.”
The banker responded, “I do not recall.”
The attorney again asked, “Do you
believe the agreement between Mr.
Smith and the bank is that Mr. Smith
provides the bank with actual cash value
of $50,000 which is used to fund a
$50,000 bank loan check back to
himself which he is then required to
repay plus interest back to the same
bank?”
The banker said, “I am not a lawyer.”
The attorney said, “Did you not say
earlier that an ordinary person can use
ordinary terms and understand this
written agreement?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney handed the bank loan
agreement marked “Exhibit B” to the
banker. He said, “Is there anything in this
agreement showing the borrower had
knowledge or showing where the
borrower gave the bank authorization or
permission for the bank to receive
$50,000 actual cash value from him and
to use this to fund the $50,000 bank
loan check which obligates him to give
the bank back $50,000 plus interest?”
The banker said, “No.”
The lawyer asked, “If the borrower
provided the bank with actual cash value
of $50,000 which the bank used to fund
the $50,000 check and returned the
check back to the alleged borrower as a
bank loan check, in your opinion, did the
bank loan $50,000 to the borrower?”
The banker said, “No.”
The attorney asked, “If a bank customer
provides actual cash value of $50,000 to
the bank and the bank returns $50,000
actual cash value back to the same
customer, is this a swap or exchange of
$50,000 for $50,000.”
The banker replied, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Did the agreement
call for an exchange of $50,000
swapped for $50,000, or did it call for a
$50,000 loan?”
The banker said, “A $50,000 loan.”
The attorney asked, “Is the bank to
follow the Federal Reserve Bank
policies and procedures when banks
grant loans.”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “What are the
standard bank bookkeeping entries for
granting loans according to the Federal
Reserve Bank policies and procedures?”
The attorney handed the banker FED
publication Modern Money Mechanics,
marked “Exhibit C”.
The banker said, “The promissory note
is recorded as a bank asset and a new
matching deposit (liability) is created.
Then we issue a check from the new
deposit back to the borrower.”
The attorney asked, “Is this not a swap
or exchange of $50,000 for $50,000?”
The banker said, “This is the standard
way to do it.”
The attorney said, “Answer the question.
Is it a swap or exchange of $50,000
actual cash value for $50,000 actual
cash value? If the note funded the check,
must they not both have equal value?”
The banker then pleaded the Fifth
Amendment.
The attorney asked, “If the bank’s
deposits (liabilities) increase, do the
bank’s assets increase by an asset that
has actual cash value?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Is there any
exception?”
The banker said, “Not that I know of.”
The attorney asked, “If the bank records
a new deposit and records an asset on
the bank’s books having actual cash
value, would the actual cash value
always come from a customer of the
bank or an investor or a lender to the
bank?”
The banker thought for a moment and
said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Is it the bank
policy to record the promissory note as
a bank asset offset by a new liability?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney said, “Does the promissory
note have actual cash value equal to the
amount of the bank loan check?”
The banker said “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Does this
bookkeeping entry prove that the
borrower provided actual cash value to
fund the bank loan check?”
The banker said, “Yes, the bank
president told us to do it this way.”
The attorney asked, “How much actual
cash value did the bank loan to obtain
the promissory note?”
The banker said, “Nothing.”
The attorney asked, “How much actual
cash value did the bank receive from the
borrower?”
The banker said, “$50,000.”
The attorney said, “Is it true you
received $50,000 actual cash value from
the borrower, plus monthly payments
and then you foreclosed and never
invested one cent of legal tender or other
depositors’ money to obtain the
promissory note in the first place? Is it
true that the borrower financed the
whole transaction?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Are you telling me
the borrower agreed to give the bank
$50,000 actual cash value for free and
that the banker returned the actual cash
value back to the same person as a bank
loan?”
The banker said, “I was not there when
the borrower agreed to the loan.”
The attorney asked, “Do the standard
FED publications show the bank
receives actual cash value from the
borrower for free and that the bank
returns it back to the borrower as a
bank loan?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney said, “Do you believe the
bank does this without the borrower’s
knowledge or written permission or
authorization?”
The banker said, “No.”
The attorney asked, “To the best of your
knowledge, is there written permission
or authorization for the bank to transfer
$50,000 of actual cash value from the
borrower to the bank and for the bank
to keep it for free?
The banker said, “No.”
Does this allow the bank to use this
$50,000 actual cash value to fund the
$50,000 bank loan check back to the
same borrower, forcing the borrower to
pay the bank $50,000 plus interest? ”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney said, “If the bank
transferred $50,000 actual cash value
from the borrower to the bank, in this
part of the transaction, did the bank loan
anything of value to the borrower?”
The banker said, “No.” He knew that
one must first deposit something having
actual cash value (cash, check, or
promissory note) to fund a check.
The attorney asked, “Is it the bank
policy to first transfer the actual cash
value from the alleged borrower to the
lender for the amount of the alleged
loan?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Does the bank pay
IRS tax on the actual cash value
transferred from the alleged borrower to
the bank?”
The banker answered, “No, because the
actual cash value transferred shows up
like a loan from the borrower to the
bank, or a deposit which is the same
thing, so it is not taxable.”
The attorney asked, “If a loan is
forgiven, is it taxable?”
The banker agreed by saying, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Is it the bank
policy to not return the actual cash value
that they received from the alleged
borrower unless it is returned as a loan
from the bank to the alleged borrower?”
“Yes”, the banker replied.
The attorney said, “You never pay taxes
on the actual cash value you receive
from the alleged borrower and keep as
the bank’s property?”
“No. No tax is paid”, said the crying
banker.
The attorney asked, “When the lender
receives the actual cash value from the
alleged borrower, does the bank claim
that it then owns it and that it is the
property of the lender, without the bank
loaning or risking one cent of legal tender
or other depositors’ money?”
The banker said, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Are you telling me
the bank policy is that the bank owns the
promissory note (actual cash value)
without loaning one cent of other
depositors’ money or legal tender, that
the alleged borrower is the one who
provided the funds deposited to fund the
bank loan check, and that the bank gets
funds from the alleged borrower for
free? Is the money then returned back to
the same person as a loan which the
alleged borrower repays when the bank
never gave up any money to obtain the
promissory note? Am I hearing this
right? I give you the equivalent of
$50,000, you return the funds back to
me, and I have to repay you $50,000
plus interest? Do you think I am stupid?”
In a shaking voice the banker cried,
saying, “All the banks are doing this.
Congress allows this.”
The attorney quickly responded, “Does
Congress allow the banks to breach
written agreements, use false and
misleading advertising, act without
written permission, authorization, and
without the alleged borrower’s
knowledge to transfer actual cash value
from the alleged borrower to the bank
and then return it back as a loan?”
The banker said, “But the borrower got
a check and the house.”
The attorney said, “Is it true that the
actual cash value that was used to fund
the bank loan check came directly from
the borrower and that the bank received
the funds from the alleged borrower for
free?”
“It is true”, said the banker.
The attorney asked, “Is it the bank’s
policy to transfer actual cash value from
the alleged borrower to the bank and
then to keep the funds as the bank’s
property, which they loan out as bank
loans?”
The banker, showing tears of regret that
he had been caught, confessed, “Yes.”
The attorney asked, “Was it the bank’s
intent to receive actual cash value from
the borrower and return the value of the
funds back to the borrower as a loan?”
The banker said, “Yes.” He knew he had
to say yes because of the bank policy.
The attorney asked, “Do you believe that
it was the borrower’s intent to fund his
own bank loan check?”
The banker answered, “I was not there
at the time and I cannot know what went
through the borrower’s mind.”
The attorney asked, “If a lender loaned a
borrower $10,000 and the borrower
refused to repay the money, do you
believe the lender is damaged?”
The banker thought. If he said no, it
would imply that the borrower does not
have to repay. If he said yes, it would
imply that the borrower is damaged for
the loan to the bank of which the bank
never repaid. The banker answered, “If
a loan is not repaid, the lender is
damaged.”
The attorney asked, “Is it the bank
policy to take actual cash value from the
borrower, use it to fund the bank loan
check, and never return the actual cash
value to the borrower?”
The banker said, “The bank returns the
funds.”
The attorney asked, “Was the actual
cash value the bank received from the
alleged borrower returned as a return of
the money the bank took or was it
returned as a bank loan to the
borrower?”
The banker said, “As a loan.”
The attorney asked, “How did the bank
get the borrower’s money for free?”
The banker said, “That is how it works.”
That what labor day is about you LABOR, and the bankers win over and over , thats why bankers rule the ghetto , even if you think you are rich , they win, why because that is the way it is , do you feel like being a john f. kennedy and changing it ,good luck, MAY ALL BEINGS BE LOVINGLY FULFILLED , so be it
If your local state and county banks do fail, a way to help them is to take $1000 and open accounts with 10 different banks ,divide it into $100, a bank , and each bank legally has the ability to loan 9 times that $100 =$900 to lend times 10 = $9000 of artificial money to get your local area going , and the reasoning is that if some fail you will still have a success rate for your community
As I was reading this my mind split into several parts:
1. this is a hellva a ‘Shaggy Dog’ story,
2. I was losing the plot, and felt like pounding my head on my desk,
3. and ain’t the legal system ‘Wonderful’.
Finally George must be a ‘saint’ to moderate this . . .
I will be going to my voting precinct to confront any UN scumbag on site…also notifying my Sherriff to remove the scumbag UN from our voting area since us locals DID NOT INVITE them…Obamas invite does not apply to county or city owned land the polling pricinct sit on…it is not federal………….imho
Old Ben Franklin warned us about getting involved in foreign affairs. He also stated those who beat their whepons into Plow Shares will be plowing for those who did not beat their whepons into plow shares/
lol – boy, I could make me some plows, lol…
Grub, guns and gold.
If you don’t hold it, you don’t own it.
If that doesn’t keep you alive nothing will.