Month: February 2017

Upon leaving office in 2009, former President George W. Bush pledged to reserve criticism of his successor, despite the fact that Obama, a junior Senator from Chicago, had been openly and extremely critical of his presidency over the preceding couple of years.  In fact, when pressed on the issue in an interview with Sean Hannity in 2014, Bush said simply, “I don’t think it’s good for the country to have a former president undermine a current president…I think it’s bad for the presidency, for that matter.”

That said, apparently Bush isn’t convinced that the same courtesy afforded to President Obama should be extended to the current administration.  In speaking with Matt Luaer of NBC, the former President took several subtle jabs at the current Trump administration on everything from Russia to immigration to his contentious relationship with the media.

On Russian involvement in the 2016 election, Bush seemed to lend credibility to the conspiracy theories of the disaffected left by saying that “we all need answers” while suggesting that a “special prosecutor” may be warranted.  Per The Hill:

“I think we all need answers…I’m not sure the right avenue to take. I am sure, though, that that question needs to be answered,” Bush said to NBC’s “Today” host Matt Lauer. 

 

U.S. intelligence agencies believe Russian-backed hackers attempted to sway the election for Trump, while multiple news reports say that Trump campaign officials had “constant” contact with Russian intelligence during the election.

 

Bush said he trusted Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to select a special prosecutor to investigate the possible ties between Russian officials and Trump’s team saying “if [Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Richard Burr] were to recommend a special prosecutor, then it’d have a lot more credibility with me.”

Of course, no such calls for a special prosecutor were made by Obama or Bush when actual, tangible evidence surfaced that Hillary Clinton knowingly violated multiple federal laws.

 

But the jabs from Bush didn’t end there…

On freedom of religion: “I think it’s very important for all of us to recognize that one of our great strengths is for people to be able to worship the way they want to or not worship at all. A bedrock of our freedom is the right to worship freely.”

 

On Trump’s immigration ban: “I am for an immigration policy that’s welcoming and upholds the law.”

 

On the media: “I consider the media to be indispensable to democracy…Power can be very addictive. It can be corrosive, and it’s important for the media to hold people to account.”

Of course, as Trump has repeatedly said, he has no problem with the media holding his administration “to account”…the problem lies with the media’s complete inability to hold ALL politicians “to account” in an unbiased way, irrespective of political affiliation.

Meanwhile, apparently we weren’t the only ones to note the hypocrisy in some of GW’s comments…

The same George W wanted to jail NYT”s reporter James Risen for reporting about W’s use of warantless wiretaps? https://t.co/mayio7DBAR

— Lizzy (@lizzie363) February 27, 2017

At no time did any major media outlet call W out on this massive steaming pile of hypocrisy which is why the public doesn’t TRUST the media! https://t.co/bhLSl4m4Ro

— Lizzy (@lizzie363) February 27, 2017

 

…though we suspect you won’t hear the same criticisms from his new best friends in the mainstream media, you know, the guys that would have done anything to undermine his credibility just 8 short years ago.

2005: George W Bush is a pillaging, torturing war criminal who let a city drown

2017: I may have disagreed with Bush but he was A Good Man™

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) February 27, 2017

via http://ift.tt/2lOU7Gg Tyler Durden

In a brand new book, the son of Medellín drug king Pablo Escobar says that his father worked for the CIA (English translation).

Sound crazy? Maybe …

But Time reports:

The U.S. government allowed the Mexican Sinaloa drug cartel to carry out its business unimpeded between 2000 and 2012 in exchange for information on rival cartels, an investigation by El Universal claims.

 

***

 

Dr. Edgardo Buscaglia, a senior research scholar in law and economics at Columbia University, says that the tactic has been previously used in Colombia, Cambodia, Thailand and Afghanistan.

“Of course, this modus operandi involves a violation of public international law, besides adding more fuel to the violence, violations of due process and of human rights,” he told El Universal.

 

Myles Frechette, a former U.S. ambassador to Colombia, said while that the problem of drug trafficking in Colombia persists, the tactic of secret agreements had managed to reduce it. The period when the relationship between the DEA and Sinaloa was supposed to have been the closest, between 2006 and 2012, saw a major surge of violence in Mexico, and was the time when the Sinaloa cartel rose significantly in prominence.

Business Insider writes:

There have long been allegations that Guzman, considered to be “the world’s most powerful drug trafficker,” coordinates with American authorities.

But the El Universal investigation is the first to publish court documents that include corroborating testimony from a DEA agent and a Justice Department official.

Fox News reports:

According to the motion, the deal was part of a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy, where the U.S. helped finance and arm the Sinaloa cartel, through Operation Fast and Furious, in exchange for information that allowed the D.E.A. and FBI to destroy and dismantle rival Mexican cartels.

 

***

 

“Under that agreement, the Sinaloa Cartel, through Loya, was to provide information accumulated by Mayo, Chapo, and others, against rival Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations to the United States government. In return, the United States government agreed to dismiss the prosecution of the pending case against Loya, not to interfere with his drug trafficking activities and those of the Sinaloa Cartel, to not actively prosecute him, Chapo, Mayo, and the leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel, and to not apprehend them.”

 

***

 

The motion claims Mayo, Chapo and Zambada- Niebla routinely passed information through Loya to the D.E.A. that allowed it to make drug busts. In return, the U.S. helped the leaders evade Mexican police.

 

It says: “In addition, the defense has evidence that from time to time, the leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel was informed by agents of the DEA through Loya that United States government agents and/or Mexican authorities were conducting investigations near the home territories of cartel leaders so that the cartel leaders could take appropriate actions to evade investigators– even though the United States government had indictments, extradition requests, and rewards for the apprehension of Mayo, Chapo, and other alleged leaders, as well as Mr. Zambada-Niebla.”

Salon notes:

Under the remit of the War on Drugs, millions of U.S. citizens have faced arrest and jail time for minor, nonviolent charges. All the while, it has been revealed, the U.S. government has been enabling billions of dollars worth of drugs to flood into the country from Mexico because of shady deals with the notorious Sinaloa cartel.

 

***

 

Sinaloa (believed to supply 80 percent of Chicago’s street drugs) has been working with U.S. authorities since 2000 to provide information in return for immunity and undisturbed drug trafficking. Court documents obtained by El Universal show testimony from DEA and DOJ officials affirming the relationship.

Indeed, top U.S. government officials say that that the government has long PROTECTED drug cartels.

Watch the Following Videos, and Decide For Yourself …

From a 60 Minutes special with Mike Wallace reporting:

And see these short video clips:

And see this and this.

Even if you don’t believe that the agencies as a whole engaged in hanky panky, there were certainly rogue agents who did.

For example, agents for the Drug Enforcement Agency had dozens of sex parties with prostitutes hired by the drug cartels they were supposed to stop (they also received money, gifts and weapons from drug cartel members).

And Drug Enforcement agents also RAN New Jersey’s sleaziest strip club – using illegal, undocumented girls – which included a prostitution ring

Postscript: Interestingly, Nixon’s chief policy officer – John Ehrlichman – said that the war on drugs was launched as an excuse to attack the antiwar left and blacks.

via http://ift.tt/2lYVggy George Washington

One and a half years after the Chinese government violently burst the stock market bubble, leading the massive losses among retail investors, and months after China’s third housing bubble since the financial crisis appeared to have peaked, also China has found itself with yet another hot-money funded bubble: commodities. And perhaps in hopes of intercepting this latest mania before it gets too big, overnight China’s top economic planner, the National Development & Reform Commission – not a market regulator, but the core agency behind China’s goalseeked economic data – announced it is investigating whether speculation has “distorted” commodity futures prices, due to concerns that the recent rally will drive inflation higher, according to Bloomberg.

In recent weeks, the NDRC has questioned futures brokers whether “price distortion” had occurred, which is a polite way of saying the buying mania has gone too far. The agency is worried over the potential impact on producer and consumer prices. China’s worries are understandable: with commodity prices surging, whether due to speculators or simply tight supply and rising demand, China’s producer prices soared in January by 6.9%, the highest level since the inflationary scare of 2011.

This is the second time China has intervened in the commodity market in the past year: Beijing tightened rules and raised fees on commodities trading last spring, as it sought to clamp down on a speculative frenzy that spurred a rapid run-up in prices and unprecedented volumes. Despite the government’s best efforts however, due to an overabundance of hot money, steel and iron ore futures have continued to rise on government stimulus, capacity cuts and a steadying in the economy of the world’s biggest metals consumer. Despite the occasional wipe out, most recently in December…

… the levitation in China’s commodity sector has continued. Steel reinforcement bar on the Shanghai Futures Exchange rose to its best level since Dec. 2013 on Monday, while iron ore on the Dalian Commodity Exchange was close to its May 2014 peak. However, trading in the contracts remains well below last year’s heady heights.

On Sunday, Fang Xinhai, vice chairman of market regulator, the China Securities Regulatory Commission, said that China doesn’t want inflated trading volumes, according to an online transcript.

Suggesting that yet another government intervention in the commodity market may be imminent, he said last year’s crackdown on speculation was “satisfactory” and that regulators will “stick to last year’s philosophy” when it comes to supervising futures. He added that the government will look at new measures to enhance pricing, such as attracting more industrial users to participate in the market.

The NDRC has also consulted with institutions including equity brokers on the outlook for commodity prices, according to Bloomberg’s sources. That’s about as close as Beijing gets to warning the country’s brokers that the Politburo is displeased with how high prices have risen. All else equal, the near-term price path for Chinese commodities is likely lower.

via http://ift.tt/2m3zsRm Tyler Durden

The French Presidential elections are very reminiscent of this past American one — with an establishment shill running up against an anti-globalist muckraker. In this case, France’s Hillary Clinton is Macron, a former investment banker for Rothschild & Cie Banque,  a man who believes ‘great migrations’ from the middle east into Europe are unstoppable and will continue to get worse — thanks to geopolitical events and GLOBAL WARMING (Jesus Christ).

He told the crowd: “We have entered a world of great migrations and we will have more and more of it.”
 
“In the coming decades we will have migrations from geopolitical conflicts that will continue to play, and we will have climate migrations because the planet is in a state of deep imbalance,” he said.
 
“France will not be able to stem it, and Europe will be affected immediately. We will see a migratory phenomenon far greater than what we have seen [with migrants from] Syria.”

According to recent ‘polls’, if Macron faced off against Le Pen today, he’d win by 21%. In other words, Le Pen is probably up by 5.

She’s taken exception to Macron’s ‘ultra-liberal’ ways and the media sycophantism.

“The media have chosen their candidate. They are campaigning hysterically for their darling.
 
“They take the moral high ground, pretend to only analyse the facts and then shout about the freedom of the press as soon as you criticise them,” she said to cheers.
 
Two new polls published Sunday showed Le Pen still winning the first round of the election on April 23 with 27 percent, but Macron closing the gap on her with 25 percent.
 
In the run-off vote set for May 7, despite her belief that Trump’s victory and Brexit point to a revival of nationalism and anti-elite movements like hers, Le Pen would lose by 20 points to Macron if it were held today, the polls suggested.
 
“Mr Macron went to Germany recently to express the admiration he had for their decision to welcome 1.5 million migrants,” she said, referring to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-door policy for refugees last year.
 
“French people can’t put up with mass immigration any more!” she said, again to cheers from the crowd waving French flags.

 
Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

 

via http://ift.tt/2mDmF4P The_Real_Fly

Via Nick Cunningham of OilPrice.com,

Canada’s oil sands could struggle to rebound, with potentially billions of barrels of oil being kept underground permanently.

Canada’s oil sands are incredibly expensive, some of the costliest sources of oil in the world. Unlike conventional oil drilling, or even drilling in shale, producing from oil sands is more like open-pit mining in many cases. The oil, often found as a sticky, viscous semi-solid known as bitumen, requires extra steps to extract and process before it can be shipped. That stands in stark contrast to conventional oil, which merely requires drilling into an oil field and pumping out the crude.

As a result, the breakeven cost for Canada’s oil sands is dramatically higher than most other places in the world. Obviously, costs vary from company to company and project to project, but a 2016 estimate from IHS put the average breakeven price at a new greenfield oil sands mine at between $85 and $95 per barrel. A steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) project could cost between $55 and $65 per barrel just to break even. With those figures, it is easy to see why very few, if any, greenfield projects could move forward in the near- to medium-term, particularly when companies could look elsewhere for oil.

To make matters worse, Canadian oil typically trades at a discount to WTI, due to its lower quality and because it needs to be transported longer distances. A dearth of pipeline capacity induces discounts from producers, as they fight for pipeline space. Inadequate pipeline capacity keeps some oil sands supply on the sidelines, which is exactly why environmental groups have targeted the likes of Keystone XL and the Trans Mountain Expansion. 

Finally, developing oil sands requires billions of dollars and the payback period is stretched out over decades. The great thing about that for producers is that it provides consistent output for years. But that is no longer the top priority for oil companies hoping to avoid having cash tied up over long time horizons. The oil market is extremely volatile, so short-cycle shale is much more attractive these days even if shale wells fizzle out over a few years.

In short, Canadian oil sands is struggling to remain competitive in a marketplace that has changed dramatically from three years ago.

A glaring example of this problem came from ExxonMobil this week, which announced that it had removed 3.3 billion barrels of Canadian oil sands from its books. The de-booking was notable for several reasons. First, it was remarkable given the fact that Exxon has refused to write down assets or remove reserves from its books even during the worst depths of the oil price downturn. That stubbornness led to an SEC investigation into the oil major’s accounting practices, as well as an inquiry from the New York Attorney General. The regulatory scrutiny certainly influenced the latest disclosure.

But the de-booking is even more interesting because of what it says about Canada’s oil sands. Exxon removed 3.3 billion barrels from its books, admitting that the oil is simply not profitable to produce with today’s prices. It’s a pretty damming admission: the oil will ultimately be left in the ground unless oil prices substantially rebound. The project was equivalent to 15 percent of the company’s entire proved reserve base.

Exxon’s announcement came shortly after ConocoPhillips also removed oil sands reserves from its books. Conoco de-booked 1.15 billion barrels of oil sands a day before Exxon, taking the oil company’s reserves to a 15-year low.

Canada will still see some increases in oil production in the short-term stemming from oil sands projects that were planned years ago but are only now coming online. But once that queue of projects gets worked through, there are very few additional projects beyond that.

To be sure, the huge oil production capacity in Alberta will remain online for years to come. Unlike shale wells, they continue to produce for a very long time. But the extraordinary growth that the region had bet on, which would propel increases in production for the next few decades, may not come to pass unless oil prices return to pre-2014 heights.

“Keep it in the ground” has been the mantra of environmental groups worried about climate change. But it could be low oil prices and the lack of competitiveness of Canada’s oil sands that keep the reserves in the ground.

via http://ift.tt/2mDzQmA Tyler Durden

Via Disobedient Media

As the American press has shone a spotlight upon alleged Russian involvement both in the U.S. presidential election and its aftermath, Disobedient Media has identified a number of foreign public and private sector groups using DNC operations to peddle influence in American politics. An investigation into a shadowy world of shell companies and chains of influence stretching all over the globe has revealed that Democratic propaganda figure David Brock’s organization Shareblue appears to be a apparent front group being used by a number of Chinese, Middle Eastern, British, Israeli, Mexican and American special interests to spread anti-Trump and anti-democratic rhetoric both during the presidential election as well as in its aftermath.

David Brock is a one-time Republican turned Democrat operative once labeled by Time Magazine as one of the most influential players in the DNC. Brock has a long history working for the Democrat Party in media promotion and propaganda, starting with his organization Media Matters. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Brock ran the group Correct the Record, which paid an army of online trolls to “harass, censor Trump supporters and spread their own propaganda” across various forums and social media outlets online. In the aftermath of the election, Brock has returned to continue to fight an information war online, armed a $40 million budget and a renewed will to resist President Donald Trump. The group, Shareblue, continues the same tactics used by Brock’s past organizations and has been criticized by fellow Democrats as harming more than helping due to its reliance upon online harassment and censorship. An investigation into the corporate paper trail behind Shareblue reveals what is likely the true reason for concern among DNC members: Shareblue appears to be supported by a raft of foreign interests in China, Britain, Israel and various Middle Eastern entities to interfere in American politics.

I. Shareblue’s Parent Company Is Partially Owned By Group With Ties To Chinese Tycoon Ke Xiping And The Chinese Government

Shareblue’s website was registered by their Chief Operating Officer Joshua Nerpel on behalf of True Blue Media LLC. True Blue Media LLC is owned by David Brock and was used to purchase Shareblue’s political commentary platform when it was known as Blue Nation Review. Blue Nation Review had previously been used during the Democratic primary as a way for paid trolls working for Hillary Clinton’s campaign to target Bernie Sanders supporters online and was described as having an extreme left bias.

A. The Holding Company Which Owned Blue Nation Review Retains A 20% Stake In Shareblue, Board Members Include Figures in Australian Mining Industry With Deep Ties To China

Brock purchased an 80% stake in Blue Nation Review from Moko Social Media Ltd., who retained a 20% equity stake. Moko Social Media Ltd. is a holding company located in Arlington, VA. Oddly for a social media company, Moko Social Media’s Board of Directors includes “Non Executive Chairman” by the name of Malcolm Raymond Scott James, an Australian mining project manager. Mr. James serves as Non Executive Finance Director at Eureka Mining PLC, a mining group located in the City of London. Since 2002, James has also acted as an Executive Director at Tianshan Goldfields Ltd. (????). Tianshan Goldfields is registered in Australia holding various exploration projects in China. Its largest asset was the Gold Mountain Project located in the Tian Shan Gold Belt in Xinjiang, China. Gold Mountain, or ?? (J?nsh?n) in Mandarin, is a commonly used Chinese nickname historically for the western region of North America, specifically California due to the state’s historic gold rush.

As outlined by the Department of State in their 2016 Investment Climate Statement on China, foreign companies seeking to gain entry to industries designated “restricted” by the Chinese government must create a joint venture with a Chinese partner. China’s ostensible goal of this restrictive Foreign Investment Catalogue is to protect sensitive industries that the government hopes to shield from foreign exploitation. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce’s Catalogue for the Guidance of Foreign Investment Industries, last updated in 2015, lists the exploration and mining of gold as a Restricted Foreign Investment Industry. To enter a restricted industry sector, a foreign firm must undergo a permit application process prone to corrupt abuses and share a minority stake with a domestic corporation which often is chosen because of its close ties to the Chinese government.

The Xinjiang Province of China has for years been beset by ethnic violence and Islamic terrorism, with attacks reported by the South China Morning Post as recently as February 2017. The area is heavily regulated by Chinese government authorities. Foreigners are seldom inclined to seek access to the region and foreign investments are seldom realized due to the unrest as well as Xinjiang’s lack of ocean access. The mining industry in particular has been made a target in large scale terror attacks.

B. Tianshan Goldfields Engaged In An Apparent Cash Transfer Scheme With The Chinese Government Disguised As A Mining Project

Tianshan Goldfields Ltd.’s entry to the volatile marketplace was a strange choice in a country with many more secure operations to offer an investing firm ostensibly seeking to maximize profit and minimize risk. Their Chinese business partner raises questions about the incentive to grant the company access to a restricted industry sector in China given Malcolm James’ ties to the holding company that managed Blue Nation Review and continues to hold a 20% stake in Shareblue.

Tianshan Goldfield’s partner holding 10% in the Gold Mountain project was revealed in Tianshan’s mining permit approval obtained by mining website 24hGold to be a Chinese mining organization called Xinjiang Gold Mountain Mining Co., Ltd. (?????????). Xinjiang Gold Mountain Mining, in turn, is held entirely by Hengxing Gold Holding Company Ltd. (??????????), a shell company registered in the Cayman Islands in an apparent attempt to conceal Xinjiang Gold Mountain’s true owner. Hengxing Gold’s List of Directors shows that the company’s Chairman is Ke Xiping, a Chinese billionaire from Xiamen, China whose Xiamen Hengxing Group Co., Ltd. (??????????) holds a diverse range of assets in the construction material, auto parts, electronics, transportation, dairy, real estate and mining sectors.

Even stranger, Tianshan almost immediately sold off their coveted holding in the restricted sector project to Sino Hydro, a Hong Kong holding group of Chinese state owned corporation PowerChina (????). PowerChina’s holdings are commonly used by the Chinese government as a means of economic diplomacy, and were involved in an economic deal struck with Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte in October 2016. Immediately after the sale to Sino Hydro, Tianshan Goldfields was merged with Australian firm Corvette Resources flush with cash from the sale but with almost no other holdings in actual mining projects. The sale and immediate merger indicates that Tianshan’s ventures in Xinjiang were intended to disguise a large cash transfer from the Chinese government in return for influence in Shareblue.

The involvement of Mr. Ke in the Gold Mountain Project, and the steps taken to conceal his involvement in it raise questions about the true nature of Hengxing’s dealings with a group whose executive had deep ties to Shareblue. The immediate sale of the entire project to a Chinese state run enterprise and Tianshan’s merger into another Australian firm indicates that the group’s involvement with the Gold Mountain Project may have been a well disguised agreement to peddle influence in Shareblue in return for financial reimbursement.

II. Shareblue COO And Website Registrant Has Ties To Organization Used By British, Arab, Israeli Special Interests As Well As The Clinton Foundation

Following the various connections of Shareblue employees leads to a global chase wading through a number of other “charitable” Foundations and front companies being used as vessels to maintain lines of communication between global players hoping to pull strings and use Brock’s propaganda to influence the minds of American voters. Many of the individuals involved with Shareblue have troubling histories as corporate lobbyists and consultants for a large list of special interest groups, raising questions about the various sources of influence pulling strings in the Democratic propaganda machine.

A. True Blue Media CEO Peter Daou Was An Advisor To Hillary Clinton, The Clinton Foundation And Other Special Interest, DNC Figures

Peter Daou is the CEO of Shareblue’s holding company, True Blue Media LLC and played an integral role in the site’s transformation from True Blue Media to Shareblue. Mr. Daou was a former advisor to Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and former Senator Arlen Specter. His website reveals that he has also advised the Clinton Foundation, the now shuttered Clinton Global Initiative, the U.S. Department of Energy, the United Nations Foundation, Microsoft, Intel, AARP, Inc., Action Against Hunger, PR Newswire and Bloomberg Philanthropies, two news organizations which both have close ties to the City of London-based UBM plc.

Lastly, Mr. Daou has played an advisory role for OneVoice International, an “international grassroots movement that amplifies the voice of mainstream Israelis and Palestinians, empowering them to propel their elected representatives toward the two-state solution.” OneVoice’s partners include an impressive list of global special interests including the Association of British Muslims, the UK Conservative Party, Google, Crown Family Philanthropies, the European Commission (part of the European Union), High Atlas Foundation, the UK Labour Party, the Rayne Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Peter Daou’s involvement with OneVoice creates a very apparent conflict of interest given the massive number of foreign interests who are affiliated with the organization.

B. OneVoice Is An Affiliate Of The PeaceWorks Foundation, With Ties To Mexico, Israel, Saudi Arabia, The City Of London And Other Foreign States

OneVoice is a part of the PeaceWorks Foundation, founded by Mexican-American billionaire Daniel Lubetzky and run with business associates Alon Kastiel, Uri Weiss and S. Daniel Abraham. Mr. Lubetzky is the founder and CEO of KIND Snacks. Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom has stated that the PeaceWorks Foundation maintains branches in Tel Aviv, Israel, Ramallah, Saudi Arabia and London, England. PeaceWork’s website mentions that the Foundation does business with Israelis, Palestinians, Egyptians, Australians, Turks, Indonesians and Sri Lankans.

The wide range of foreign connections and interests associated with PeaceWorks indicates additional conflicts of interest given the apparent presence of intermediary figures such as Peter Daou in leadership positions at Shareblue and its holding company. The large number of foreign political parties, special interests and foundations associated with PeaceWorks and OneVoice raise serious concerns about their influence within Shareblue and how that influence might be affecting decision making processes in the group. David Brock’s various propaganda machines are by nature already problematic. With the revelations that Chinese moguls, state run enterprises and Foundations with deep ties to the financial world of London, Israel, Saudi Arabia and a number of other players have ties to Shareblue and its affiliated companies, Brock, Daou and others in the propaganda group could be in violation of the Foreign Agent Registration Act for failing to declare their roles as actors working on behalf of foreign principals. The large number of foreign interest groups connected to Brock and other officers in positions of control indicate that, far from being an organization that promotes liberal ideals, Shareblue exists as an outlet for political interests to subvert democratic institutions in America and hijack liberalism to promote the interests those who wish to take advantage of American citizens.

via http://ift.tt/2mn3T5Z William Craddick