Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says there are big stories with big implications for America that are unfolding now.
One of the biggest earthquakes that is going off will be the high ranking Deep State elite surrounding convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein. Shipp says,
“Oh my goodness gracious, the Deep State is darn well scared, and some of its political top participants, I guarantee you, they want Epstein gone. There is no doubt about that. I don’t know why the Bureau of Prisons put Epstein in a jail cell with a cop that killed four people and buried them in his back yard. Epstein should have been in solitary confinement under watch. So, whoever made that decision, it was a complete error in judgment, if not intentional. That should not have happened in the first place.”
Shipp goes on to point out, “It looks pretty clear to me that the Deep State intelligence Shadow government was involved, and it gets worse…”
“Ghislaine Maxwell, who was Epstein’s alleged recruiter for young girls, was the daughter of Robert Maxwell, (Correction: Shipp said John by mistake) who was a known Mossad Agent.
He bilked pension funds to cover losses in his business… He was found dead floating next to his yacht from an alleged heart attack. So, there are some strange connections to the Deep State. U.S. Attorney (and former Labor Secretary) Alexander Acosta would not have said this if it were not true. It is true. There are intelligence connections. Is this a blackmail operation? We know Epstein has a ‘black book.’ We know Epstein probably has video of massages by young girls of high profile people, including politicians…
. There are going to be some big names that are going to be connected to Epstein and his pedophile child trafficking ring. There is no question about it.”
Another huge story unfolding is the investigation into the “hoax” and “witch hunt” of Russian collusion with President Trump that has now been totally disproven. The real story is how traitors in the U.S. government made up a crimes to frame the President, his campaign and his Administration. People high up in the Obama Administration committed massive crimes, only to fail badly in removing Trump from office. Kevin Shipp says,
…for President Trump, “This is a fight to the death. . . . Trump has to win. . . . There is no question about it. They want Donald Trump gone anyway that they can. We know the Shadow Government, including the CIA, and I studied this in detail, were responsible for the assassination of JFK using the Mafia, and that’s how far they will go. You are talking trillions of dollars, trillions of dollars they could lose if the President isn’t in their pocket. . . . They want him dead, and he is under serious risk right now. . . . He has got to push this forward. He has to win for the Constitution and for his family that might be assassinated.”
Yet another big risk, says Shipp, is the global economic system suffering a financial calamity. This includes the U.S. Shipp contends,
“Russia and China are stocking up on gold . . . as they agree to stop using the U.S. dollar and go to the yuan and ruble, which means they will stop recognizing the U.S. dollar. The dollar will lose its value because of that. We have a huge debt, and by 2025, our deficit will be $30 trillion. It is impossible to pay that off. The global deficit is $245 trillion. This thing has got to burst, and it’s going to burst…
Donald Trump has come out against the Deep State and Shadow Government in ways I could only dream of. I am a Trump supporter, but what he has got on his hands is a coming catastrophe. You cannot stop the collapse caused by the deficit…
Trump will take some significant action. This is a national security issue, and he can step in and make some changes. This is a huge catastrophe, and Americans are not aware of what is coming . . . and are not ready for a financial calamity.”
Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp.
To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here. (By the way, YouTube demonetized this video before I posted it. So, it must be good. There is lots of new information and analysis in this 80 minute interview.)
There is free information on Kevin Shipp’s website called ForTheLoveofFreedom.net. At the very top of the page is a new section called “The Shipp Brief.” Shipp gives a new “brief” every day. You can also scroll down and find Shipp’s donation page that has multiple ways you can support his work. It’s all on ForTheLoveofFreedom.net.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2MnHEJk Tyler Durden
In Rep. Jerry Nadler’s America, the presumption of guilt needs only to be backed by eventual evidence of wrongdoing.
Without going into specifics, Nadler (D-NY) told CNN‘s Jake Tapper that President Trump has “violated the law six ways from Sunday,” and former special counsel Robert Mueller’s report offers “very substantial evidence” that Trump is “guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors” worthy of impeachment.
That said, Nadler says that the House Judiciary Committee he chairs needs “more evidence” before they embark on the first step in what would be a long and messy impeachment process.
“My personal view is that [Trump] richly deserves impeachment,” House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler says.
Nadler calls the Mueller hearing an “inflection point,” saying that “we now have to get further evidence…as we consider articles of impeachment.” #CNNSOTUpic.twitter.com/g5BiQ9Lacc
So – totally guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, six ways from Sunday – it’s just that there isn’t enough evidence to do anything about it at this time.
On Friday, the House Judiciary Committee announced that they would go to federal court to obtain secret grand jury material used by Mueller’s office in its report, arguing that they need the materials to continue investigating Trump, according to CNN.
Nadler said Sunday that, despite the fact that fewer than half of House Democrats support launching an impeachment probe, Mueller’s testimony was an “inflection point” for the country and that as more evidence is uncovered the American people will come to “understand the gravity of the situation.”
But when asked by Tapper whether he agreed with California Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier, who said if Democrats don’t “take action” on impeachment by September 1, “we should just shut it down,”Nadler disagreed.
“We have to do this, whatever time frame there is and we’re doing it now. We’re engaged in an investigation into these different alleged crimes and to whether the President violated his oath of office,” Nadler said. –CNN
In other words – Nadler thinks he’ll find something that 13 ‘Angry Democrats’ on Mueller’s team overlooked or failed to include in their report, and he’ll use it to impeach Trump.
Six ways from Sunday, we’re sure.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YaOedc Tyler Durden
Submitted by Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management
“The power to predict the future is about to emerge,” declared Masayoshi Son. “The amount of data will grow by a million times over the next 30 years,” continued the SoftBank Chairman, pitching his $108bln Vision Fund II which will target companies that facilitate an acceleration of the artificial intelligence revolution.
Microsoft, Apple, Foxconn, numerous Asian financial firms, and three Japanese banks will give their cash to Masayoshi Son (forgoing $14trln in negatively yielding global bonds).
He launched his first $100bln Vision Fund in November 2016. It quickly used nearly all its working capital, buying stakes in companies like Arm, Uber, Didi, WeWork.
That first fund is leveraged, with $40bln of its capital in preferred securities that pay a 7% coupon. The remaining $60bln delivered a +29% annualized investment return (as reported by SoftBank using private valuations over which it has enormous influence).
You see, when you borrow money to buy shares in private companies then mark their valuations higher, the returns look extraordinary. But ‘extra’ ordinary returns are extremely difficult to deliver at scale, and then only in the most exceptional circumstances for brief periods.
Returns that exceed ordinary are reserved for smaller, niche opportunities. But if you deliver extraordinary in your first fund, then the speed at which you can attract money for your second fund accelerates.
This inspires others to copy your model either directly or indirectly. And in this way, purchases of private shares using leverage rises. Which of course lifts their price. And as prices increase, returns for leveraged funds appear extraordinary.
The process attracts fresh capital and is thus self-reinforcing, reflexive. Carried to its logical conclusion this leads to prices that are infinite.
Source: Softbank Investor Presentation
Except that rallies to infinity never happen – prices rise inexorably, until they fall for no reason. And not even tomorrow’s most advanced AI, processing a trillion times more data, will ever change that.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YsJElI Tyler Durden
A massive pullback in international buyers purchasing US real estate has been seen in the last several years, resulting in the softening of housing markets across South Florida,reported The Palm Beach Post.
Foreign buyers purchased a $153 billion in US homes from April 2016 to March 2017, total sales of homes to international buyers dropped to $121 billion for the year ending in March 2018, then plunged to $77.9 billion for the year ending on March 2019, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) said in its latest report.
Florida transactions involving foreign buyers fell to 36,000 in the year ending in March 2019, down from 50,000 the previous year, and 60,000 in the year ending March 2017.
“The magnitude of the decline is quite striking, implying less confidence in owning a property in the US,” NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun said in a statement.
South Florida is a top destination for foreign buyers, accounting for 20% of the 183,100 international transactions nationwide over the past year.
Capital flight from Latin America over the past decade has driven at least a quarter of Florida’s real estate market, but new trends today suggest foreigners are abandoning US markets with home prices in bubble territory.
“It takes a lot more pounds to buy an American property than it did a few years ago,” said John Mike, an agent at RE/MAX Prestige Realty in Royal Palm Beach.
Mike said a stronger dollar that stated to rise in 2014 had deterred many buyers from Britain and Europe who are now increasingly buying vacation homes in Spain and the Bahamas rather than Florida.
Mike said President Trump’s crackdown on immigration and a dangerous trade war with China had hampered demand. He added that international buyers “don’t feel welcome” in America anymore because of President Trump’s policies – so they are going elsewhere.
The exodus of foreign buyers and crashing sales explains why homes in South Florida are experiencing the most significant percentage of price cuts in some time, that has led to properties staying on the market for longer, and has tipped the overall market to buyers. All of this suggests that a top could be near.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OpkQLQ Tyler Durden
I blogged previously here and here about the Massachusetts case of Michelle Carter, who is currently in prison for encouraging her boyfriend Conrad Roy to commit suicide. The HBO documentary “I Love You, Now Die: The Commonwealth v. Michelle Carter” shines the spotlight back on her trial and appeal. The documentary did a decent job of putting the case in context, and consider this to be your spoiler alert if you haven’t watched it yet and still plan to.
The prosecution’s case was built around the theory that Carter sought to manipulate Roy into killing himself so she could achieve sympathy and popularity as the grieving girlfriend. Indeed, the prosecution painted her as a friendless weirdo at best and sociopath at worst who frequently lied to get attention.
The defense, of course, tells a different story. According to that side, Carter was a mentally unstable teenager who thought that she was helping Roy escape misery and who had at best a tenuous relationship with reality. Text messages exist in which Carter had previously sought to dissuade Roy from killing himself, and nobody argues that she was responsible for his four previous suicide attempts. Roy had a long history of social anxiety and depression, and his family inflicted domestic violence on him—including the (substantiated) time his father punched him in the face.
One of the largest misconceptions about the case is that Carter texted Roy to get back in the car that was filling with carbon monoxide. This did not occur, as can be seen in the complete transcript of their texts from that day. The question is whether this is something she said to him on the phone that day, for which the evidence is a statement that Carter made to a friend via text months later. The defense’s expert, Dr. Peter Breggin, later criticized the selective way in which the prosecution presented whether Carter told the truth in given instances. Indeed, the trial judge’s (and our) belief about whether Carter told Roy to get back in the car hinges entirely on the veracity of her later text to the friend.
On the one hand, it is common in a criminal case for a defendant only to lie when it is in their interest. On the other hand, Carter sometimes potentially appeared to live in a fantasy world, such as when speaking to Roy (over the course of their texting relationship) in almost verbatim lines from the TV show “Glee” with which she was obsessed. Her perceptions of what had taken place in real life, even for occurrences entirely unrelated to Roy’s death, also frequently seemed to differ from other people’s. Ultimately, we may never know what exactly she said to Roy in their phone call.
As I have argued previously, I believe the case was decided incorrectly whether she told him to get back in the car or not because the worst version of her actions still does not correspond to the legal definition of involuntary manslaughter. Carter’s detractors may themselves recognize the uncomfortable legal fit (and/or they may desire harsher punishments), which is why they are now promoting a bill known as “Conrad’s Law” that would explicitly make the encouragement of suicide a criminal offense punishable with up to five years in prison. The bill states in relevant part:
(b) A person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years if they know of another person’s propensity for suicidal ideation and either:
(1) (i) Exercise substantial control over the other person through control of the other person’s physical location or circumstances; deceptive or fraudulent manipulation of the other person’s fears, affections, or sympathies; or undue influence whereby the will of 1 person is substituted for the wishes of another;
(ii) intentionally coerces or encourages that person to commit or attempt to commit suicide; and
(iii) as a result of the coercion or encouragement, in whole or in part, that other person commits or attempts to commit suicide; or
(2) (i) Intentionally provides the physical means, or knowledge of such means, to the other person for the purpose of enabling that other person to commit or attempt to commit suicide and, as a result, the other person commits or attempts to commit suicide; or
(ii) participates in a physical act which causes, aids, encourages or assists the other person in committing or attempting to commit suicide.
(c) This section shall not apply to a medical treatment lawfully administered by, or in a manner prescribed by, a licensed physician.
While it is preferable to have the legislature address the issue head-on, the bill is problematic in many respects. Criminalizing speech requires both a strong public interest rationale and careful drafting. As to the former, it is not clear to me how frequently suicide can be said to have been “caused” by the speech of another even using liberal definitions of causation.
The current text of the bill also invites other great difficulties, such as when including as an element “undue influence whereby the will of 1 person is substituted for the wishes of another”. Trial courts are likely to interpret this language in vastly disparate ways and be unable to ensure fair and equal administration of justice. The bill’s text also disregards motive: someone who encouraged suicide out of hatred for an individual and someone who genuinely believed that said individual could best escape suffering via suicide would both be treated the same. And a defendant’s own mental instability would presumably not serve as a legal defense to criminal interactions with a would-be suicide victim, short of meeting the (high) standard for Massachusett’s insanity defense.
We are likely to see disconcerting cases if this law is passed. I remain of the view that a tort remedy, while imperfect, would avoid a lot of the pitfalls that any criminal measure entails.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2OoqCgN
via IFTTT
I blogged previously here and here about the Massachusetts case of Michelle Carter, who is currently in prison for encouraging her boyfriend Conrad Roy to commit suicide. The HBO documentary “I Love You, Now Die: The Commonwealth v. Michelle Carter” shines the spotlight back on her trial and appeal. The documentary did a decent job of putting the case in context, and consider this to be your spoiler alert if you haven’t watched it yet and still plan to.
The prosecution’s case was built around the theory that Carter sought to manipulate Roy into killing himself so she could achieve sympathy and popularity as the grieving girlfriend. Indeed, the prosecution painted her as a friendless weirdo at best and sociopath at worst who frequently lied to get attention.
The defense, of course, tells a different story. According to that side, Carter was a mentally unstable teenager who thought that she was helping Roy escape misery and who had at best a tenuous relationship with reality. Text messages exist in which Carter had previously sought to dissuade Roy from killing himself, and nobody argues that she was responsible for his four previous suicide attempts. Roy had a long history of social anxiety and depression, and his family inflicted domestic violence on him—including the (substantiated) time his father punched him in the face.
One of the largest misconceptions about the case is that Carter texted Roy to get back in the car that was filling with carbon monoxide. This did not occur, as can be seen in the complete transcript of their texts from that day. The question is whether this is something she said to him on the phone that day, for which the evidence is a statement that Carter made to a friend via text months later. The defense’s expert, Dr. Peter Breggin, later criticized the selective way in which the prosecution presented whether Carter told the truth in given instances. Indeed, the trial judge’s (and our) belief about whether Carter told Roy to get back in the car hinges entirely on the veracity of her later text to the friend.
On the one hand, it is common in a criminal case for a defendant only to lie when it is in their interest. On the other hand, Carter sometimes potentially appeared to live in a fantasy world, such as when speaking to Roy (over the course of their texting relationship) in almost verbatim lines from the TV show “Glee” with which she was obsessed. Her perceptions of what had taken place in real life, even for occurrences entirely unrelated to Roy’s death, also frequently seemed to differ from other people’s. Ultimately, we may never know what exactly she said to Roy in their phone call.
As I have argued previously, I believe the case was decided incorrectly whether she told him to get back in the car or not because the worst version of her actions still does not correspond to the legal definition of involuntary manslaughter. Carter’s detractors may themselves recognize the uncomfortable legal fit (and/or they may desire harsher punishments), which is why they are now promoting a bill known as “Conrad’s Law” that would explicitly make the encouragement of suicide a criminal offense punishable with up to five years in prison. The bill states in relevant part:
(b) A person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years if they know of another person’s propensity for suicidal ideation and either:
(1) (i) Exercise substantial control over the other person through control of the other person’s physical location or circumstances; deceptive or fraudulent manipulation of the other person’s fears, affections, or sympathies; or undue influence whereby the will of 1 person is substituted for the wishes of another;
(ii) intentionally coerces or encourages that person to commit or attempt to commit suicide; and
(iii) as a result of the coercion or encouragement, in whole or in part, that other person commits or attempts to commit suicide; or
(2) (i) Intentionally provides the physical means, or knowledge of such means, to the other person for the purpose of enabling that other person to commit or attempt to commit suicide and, as a result, the other person commits or attempts to commit suicide; or
(ii) participates in a physical act which causes, aids, encourages or assists the other person in committing or attempting to commit suicide.
(c) This section shall not apply to a medical treatment lawfully administered by, or in a manner prescribed by, a licensed physician.
While it is preferable to have the legislature address the issue head-on, the bill is problematic in many respects. Criminalizing speech requires both a strong public interest rationale and careful drafting. As to the former, it is not clear to me how frequently suicide can be said to have been “caused” by the speech of another even using liberal definitions of causation.
The current text of the bill also invites other great difficulties, such as when including as an element “undue influence whereby the will of 1 person is substituted for the wishes of another”. Trial courts are likely to interpret this language in vastly disparate ways and be unable to ensure fair and equal administration of justice. The bill’s text also disregards motive: someone who encouraged suicide out of hatred for an individual and someone who genuinely believed that said individual could best escape suffering via suicide would both be treated the same. And a defendant’s own mental instability would presumably not serve as a legal defense to criminal interactions with a would-be suicide victim, short of meeting the (high) standard for Massachusett’s insanity defense.
We are likely to see disconcerting cases if this law is passed. I remain of the view that a tort remedy, while imperfect, would avoid a lot of the pitfalls that any criminal measure entails.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2OoqCgN
via IFTTT
If what you already know about the FBI’s investigation into President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia has you wondering what can come next, “make sure you are sitting down because it’s about to get worse,” said Patrick Byrne, the philanthropist and CEO of the mega online retail chain Overstock.com.
Byrne revealed never published details about his intimate relationship with the Russian gun right’s activist and libertarian, Maria Butina, who is now serving out her sentence after pleading guilty in 2018 to working as a foreign agent in the U.S. without registering.
In an interview several weeks ago, Byrne recounted first meeting Butina at Freedom Fest 2015. He described the relationship that developed between the two and revealed that he had initiated contact in July, 2015 with the FBI after his first meeting with Butina. He also disclosed that he met twice with Justice Department attorneys in April, 2019 giving a total of seven hours of interviews on the separate occasions. A source directly familiar with the interviews, confirmed those meetings took place.
Butina’s lawyer, Robert Driscoll, also confirmed the relationship between Byrne and Butina. Driscoll stated that he also had relayed the information to the FBI and prosecutors earlier during his trial, and asked repeatedly about any Brady material -exculpatory information – that the bureau may have collected from Byrne on Butina, to no avail. The bureau denied it had any information regarding Byrne and Butina’s relationship, said Driscoll.
On Thursday, Driscoll sent a letter to United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut John Durham, who was appointed by Attorney General William Barr to investigate the FBI’s handling of the Russia investigation; Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is conducting an investigation into the bureau’s origins of the Trump probe and Corey Amundson, with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility.
“In writing, the government denied the existence of any such Brady material,” Driscoll stated in his letter.
“Orally, during debrief sessions with Maria, I directly told the government that I believed Patrick Byrne, Chief Executive of Overstock.com, who had a sporadic relationship with Maria over a period of years prior to her arrest, was a government informant. My speculation was flatly denied. My associate Alfred Carry made similar assertions in a separate debrief that he covered and was also rebuffed.”
“Mr. Byrne has now contacted me and has confirmed that he, indeed, had a ‘non-standard arrangement’ with the FBI for many years, and that beginning in 2015 through Maria’s arrest, he communicated and assisted government agents with their investigation of Maria. During this time, he stated he acted at the direction of the government and federal agents by, at their instruction, kindling a manipulative romantic relationship with her. He also told me that some of the details he provided the government regarding Maria in response was exculpatory – that is, he reported to the government that Maria’s behavior and interaction with him was inconsistent with her being a foreign agent and more likely an idealist and age-appropriate peace activist.”
“As an adjunct university professor and CEO of a public company, Mr. Byrne is a credible source of information, who from my view has little to gain but much to lose by disclosing a sporadic relationship with Maria. His claims are worthy of investigation. Indeed, he has much to say about the government’s handling of Maria’s case that go far beyond the Brady issue I raise in this letter. Regardless of these other issues, which I suggest you pursue directly with him, I was told the following by Mr. Byrne,” Driscoll’s letter states.
Full letter below:
Overstock.Com
Byrne’s decision to come forward didn’t come lightly. However, he said it was necessary after watching what had transpired between the FBI, the intelligence community and the probe into President Trump’s campaign over the past several years.
“It was something I knew I had to do,” he told this reporter.
“Those running the operation were not honest and in the end I realized I was being used in some sort of soft coup.”
Familiar with the possible backlash he will face, he made the decision to go public after speaking to his mentor and longtime friend billionaire Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. Buffett, whom Byrne describes as his ‘Rabbi,’ sent SaraACarter.com a statement Tuesday night confirming his meeting with Byrne at his home in Omaha, Nebraska several weeks ago.
“I’ve known Patrick and his family for more than 40 years,” Buffett said in an email to this reporter.
“His father, Jack Byrne, saved GEICO in 1976 and I met his three boys when they were teenagers. Both Mark, the middle son, and Patrick, the youngest, worked for Berkshire Hathaway. Patrick helped the company without pay in solving a difficult business problem. Patrick is very intelligent and patriotic. He comes by Omaha periodically to see me. At the most recent visit – a few weeks ago – though I know nothing about the subject he was describing, I told him to follow his conscience.”
Byrne’s Reveal
There are only several other reporters with knowledge of what you are about to read and another who is aware of the situation with Byrne. Byrne recounted his story of his involvement with the FBI and DOJ on video during the private meeting he arranged with this reporter, and several others.
The meeting between Byrne and the journalists took place in New York City. It was a little more than three hours long, for the most part completely on the record and videotaped. He told his story in seven parts.
He said his motivation is to get the truth to the American people about his role with the FBI and what transpired. There were allegations that Byrne revealed regarding other aspects of his involvement with the FBI that could not be verified.
This reporter relayed the full extent of Byrne’s allegations to the FBI last week. On Wednesday the FBI declined to comment on Byrne’s allegations.
Byrne, who is not the typical CEO, is a is familiar with big public battles. A Libertarian with a doctorate in philosophy, Byrne took on Wall Street in 2005. Byrne launched a massive campaign against hedge fund market manipulation and the possibility they were going to crash Wall Street. Some financial giants, along with members of the media, were chomping at the bit to destroy him, he recalled. It wasn’t until the market crashed in 2008 and he won his battle in court that those enemies backed off. But at the time, enemies of Byrne on Wall Street flooded the news with stories making him out to be crazy, “even a picture with a UFO coming out of my head,” said Byrne.
Byrne said he didn’t come forward sooner about his contacts with the FBI, which he describes as a ‘non standard’ relationship with the government, because he wanted to be “judicious and let the system play out,” he said, referring to the government’s ongoing investigation into the FBI’s handling of the Russia Trump probe.
“But I can’t trust that’s what’s going to happen,” he said.
”I’ve been holding my breath for more than 12 months watching everything unfold. I’ve never met Trump, never gave the guy money, as soon as he said the stuff about John McCain I stopped listening at the time. This isn’t about Trump, it’s about what’s right for the American people. The public should know the truth.”
Earlier this year Byrne approached the DOJ and met with lawyers on April 5th and 30th. The first meeting was without counsel in Washington D.C. A source directly familiar with the interviews confirmed Byrne’s account of the meetings.
DOJ officials said they could not comment on Byrne’s allegations.
Driscoll noted that the information provided by Byrne should be investigated by Durham.
“Subsequent to Maria’s arrest, incarceration, plea, and sentencing, Byrne has felt remorse for the role he played in Maria’s situation. In view of recent reports of other alleged government misconduct, he has also expressed a fear that political motives may have influenced the government’s handling of Maria’s case,” Driscoll told Durham in his letter.
Byrne’s “recollection of certain conversations with government agents would appear to validate his concern,” Driscoll said.
Byrne Reveals Details About Butina To FBI
In those interviews with Justice Department attorneys, Byrne revealed details about his intimate relationship with the Russian gun right’s activist Butina. Byrne was a keynote speaker on July, 8, 2015 at Freedom Fest, a yearly Libertarian gathering that hosts top speakers in Las Vegas. Shortly after his address, Butina approached him. She was flattering and repeatedly told him she was a fan of his, saying she was a graduate student that had studied the famous libertarian Militon Friedman.
He spoke to her shortly and “brushed her off.”
The young redheaded Russian graduate student then approached him again over the course of the conference and explained that she worked for the Vice Chairman of the Central Bank of Russia and sent by them to make contact with Byrne.
She also said “did you know you’re a famous man in Russia, we watch videos about you and your relationship with Milton Freeman.”
She said she was appointed to lead Russia’s gun right’s group by Lieutenant-General Mikhail Kalashnikov, who was a Russian general, most notably known for his AK-47 machine gun design. The designation by Kalashnikov is considered a huge honor and Byrne then had an “extensive conversation about Russian history and I understood her designation about Kalishnikov was significant.”
She wanted to invite Byrne to Russia to speak at the Central Bank before dignitaries. The speaking engagement would be at a major resort for three days. Butina told Byrne the event would offer him the opportunity to meet senior Russian officials and oligarchs. He didn’t accept the offer because of his security clearance. He then reported Butina and her offer to the FBI.
Communication In Disguise Of A Romantic Relationship
She told Byrne “we will communicate in disguise of a romantic relationship, I wish to make arrangements with you for this to happen.”
Butina had to have a reason to be texting Byrne and believed that “she was being monitored and proposed that we disguise our discussions as a romantic relationship,” Byrne said.
He admitted he was intrigued by Butina’s intelligence and believed that she if anything could’ve been a great contact and possible opportunity for peace.
“I have been involved with three peace efforts in my life, and stranger things have happened than that someone positive came from such an encounter. However, I was also keenly aware that she might be a Red Sparrow instead.”
Interestingly, then-candidate Donald Trump (who had only recently announced his candidacy for president), was also a keynote speaker at the 2015 event. During a public question and answer, Butina asked Trump several questions, as has been extensively reported by numerous outlets. Byrne had already left Las Vegas by the day Trump spoke and has never communicated with Trump.
Byrne said he had received a low level security clearance early in his career and “after something like this happens, there’s a number you call and I called that number and said there is something interesting, or note worthy going on.”
When he contacted the FBI and then subsequently for the next few months “instead what I got was vague instructions that it would be ok to get to know her better.”
He said there was very little response from the FBI after his initial contact, until Butina asked him to come meet her in New York City. He told the FBI he didn’t want any vague instructions on whether to meet Butina or not because “I didn’t want my security clearance to get pulled.”
At that point the FBI gave him an explicit “green light” to meet with her. He rented a hotel room with two bedrooms because he was under the impression that the romantic texts were simply her way to cover for communicating with him. However, she arrived at the hotel beforehand, occupied the room before Byrne’s arrival, and when he arrived, she made clear that her flirtatious texts were not simply a disguise.
Byrne said that the FBI agents made clear they were skeptical that Butina might be of interest, dismissing her as simply a normal 26 year old Russian graduate student. Over time, Byrne and Butina developed an intimate relationship but at the same time he alleges he was continuously reporting on Butina to the FBI in an effort to convince them that it might be worthwhile to introduce her to some of his contacts at the Council on Foreign Relations. He also noted he reported to the FBI his interactions more frequently with Butina starting in December, 2015, both out of a desire not to lose the possibility of something good coming from this encounter, but also, because Butina was starting to speak more frequently of meeting with big shots in Republican circles.
Butina’s lawyer, Robert Driscoll, told this reporter that Byrne’s disclosure regarding his contact with bureau agents is significant, revealing and should be investigated by the DOJ.
“Patrick Byrne is publicly saying that he was dealing with the government in regards to Maria and I would suspect that the FBI has reports or information regarding these meetings,” said Driscoll, who noted that he repeatedly asked the FBI for all documentation collected on Butina, including interviews with witnesses, notes and any other form of documentation. The FBI, however, repeatedly told Driscoll that there was no exculpatory information to give.
“It would be a Brady violation,” said Driscoll.
“I would have to see if we have to go to court or not. I will have to go the the Office of Professional Responsibility. We’ve asked for the Brady material repeatedly and from the sound of it, it looks like there should be Brady material. We need an explanation to why they didn’t turn any information over to us with regard to Byrne.”
In 2018, Butina pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to act as an agent of a foreign government without registering. U.S. prosecutors had to walk back accusations they had made during the trial that she was a Russian spy using sex as a tool to gain influence and access. Prosecutors did have evidence that she was passing information to her confidant, high-level Russian official, Alexander Torshin, who headed a Russian bank linked to the Kremlin. Butina is currently serving out her sentence in Florida’s FCI Tallahassee minimum security prison, which ends on Oct. 25. The guilty plea was not an admission that Butina was a Russian spy but a failure to register herself as a Russian citizen working on behalf of her country, Driscoll said.
Byrne’s relationship with Butina was confirmed by a source directly involved in Butina’s investigation. The source confirmed that “she had a relationship with Byrne, they did meet at Freedom Fest in 2015 and had met at various points afterwards in different places. She had nothing negative to say, he always treated her well.”
Oddly, Byrne’s name was not disclosed by prosecutors in the case or by the FBI. And despite the government’s earlier efforts to paint Butina as a Russian spy attempting to infiltrate Republican circles she was never investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, which charged 25 Russian agents with interfering in the U.S. election. Further, the FBI, unlike convicted Russian bombshell spy Anna Chapman, did nothing to stop Butina from meeting with high level Republican and conservative figures. The bureau also didn’t warn those conservative figures she had made contact with, even though they had her under surveillance and allegedly Byrne had been reporting on her during that time. As noted in a column by The Hill’s John Solomon Chapman’s actions were handled differently than Butina. When one of Chapman’s associates, who went by the name of Cynthia Murphy, made contact with Alan Patricof, a major Democratic donor close to Hillary Clinton, the FBI acted swiftly to arrest the entire cell.
Driscoll said there was suspicion that the FBI did not disclose all the information it had on Butina and he stated that he believed “Patrick is not the only one” who was giving information to the FBI.
“We’ve thought of several possibilities and some we are more confidant than others. I’m firmly convinced,” said Driscoll, who shared numerous letters and emails with this reporter that he exchanged with the FBI.
Byrne, the FBI and Butina
Although, Byrne was then concerned about Butina’s possible motives, he eventually became convinced that she was an intellectual being used by both the Russians and American intelligence apparatus. She was stuck between two highly contentious and secretive governments, he claimed. He relayed those concerns to the FBI, he said.
“From January through March, in 2016 and I was telling (the FBI) I was 50/50, that this was a real opportunity and 50 that it was Red Sparrow,” said Byrne, referencing the American film about Russian spy’s who are trained to use sex as a tool to retrieve information from sources. He said he believed more in the possibility that Butina could be someone with the right connections to be an opportunity for U.S. officials to better understand Russia.
“I actually think that back then I was two-thirds, one-third. It was two-thirds opportunity and maybe one-third, threat. As those months went on, those odds shifted, he said. “She had insisted to me that she was not a spy,” said Byrne. “Yet the more she swanked around in political circles, the more concerned I became that she would get herself in trouble.”
“I was surprised that there was no appetite in letting me connect her to people I know at CFR who are qualified to take such a meeting, but in fact the ‘men in black’ were telling me that was absolutely ridiculous,” said Byrne, who noted that their refusal to even consider pursuing the prospect was something he found “odd.”
“Eventually, her conversations became less about philosophy and it became clear that she was doing things that made me quite uncomfortable,” stated Byrne. “She was basically schmoozing around with the political class and eventually she said to me at one point I want to meet anyone in the Hillary campaign, the Cruz, the Rubio campaigns.”
Butina had also told Byrne, that Torshin, the Russian politician who she had been assisting while she was in the U.S., had sent her to the United States to meet other libertarians and build relations with political figures. She repeated to him numerous times that she was not a spy, even when he directly asked her.
Byrne said he warned Butina: “Maria the United States is not like Russia” and knowing powerful people ‘like oligarchs and politicians’ won’t help if the FBI believes a line has been crossed. Byrne believed Butina was naive but not blameless. He said during the interview if “you’re reporting to any Russian official and you’re doing this stuff and not disclosing yourself, there are these men in black here and they don’t really give a shit who you know here -that’s not going to save you.”
Driscoll noted in his letter to Durham and Horowitz the extent of Byrne’s relationship with the FBI.
“At some point prior to the 2016 election, when Byrne’s contact with Maria diminished or ceased, the government asked and encouraged him to renew contact with her and he did so, continuing to inform the government of her activities. Byrne states he was informed by government agents that his pursuit and involvement with Maria (and concomitant surveillance of her) was requested and directed from the highest levels of the FBI and intelligence community.”
“As time passed, Byrne became more and more convinced that Maria was what she said she was—an inquisitive student in favor of better U.S.-Russian relations—and not an agent of the Russian government or someone involved in espionage or illegal activities. He states he conveyed these thoughts and the corroborating facts and observations about Maria to the government.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZfPS9H Tyler Durden
After stubbornly refusing to admit the increasingly more violent protests in Hong Kong for nearly two months, on Monday China’s top Hong Kong policy office will respond for the first time to escalating civil unrest that has beset the city’s government since June. The Sunday announcement came as anti-government protesters clashed with riot police outside the central government’s liaison office in Hong Kong for a second consecutive weekend.
The latest scuffles followed a new twist last Sunday when young protesters targeted the Chinese government’s representative office in Hong Kong. A front-page article published in the People’s Daily, the mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, the following day condemned the attack as “a blatant challenge to the central government’s authority.” Meanwhile, footage of men in white shirts attacking demonstrators with batons at a railway station in Hong Kong has gone viral, leaving the city in shock.
Fast forward to this weekend when The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO) under the State Council, China’s cabinet, will hold a press conference in Beijing to give “its stance and views on Hong Kong’s current situation”, the SCMP reported, citing a central government notice.
Riot police fire tear gas at protesters as they head towards the central government’s liaison office in Sai Ying Pun on Sunday.
It will mark the first time the HKMAO has held a press briefing on the city since Britain handed it over to China in 1997. It also suggests the Chinese leadership may have reached a decision on Hong Kong since a wave of mass protests and violent clashes over a now-shelved extradition bill began nearly two months ago. The proposed legislation, which has for now been mothballed, would have allowed the transfer of criminal suspects to jurisdictions including mainland China, where critics say there is no guarantee of a fair trial.
Meanwhile, as the Nikkei reported, with no end in sight to the unrest, Han Zheng, the seventh-ranking Politburo Standing Committee member, journeyed south to Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, adjacent to Hong Kong, to take command while communicating with Hong Kong’s top leaders. It was an unusual mission, and Han has made it “at least twice” since June, an informed source said. This suggests how grave the Hong Kong situation is. Some are calling it “the July crisis.”
Han Zheng has been sent to Shenzhen to coordinate responses to the Hong Kong protests.
While Chinese citizens appeared to mostly ignore the escalating events in neighboring Hong Kong for much of the duration of protests, public sentiment on the mainland towards Hong Kong has become noticeably more negative after Beijing strongly condemned protesters who defaced the national emblem and spray-painted anti-Chinese slogans on the liaison office building in Sai Ying Pun a week ago. The liaison office also stepped up security afterwards and installed a protective plastic screen in front of the emblem.
The national emblem on the liaison office building is seen protected by plexiglass on Sunday. Photo: AFP
On Sunday, a clash outside the liaison office – the symbol of Beijing’s official presence in the city – was more muted than the scenes of last weekend when even members of the Triads were observed, with riot police putting up a line of defense about 200 meters from the building and stopping protesters from marching towards it. As night fell, officers again unfurled black banners warning that they would use force, firing tear gas at protesters just before 7pm in an attempt to disperse them. The protesters held their line behind a wall of umbrellas and threw projectiles at the officers.
As the SCMP reports, gradually the riot police gained ground and pushed protesters further away from the liaison office, but the crowd did not disperse until well into the night. For hours, the two sides clashed along Connaught Road and Des Voeux Road – the two main thoroughfares in the central and western area of Hong Kong Island.
The protesters threw bricks, paint bombs and bottles at police, who responded with tear gas and beanbag rounds. Some protesters set fire to a trolley loaded with cardboard and shoved it towards officers. Others were seen carrying weapons like bows and arrows. Police subdued and arrested at least a dozen protesters. By 10pm, four people were reported to have been injured.
The demonstrators had defied a police ban to march to the liaison office, one of several protests that sprang from a rally at Chater Garden in Central earlier in the day. At one point, spontaneous protests broke out along main roads on Hong Kong Island, stretching more than 6km and running through the city’s financial district Central and shopping area Causeway Bay.
The clashes followed another violent, illegal protest in the northern town of Yuen Long on Saturday, with Police arresting 13 people on Sunday morning for their parts in the Yuen Long protest, including organiser Max Chung Kin-ping. “He insisted on going to Yuen Long … which ended in a series of violent acts. Police will never condone this behaviour,” a police spokeswoman said, adding that officers had confiscated weapons including imitation firearms and metal rods.
The chaotic protests brought traffic in one of the world’s busiest districts to a standstill. Dozens of bus services had to be diverted and many shops closed. But during another day of chaos in Hong Kong, the city’s top officials – including Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor – spent Sunday at a youth summer camp at the People’s Liberation Army barracks in rural district Fanling.
Protesters defied a police ban on marching after a rally at Chater Garden in Central. Photo: Felix Wong
In the city center, protesters vowed they would not stop unless their demands were met. Third-year university student Aaron Yam, 20, said a key demand was to launch an “independent and fair inquiry” into police handling of the demonstrations. “The only way out for Hong Kong is to have a fair inquiry into the policing of recent protests,” he said.
Meanwhile, a group of civil servants from various government departments issued a statement saying they would organise a rally to support the protesters on Friday, estimating about 500 people would take part. It will be the first time a group of civil servants has joined the anti-government protests.
And so with all eyes now on Beijing, several mainland observers told the SCMP that the central government was unlikely to announce any measure that could resolve the crisis during its briefing.
“It’s likely the officials will reprimand advocates of Hong Kong independence … as well as express support for the Hong Kong government and its police force,” said Zhang Dinghuai, a Hong Kong policy researcher with Shenzhen University. But analysts expected major policy adjustments were likely to be taking place behind the scenes.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2yg37eS Tyler Durden
For three years, the pair scrimped and saved in order to fix up the four-unit property. On the weekends, Ramouldo would spend his days off making the 11-hour drive from New Jersey to Michigan to work on the house, making the much-needed repairs himself. In addition to the small complex, the family had purchased a small home next door. The plan was to renovate and rent out each unit and then use that money to help Ramouldo retire and move his family to the small home in Michigan, where the rest of their extended family resides.
Erica, who had seen her father work long hours and sacrifice to provide for her family over the years, was happy to help her father buy the property. She was eager to begin building her own financial legacy and saw the property as an excellent investment opportunity.
These plans were derailed, however, when their property was seized by Wayne County, Michigan, in 2017 and sold to a private buyer.
All because they unknowingly underpaid their tax bill – by $144.
Disproportionate Punishment
While the father and daughter had been paying their property taxes diligently for each year they owned the property, in 2014, they unintentionally underpaid by $144. Neither knew about this miscalculation or the situation could have quickly been remedied. And without knowledge of this outstanding debt, the small amount grew as the county tacked on interest charges to the tune of $359.
To be sure, when interest was accounted for, the Perez family did owe roughly $500 in unpaid taxes to the county. County officials used this as justification to seize, sell, and then keep the $108,000 revenue earned from the sale of said property.
In the American legal system, there is a maxim: the punishment must fit the crime. But when considering the small amount by which the Perez family underpaid their property taxes, this seems like a disproportionate punishment to receive.
The government is allowed to seize property in order to settle a debt owed by an individual. However, it isn’t allowed to take more than it is owed. And in the instance of the Perez family property, Wayne County kept every penny it earned from the sale of their property—a practice known as home equity theft.
Fortunately, Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) has stepped in and on July 9th, announced that it had filed suit on behalf of the Perez family against Wayne County and County Treasurer Eric Sabree.
Home Equity Theft
Many of us have accidentally underpaid a bill before. Whether we were distracted, busy, or simply not paying enough attention to the total amount due, accidents happen to everyone. Eager to get the full amount owed, most companies will send strongly worded letters or call incessantly until you cough up the remaining amount due. It’s completely understandable as to why an entity would do this: they want what is owed.
However, if they tried to take your car away over the miscalculation of a few dollars, most people would be angry—and justifiably so.
When it comes to property taxes, if an individual underpays by even just a few dollars, there are 12 different state governments that can and will seize your property and sell it, without having to pay you a dime of the earnings. This is known as home equity theft. Unfortunately, the Perez family is not the only victim of this practice in Michigan.
In 2014, Uri Refaeli lost his home after it was foreclosed on and seized by Oakland County, Michigan. In 2011, Rafaeli purchased a small $60,000 property for his business, Rafaeli, LLC.
While he had paid his 2012 and 2013 property taxes in full, he discovered that he had accidentally underpaid in 2011. When he made this realization and tried to correct his mistake in 2013, he forgot to account for the interest that had accrued on his back taxes. As a result, he underpaid by a measly $8.41. The county seized and sold his property for $24,500. Rafaeli never saw a dime of this money.
When it comes to outstanding debt, just like private companies, governments are eager to get what is owed and there nothing wrong with them attempting to do so. However, when they begin to go after more than they are owed, the situation becomes troublesome.
To make matters worse for Michigan, the state also has a shady reputation for using this practice to its own benefit. According to Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), local governments pad their budgets with the money earned from this stolen property. Each year in Detroit’s budget, there is a line with the estimated total revenue that the government is expecting to bring in from foreclosures of this very nature.
Earlier this year, it was discovered that Wayne County Treasurer Eric Sabree had violated Treasurer’s office rules by funneling foreclosed properties to family members and well-established and connected businessman for a fraction of the cost.
While state Treasurer’s office rules prohibit family members from participating in these auctions, several Freedom of Information Act requests filed on behalf of a Detroit News investigation found that transfers involving Sabree’s family overlap with his time in office. Since 2011, when Sabree began as deputy treasurer, Wayne County has transferred ownership of more than 1/4 of privately owned properties in Detroit as a result of back taxes—making the whole situation in Michigan even more suspicious.
Home Equity Theft in Montana
Michigan is not the only state guilty of using the practice of home equity theft. In Montana, local governments have been known to sell private homes of those with back taxes to “preferred” private investors, a practice that helped get the practice of home equity theft banned statewide just a few months ago.
Eighty-year-old electrician Gary Guidotti once owned four homes in Great Falls, Montana, which he rented out to help support himself and pay his bills. When the Great Recession hit in 2007, some of his tenants were no longer able to afford rent and stopped paying altogether. And without their rent helping to support him, Guidotti stopped paying his property taxes.
In 2008, Cascade County, Montana issued a tax lien of $1,125.45 on one of his homes. Just 17 months after issuing the lien, the county ended up selling it to a well-connected private entity for pennies on the dollar at $667.20. The private company, Sunrise Financial, acquired the deed to the property in 2011 and in 2015, sold the property for $139,300. Guidotti, of course, received no compensation from the sale of his home.
“This can’t be fair,” Guidotti said. “It (the law) has to be changed, but what’s the sense in fighting? The lawyers will have it all anyway. It’s just the way it goes.”
Without his properties, Guidotti was forced to move into a motorhome parked behind one of the homes that he used to own.
Challenging Home Equity Theft in Court
Our country was founded on the fervent belief that individuals have the right to their life, liberty, and, as is especially applicable here, their property. Greatly influenced by philosopher John Locke and his Second Treatise on Government, our country’s Founders understood how important property rights were to securing individual liberty and protecting Americans against government overreach.
In chapter five of Locke’s famous essay, “On Property,” he writes:
Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to (emphasis added), at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.
When a person works, like Ramouldo Perez did, and uses the fruits of his or her labor to purchase property, that property is theirs and theirs alone. This respect for the sanctity of property rights has been one of the most defining characteristics of the American idea.
Yet, practices like home equity theft and civil asset forfeiture, which allow law enforcement to strip individuals of their property without due process, have belittled this sacred principle and harmed many innocent people in the process. The confiscation of a person’s property, especially over a few dollars of unpaid taxes, is thoroughly unAmerican. Private property should be protected by the government, not seized and sold off before an individual has an opportunity to remedy the situation.
The unconstitutional practice of home equity theft has allowed individuals to be stripped of their property without fair compensation. But there is hope that this practice could soon be reined in or perhaps even stopped altogether.
In May, after diligent efforts made by PLF, Montana passed Senate Bill 253, giving property owners further protections against home equity theft.
The new law protects homeowners’ equity by requiring homes be sold to the highest bidder. Now the extra profits must be returned to the former owner after deducting taxes, interest, penalties, and costs,
The left, the mainstream media, and every virtue-signaling celebrity has quickly jumped on the bandwagon to support Rep. Elijah Cummings following President Trump’s “racist” tweets yesterday about the desperately terrible state of the congressman’s district.
However, despite tears and furore, none on the left is actually denying Trump’s facts – merely distracting with rage that #OrangeManBad. But Trump would not let it go, doubling down this morning:
Someone please explain to Nancy Pelosi, who was recently called racist by those in her own party, that there is nothing wrong with bringing out the very obvious fact that Congressman Elijah Cummings has done a very poor job for his district and the City of Baltimore. Just take…
….a look, the facts speak far louder than words! The Democrats always play the Race Card, when in fact they have done so little for our Nation’s great African American people. Now, lowest unemployment in U.S. history, and only getting better. Elijah Cummings has failed badly!
As expected, White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney argued on “Fox News Sunday” that President Trump’s use of “infested” to attack Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) has “nothing to do with race.”
MULVANEY: “Does anyone watching this program dispute the fact or the possibility that if Adam Schiff said the same thing about the border, that the president would be attacking Adam Schiff the exact same way today?”
WALLACE: “I don’t think he would be talking about his crime-investor, rodent-infested district.”
MULVANEY: “He very well could. It has zero to do with the fact that Adam’s Jewish and everything to do with the fact that Adam would just be wrong for saying that. This is what the president does. He fights — “
WALLACE: “You’re completely comfortable with him saying that this is a rodent-infested district and no human being would want to live there? You’re comfortable with that personally?”
MULVANEY: “Have you seen some of the pictures on the Internet? Just this morning from the conditions in Baltimore?”
WALLACE: “You can do that in any inner city in America. And you could argue why doesn’t the president or something to stop it?”
MULVANEY: “The richest estate in the nation has abject poverty like that. A state, by the way, dominated for generations by Democrats. I think it’s fair to have that conversation.
He claims to care about children & their future, however in West Baltimore you will find abandoned homes on every block. Many filled with trash, rodents & homeless looking for shelter. Children live on these streets seen here. This district belongs to @RepCummings. More to come.. pic.twitter.com/8z7tfIHU0q
Baltimore has more than 30,000 abandoned homes according to the Housing Authority of Baltimore City. These vacancies are primarily located in neighborhoods with low incomes and high proportions of households of color.
Baltimore’s vacant buildings stand as a reminder, the city is rapidly shrinking. As illustrated in the map below, the areas with the highest concentration of homicides correspond precisely with the city’s vacancies.
Baltimore is on the verge of implosion. The city is an opioid hell-hole that has the most extensive wealth inequality in the country. Its millennial base is fleeing the city, headed to the suburbs to escape the out of control murders.
Baltimore struggles to curb violent crime as the city’s total homicides are expected to breach 300 in the coming days.
“We’ve got to teach folks that life is valuable. These folks don’t get up off the ground and get to live another day or to have another conversation with their daughter their father their mother their sister their cousin – they don’t get to do that,” Pugh said.
Baltimore had the most significant number of robberies per capita – 95.87 for every 10,000 people.
ADT’s analytic analysts “looked at the FBI’s annual crime data [for 2017] for robbery rates to discover which city in each state experienced the most robberies.”
While robberies worsened in Baltimore, they declined nationwide, dropping by 28% between 2008 and 2017.
According to The Baltimore Sun, the city has sustained a vicious upcycle in violent crime since 2015, when the per annum number of homicides soared well above 300 for three consecutive years after civil unrest that followed Freddie Gray’s death from injuries suffered in police custody.
And finally, if everything’s so awesome, why are ‘human beings’ leaving Baltimore in droves?
New data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual population that has confirmed our thoughts: Baltimore is descending into chaos as a mass exodus of its residents is currently underway.
Government data showed the city lost 7,346 people, or 1.2% of its population, during the 12 months that ended July 1, 2018, reported The Baltimore Sun.
The exodus, which puts Baltimore’s population at 602,495 as of July 1, 2018, is one of the biggest losses the city has seen since 2001.
The overall trend for Baltimore is down. In the mid-1950s, Baltimore was America’s sixth most populous city, with more than 900,000 residents.
The city was one of the beating industrial hearts of America for decades, but since de-industrialization started in the 1970s to the present date, the city teeters on the edge of collapse.
* * *
So, you decide, is President Trump right about Elijah Cummings’ district? Or is its just “racist” to write about the facts in the Democratic stronghold?
Of, course, Cummings is not alone..
Speaking of failing badly, has anyone seen what is happening to Nancy Pelosi’s district in San Francisco. It is not even recognizeable lately. Something must be done before it is too late. The Dems should stop wasting time on the Witch Hunt Hoax and start focusing on our Country!
