Doxxed FBI Trump Spy Also Spied On Carter Admin Under Reagan

Authored by Shepard Ambellas via Intellihub.com,

Doxxed FBI Trump spy Stefan A. Halper also spied on the Jimmy Carter Administration while he was working as a Ronald Reagan Campaign aide, according to an archived 1983 report out of the New York Times.

The report, titled Reagan aides describe operation to gather inside data on Carterexplains:

An operation to collect inside information on Carter Administration foreign policy was run in Ronald Reagan’s campaign headquarters in the 1980 Presidential campaign, according to present and former Reagan Administration officials.

Those sources said they did not know exactly what information the operation produced or whether it was anything beyond the usual grab bag of rumors and published news reports. But they said it involved a number of retired Central Intelligence Agency officials and was highly secretive.

The sources identified Stefan A. Halper, a campaign aide involved in providing 24-hour news updates and policy ideas to the traveling Reagan party, as the person in charge. Mr. Halper, until recently deputy director of the State Department’s Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs and now chairman of the Palmer National Bank in Washington, was out of town today and could not be reached. But Ray S. Cline, his father-in-law, a former senior Central Intelligence official, rejected the account as a ”romantic fallacy.”

Here is the actual article out of the newspaper.

Screenshot via TimesMachine/New York Times (@BlacklistedNews on Twitter)

It looks like Halper and the FBI have some explaining to do.

#SecretAgentMan

H/T: BlacklistedNews on Twitter

via RSS https://ift.tt/2IwpRPf Tyler Durden

Hawaii Residents Trapped As Volcanic Eruption Intensifies, First Major Injury Reported After “Lava Bomb”

More residents of Hawaii’s Big Island have been told to evacuate as fast moving lava threatens homes and businesses after a new, explosive eruption took place at Kilauea’s summit crater Saturday as well as the emergence of fresh, faster flowing lava throughout the region. Some 22 fissures have opened up in the lower Puna district since the eruptions began over two weeks ago, claiming at least 44 structures in the affluent Leilani Estates and Lanipuna Gardens subdivisions.

Residents across the Ka’u region have been advised to prepare for “rapid changes in air quality” due to the potential for ashfall or increased levels of sulfur dioxide. 

As of Sunday morning, powerful lava flows had crossed a highway and begun flowing into the Pacific ocean – sending “hydrochloric acid and steam with fine glass particles into the air,” according to County officials. 

USGS scientists also announced on Saturday that fissures are now merging and connecting to other lava flows in the area. Fissures 16 and 20 have merged together and are producing a very voluminous line of spatter and lava fountaining. 

The combined lava flow from fissure 20 advanced 1,000 feet in less than an hour early Saturday morning, and moved toward the coast at a rate of 300 yards per hour.

The eruptions took a particularly dangerous turn on Friday, with at least five separate fissures spitting out fresher, hotter lava from Kilauea’s summit. –Hawaii News Now

With fresher, hotter magma, there’s the potential that the lava flows can move with greater ease and therefore cover more area,” said Janet Babb, USGS geologist, earlier in the day.

The rift zone is being forced apart,” added Steve Brantley of the USGS. “I think clearly it points to the potential for additional eruptive activity” in lower Puna. 

Footage of a man losing his home taken by Lava News can be seen below. The description in the video reads “After non-stop truck loads to Higher Ground the owner retreated only minutes before his house was taken. He wasn’t interested in seeing it happen with his own eyes so we recorded it for him with his permission.”

 

Meanwhile, a man’s leg was destroyed after a “lava bomb” hit him while he was on his 3rd floor balcony, marking the first serious injury from the eruption.

The lava flew through the air and landed on the man’s leg, spokeswoman Janet Snyder said. “It hit him on the shin, and shattered everything from there down on his leg,” Snyder added.

The man was reportedly transported to the hospital with serious injuries. –Hawaii News Now

On Wednesday, around 125 shallow quakes rattled Kilauea’s summit and nearby communities, causing minor damage to structures and roads. The strongest quake in the area was a magnitude 4.4, and dozens more have been upwards of magnitude 3.

It’s been like hell,” said resident Ikaika Marzo, who has been helping get much-needed information to those in lower Puna. 

He described the sounds of lava in the area as 10 or 20 jets taking off at once and right in your backyard. “It’s like huge grenades going off,” he said. “It shakes the whole community.

The ongoing volcanic activity prompted civil defense authorities to urge extreme caution for anyone still in lava-ravaged areas. –Hawaii News Now

“Everything is so uncertain. It’s really nerve-wracking,” said Debbie Kalaluhi, who can see the ongoing eruption of fissure no. 17 from her backyard. “You’re very on edge. You have to really see it to believe it.”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2KGDXKu Tyler Durden

The US Is Definitely “Meddling” In The Venezuelan Election

Authored by Roger Harris via ConsortiumNews.com,

As Venezuelans go to the polls today, the U.S. is working to disrupt the re-election of Nicolas Maduro and rollback left-wing governments in the region…

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro is the frontrunner in the presidential elections that will take place today. If past pronouncements and practice by the United States are any indication, every effort will be made to oust an avowed socialist from the the U.S. “backyard.”

This week, the leftist president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, tweeted:

“Before the elections they (U.S. and allies) will carry out violent actions supported by the media and after the elections they will try a military invasion with Armed Forces from neighboring countries.”

U.S. antipathy towards the Venezuelan government started with the election of Hugo Chávez in 1998, followed by a brief and unsuccessful U.S.-backed coup in 2002. Chávez made the magnanimous, but politically imprudent, gesture of pardoning the golpistas, who are still trying to achieve by extra-parliamentary means what they have been unable to realize democratically. After Chávez died in 2013, the Venezuelans elected Maduro to carry on what has become known as the Bolivarian Revolution.

The Phantom Menace

In 2015 then U.S. President Barack Obama declared “a national emergency” because of a supposed Venezuelan threat to the U.S. The U.S. has military bases to the west of Venezuela in Colombia and to the east in the Dutch colonial islands. The Fourth Fleet patrols Venezuela’s Caribbean coast. Yet somehow in the twisted logic of imperialism, the phantom of Venezuela posed a menacing, “extraordinary threat” to the U.S. 

Each year Obama renewed and deepened sanctions against Venezuela under the National Emergencies Act. Taking no chances that his successor might not be sufficiently hostile to Venezuela, Obama prematurely renewed the sanctions his last year in office even though the sanctions would not have expired until two months into Trump’s tenure.

The fear was that presumptive U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson might try to normalize U.S. -Venezuelan relations to negotiate an oil deal between Venezuela and his former employer Exxon. As it turns out, the Democrats need not have feared Trump going soft on regime change.

Last August, Donald Trump publicly raised the “military option” to overthrow Venezuela’s democratically-elected government. Then David Smilde of the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) counseled for regime change, not by military means, but by “deepening the current sanctions” to “save Venezuela.” The somewhat liberal, inside-the-beltway NGO argued against a direct military invasion because the Venezuelan military would resist, not because such an act is the gravest violation of international law.

Maduro: Phony threat to the U.S.

Meanwhile the sanctions have taken a punishing toll on the Venezuelan people, even causing death. Sanctions are designed, in Richard Nixon’s blood-curdling words, to “make the economy scream” so that the people will abandon their democratically elected government for one vetted by the U.S.

In January, Trump’s first State of the Union address called for regime change of leftist governments in Latin America, boasting, “My government has imposed harsh sanctions on the communist and socialist dictatorships of Cuba and Venezuela.” Hearing these stirring words, both Democrats and Republicans burst out in thunderous applause.

“Dictatorships,” as the term is wielded by the U.S. government and mainstream media, should be understood as countries that try to govern in the interests of their own peoples rather than privileging the dictates of the U.S. State Department and the prerogatives of international capital.

Attack of the Clones

In addition to summoning Venezuela’s sycophantic domestic opposition, who support sanctions against their own people, the U.S. has gone on the offensive using the regional Lima Group to destabilize Venezuela. The group was established last August in Lima, the capital of Peru, as a block to oppose Venezuela.

The eighth Summit of the Americas was held in Lima in April under the lofty slogan of “democratic governance against corruption.” Unfortunately for the imperialists, the president of the host country was unable to greet the other U.S. clones. A few days earlier he had been forced to resign because of corruption. Venezuelan President Maduro was barred from attending.

Along with Peru and the U.S. ’ ever faithful junior partner Canada, other members of the Lima Group are:

  • Mexico, a prime participant of the U.S. -sponsored War on Drugs, is plagued with drug cartel violence. The frontrunner for the July presidential election is left-of-center Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), who is widely believed to have won the last two elections only to have them stolen from him.
  • Panama’s government is a direct descendent of the one installed on a U.S. warship when the U.S. invaded Panama in 1989. Recall the triggering incident that unleashed U.S. bombs and 26,000 troops into Panama against a defense force of 3,000: a GI in civilian clothes was fatally shot running a military checkpoint and another GI and his wife were assaulted. What similarly grave affront to the global hegemon might precipitate a comparable military response for Venezuela? Panama imposed sanctions against Venezuela in a spat in April, accusing Venezuela of money laundering. Panama is a regional money laundering center for the illicit drug trade (some alleged through aTrump-owned hotel).
  • Argentina elected Mauricio Macri president in 2015. He immediately sold the country out to the vulture funds and the IMF while imposing severe austerity measures on working people. The economy has tanked, reversing the gains of the previous left-leaning presidencies of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández. Military and diplomatic deference to the U.S. has become the order of the day. Macri has negotiated installation of two U.S. military bases in Argentina, first with Obama and now with Trump.
  • Brazil deposed its left-leaning, democratically elected President Dilma Rousseff in a 2016 parliamentary coup. Her successor, the unelected Michel Temer, has imposed austerity measures and cooperated with the U.S. in joint military exercises along the Brazilian border with Venezuela. Temer suffers from single digit popularity ratings and is barred from running for public office due to a corruption conviction. Former left-leaning president “Lula” da Silva is the frontrunner in October’s presidential election but was imprisoned in April by Temer’s government.
  • Chile was the victim of the U.S. -backed coup, which overthrew the elected left-leaning government of Salvador Allende in 1973. A reign of terror followed with the extreme rightwing government of Gen. Augusto Pinochet killing thousands. An economic and diplomatic destabilization campaign coordinated by Washington set the stage for the coup. The Chilean regime-change scenario could be the model for Venezuela. The rightwing opposition in Venezuela torched a maternity hospital with mothers and babies inside and even poured gasoline on suspected Chávez supporters, burning them alive.
  • Colombia is the U.S. ’ closest ally in the region, the recipient of the most U.S. military aid, and the source of the greatest amount of illicit drugs afflicting the U.S. . The Colombian government has flaunted its recent peace accords with the FARC and continues to be a world leader with 7 million internally displaced persons and political assassinations of trade union leaders, human rights workers, and journalists. In cooperation with the U.S. , Colombia has been provocatively massing troops along its border with Venezuela.
  • Costa Rica is a neoliberal state that has been a staunch silent partner of U.S. imperialism ever since it served as a base for the Contra war against the Sandinista government of Nicaragua.
  • Guatemala is a major source of undocumented immigrants fleeing violence into the relative safety of the U.S. . Femicide is rampant as is criminal impunity, all legacies of the U.S. -backed dirty war of genocide from the 1960s through the ‘80s, which claimed some 200,000 Mayan lives.
  • Honduras’ left-leaning President Zelaya was deposed in a U.S. -backed coup in 2009. In the aftermath of rightwing repression and domestic violence, Honduras earned the title of murder capital of the world. The current rightwing president was reelected last November in an election so blatantly fraudulent that even the Organization of American States (OAS) failed to endorse the results.
  • Paraguay is the site of the first of the rightwing parliamentary coups in the region when left-leaning President Fernando Lugo was deposed in 2012.

Pinochet: Torturer and Murderer backed by U.S.

Such is the nature of the rightwing states allied against Venezuela in contemporary Latin America. Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of this right tide is the willingness of Brazil and Argentina to allow U.S. military installations in their border areas as well as conducting joint U.S. -led military exercises with contingents from Panama, Colombia and other countries.

Cuba, Bolivia, and Nicaragua are Venezuela’s few remaining regional allies, all of which have been subject to U.S. -backed regime-change schemes. Most recently, the Nicaraguan government undertook modest measures to increase workers’ and employers’ contributions but lower benefits. It led to violent demonstrations. Some sources hostile to the Ortega government labelled the protests as “made in the U.S. A.” In the face of such protests, the government rescinded the changes on April 23.

The Empire Strikes Back

In early April, the U.S. Southern Command conducted a series of military exercises, dubbed “Fused Response,” just 10 miles off the Venezuelan coast, simulating an invasion.

Later that month, Juan Cruz, Special Assistant to President Trump and Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs, was asked whether the U.S. government supports a military coup in Venezuela. Speaking for the White House and dripping with imperial arrogance, he responded affirmatively:

“If you look at the history of Venezuela, there’s never been a seminal movement in Venezuela’s history, politics, that did not involve the military. And so it would be naïve for us to think that a solution in Venezuela wouldn’t in some fashion include a very strong nod – at a minimum – strong nod from the military, a whisper in the ear, a coaxing or a nudging, or something a lot stronger than that.”

Across the Atlantic on May 3, the European Parliament demanded Venezuela suspend presidential elections. Four days later, U.S. Vice President Pence called on the OAS to expel Venezuela. Adding injury to insult, the U.S. announced yet another round of sanctions. Then the next day, U.S. ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley joined the chorus calling on President Maduro to cancel the presidential election and resign.

Haley: End Venezuelan election. (UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe)

Far more blatant and frightening is the Plan to Overthrow the Venezuelan Dictatorship – Masterstroke, dated February 23, 2018.Masterstrokewas leaked on the websiteVoltairenet.org and picked up by Stella Calloni in the reliable and respected Resumen Latinoamericano. Although Masterstroke is unverified, the contents as reported by Calloni are entirely consistent with U.S. policy and pronouncements:

The document signed by the head of the U.S. Southern Command demands making the Maduro government unsustainable by forcing him to give up, negotiate or escape. This Plan to end in very short terms the so-called ‘dictatorship’ of Venezuela calls for, ‘Increase internal instability to critical levels, intensifying the decapitalization of the country, the escape of foreign capital and the deterioration of the national currency, through the application of new inflationary measures that increase this deterioration.’”

That is, blame the Venezuelan government for the conditions imposed upon it by its enemies.

Masterstroke calls for, “Continuing to harden the condition within the (Venezuelan) Armed Forces to carry out a coup d’état, before the end of 2018, if this crisis does not cause the dictatorship to collapse or if the dictator (Maduro) does not decide to step aside.”

Failing an internal coup, Masterstroke plans an international military invasion: “Uniting Brazil, Argentina, Colombia and Panama to contribute a good number of troops, make use of their geographic proximity…”

A New Hope

With the urging of the Pope and under the auspices of the government of the Dominican Republic, the Maduro government and elements of the opposition agreed to sit down to negotiate last January in the hopes of ending the cycle of violence and the deterioration of living conditions in Venezuela.

By early February they had come to a tentative agreement to hold elections. The Maduro government initially opposed a UN election observation team as a violation of national sovereignty, but then accepted it as a concession to the opposition. The opposition in turn would work to end the unilateral sanctions by the U.S. , Canada, and the EU, which are so severely crippling the daily life of ordinary Venezuelans. Two years of adroit diplomacy by the Maduro government with the less extreme elements of the opposition were bearing fruit.

The agreement had been crafted and a meeting was called for the government and the opposition to sign on. The government came to the final meeting, but not the opposition. The opposition as good clones of Washington had gotten a call from their handlers to bail.

In a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don’t scenario, the U.S. first accused Venezuela of not scheduling presidential elections. Then elections were scheduled, but too early for the U.S. . Then the date of the elections was moved to April and then extended to May. No matter what, the U.S. would not abide by any elections in Venezuela.Ipso factoelections are considered fraudulent by U.S. if the people might vote for the wrong candidate.

Mesa de la Unidad Democrática(MUD), the coalition of Venezuelan opposition groups allied with and partially funded by the U.S., are accordingly boycotting Sunday’s election and are putting pressure on Henri Falcón to withdraw his candidacy. Falcón is Maduro’s main competition in the election. MUD has already concluded that the election is fraudulent and are doing all they can to discourage voting.

CNBC, reflecting the Washington consensus, expects the U.S. to directly target the Venezuelan oil industry immediately after the election in what they describe as “a huge sucker punch to Maduro’s socialist administration, which is depending almost entirely on crude sales to try and decelerate a deepening economic crisis.”

Ever hopeful and always militant, Maduro launched the new Petro cryptocurrency and revalued the country’s traditional currency, the Bolivar, in March. The Petro is collateralized on Venezuela’s vast mineral resources: the largest petroleum reserves in the world and large reserves of gold and other precious metals. The U.S. immediately accused Venezuela of sinisterly trying to circumvent the sanctions…which is precisely the intent of the Petro and other economic reforms, some of which are promised for after the presidential election.

The Force Awakens

Latin America has been considered the U.S. empire’s proprietary backyard since the proclamation of the Monroe Document in 1823, reaffirmed by John F. Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress in 1961, and asserted by today’s open military posturing by President Trump.

Kissinger: Issue too important for democracy.

The so-called Pink Tide of left-leaning governments spearheaded by Venezuela in the early part of this century served as a counter-hegemonic force. By any objective estimation that force has been ebbing but can awaken.

Before Chávez, all of Latin America suffered under neoliberal regimes except Cuba. If Maduro is overthrown, a major obstacle to re-establishing this hemispheric wide neoliberalism would be gone.

The future of Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution is pivotal to the future of the counter-hegemonic project, which is why it is the empire’s prime target in the Western Hemisphere. If the Venezuelan government falls, all Latin American progressive movements could suffer immensely: AMLO’s campaign in Mexico, the resistance in Honduras and Argentina, maybe the complete end of the peace accords in Colombia, a left alternative to Lenin Moreno in Ecuador, the Sandinista social programs in Nicaragua, the struggle for Lula’s presidency in Brazil, and even Morales and the indigenous movements in Bolivia. 

As U.S. National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger said in 1970: “I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2IzxfoU Tyler Durden

Italy Has A New Government As Populist Parties Agree On New Premier

Taking the biggest step toward forming Italy’s next government, the head of the anti-immigration League party Matteo Salvini said he’s reached a deal with Five Star leader Luidi Di Maio on forming a populist government, and picked a premier.

According to a report in Corriere, Florence University law professor Giuseppe Conte was chosen as prime minister, while Matteo Salvini would be proposed as interior minister, and Five Star head Luigi and Di Maio would be labor minister.

Giuseppe Conte

Additional, on Saturday Il Messaggero reported that Salvatore Rossi, the Bank of Italy’s director general, could be picked as finance minister. Ansa added that according to Di Maio, Five Star will head joint ministry of economic development and labor; Giancarlo Giorgetti, Matteo Salvini’s right-hand man, will be proposed as economy minister, while Nicola Molteni would become minister of the infrastructure and transport and Gian Marco Centinaio would head the department of Agriculture and Tourism.

ANSA added that Salvini will present the proposal to President Sergio Mattarella on Monday.

As Bloomberg adds, the endgame follows a week of turmoil in Italian bonds and stocks triggered by reports about the coalition’s spending plans and rejection of European Union budget rules. Italy’s 10-year yield spread over German bonds shot up to 165 bps on Friday, the most since October, prompting a warning from Paris. French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said in a Sunday interview with Europe 1 radio that “if the new government took the risk of not respecting its commitments on debt, the deficit and the cleanup of banks, the financial stability of the entire euro zone will be threatened.”

Salvini fired back on Twitter, suggesting the warning was “unacceptable” interference. “Italians first!” he said, clearly referencing Trump’s slogan.

While Italian risk assets were sold off last week, in a move which many were surprised hadn’t taken place much sooner, the official formation of a new government may prompt further selling when Europe opens for trading on Monday, especially now that Europe has had more time to familiarize itself with Italy’s new currency plan, the “Mini-BOT”, which we profiled extensively on Friday, and which the pro-establishment Financial Times already slammed as a “menace” which “may split the euro.”

For more on the Mini-BoT plan, please read “Meet ‘Mini-BOT’: Italy’s New Parallel Currency Plan.”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2LgEUui Tyler Durden

Mnuchin: ‘We’re Putting the Trade War on Hold’

The Trump administration’s trade war with China is over—or at least it’s not starting just yet.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, said the administration is withdrawing its plan to impose 25 percent tariffs on more than 1,300 Chinese-made goods valued at more than $150 billion while the United States and China continue trade negotiations.

“We’re putting the trade war on hold,” Mnuchin said. “Right now, we have agreed to put the tariffs on hold while we try to execute the framework.”

There were two major developments this week that may have influenced the administration’s shift. First, as Mnuchin suggested, there were two days of intense negotiations between the two countries, which concluded Saturday with the release of a joint statement including several vague promises about China’s intention to buy more American products. Second, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative held three days of hearings on the proposed tariffs, with dozens of American business owners expressing their anger and frustration with the proposal, which they said would do significant damage to the domestic economy.

The Trump administration has already gone ahead with tariffs on steel and aluminum, imposed on supposed national security grounds. The second round of tariffs specifically targeting Chinese goods were to be issued under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to use tariffs as a means of resolving trade disputes or to punish unfair trade practices. The Trump administration has sold the tariffs as a way to close America’s trade deficit with China—even though a trade deficit isn’t really a problem.

Trump’s defenders are likely to seize on Sunday’s news as proof that the president was always using the tariff threat as a negotiating tactic to bring China to the table. That may be true, but it’s too soon to tell. The concessions made this week by China—most importantly, a promise that China will increase purchases of American imports by $200 billion—sound like a victory for the administration, but leave many details unanswered. It’s also unclear whether China has actually agreed to the $200 billion figure, as The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday that Chinese officials had refused to make that commitment.

Even if China did agree to the figure, economists say it would be difficult for America to increase exports by “anything close to that figure,” The New York Times reports.

And using tariffs as a negotiating tactic with China might have soured the trade relationship between the United States and Europe. Trade wars, even ones that are narrowly avoided, are complicated and not easy to win.

Still, removing the immediate threat of tariffs is a clear victory for American consumers and businesses. If the tactic helps ease tensions between the United States and China, even better.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2KGzHL8
via IFTTT

Turkey Repatriates All Gold From The US In Attempt To Ditch The Dollar

After Venezuela, Germany, Austria and the Netherlands prudently repatriated a substantial portion (if not all) of their physical gold held at the NY Fed or other western central banks in recent years, one month ago Turkey announced that it too has decided to repatriate its gold stored in the US Federal Reserve and deliver it to the Istanbul Stock Exchange, according to reports in Turkey’s Yeni Safak. As we reported at the time, it wouldn’t be the first time Turkey has asked the NY Fed to ship the country’s gold back: in recent years, Turkey repatriated 220 tons of gold from abroad, of which 28.7 tons was brought back from the US last year.

And now, according to a report by the Swiss Schweiz am Wochenende, the repatriation is complete with the Turkish central bank withdrawing all of its gold reserves from the U.S. due to the “tense political situation.” However, in a strange twist, instead of moving the physical gold to Istanbul as the Turkish press reported in April, the Swiss newspaper notes that around 19 tons of Turkish gold is now stored at the Basel-based Bank for International Settlements.

It was not immediately clear why Turkey would shift its gold from the NY Fed to the BIS, whose historical “gold rehypothecation” tendencies have been well documented over the years.

According to the latest IMF data, Turkey’s total gold reserves are estimated at 596 tons in May, up 5 tons since April, and worth just under $23 billion, rising 40% over the past year. This makes Ankara the 11th largest gold holder, behind the Netherlands and ahead of India.

Turkey’s gold repatriation come at a sensitive time for Turkey’s currency, the lira, which has been pounded for the past month, and plunged to all time lows against both the dollar last week amid double-digit inflation in Turkey, as the central bank continues to be terrified of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and refuses to raise rates.

Meanwhile, Erdogan has taken a tough stance against the US currency, criticizing dollar loans and stating that international loans should be given in gold instead.

“I made a suggestion at a G20 meeting. I asked: Why do we make all loans in dollars? Let’s use another currency. I suggest that the loans should be made based on gold,” Erdoğan said during a speech at the opening ceremony of the Global Entrepreneurship Congress in Istanbul on April 16, Turkey’s Hurriyet reported.

In what some saw an appeal for a gold standard by the Turkish president, Erdogan added that “with the dollar the world is always under exchange rate pressure. We should save states and nations from this exchange rate pressure. Gold has never been a tool of oppression throughout history.”

In other words, Erdogan’s latest excuse for the crashing Turkish Lira was that there was not enough physical gold back home to launch a gold-backed currency. And now that Turkey just repatriated even more gold from New YOrk (even if it mysteriously ended up in Basel), Erdogan will be able to launch a gold-backed currency if he so desires. Unfortunately, as we said last month “all signs point to the gold being repatriated only so it can be raided, pillaged and promptly deposited in offshore vaults by members of the ruling oligarchy.”

Seen in this light, one wonders if Erdogan has not cut a deal with the BIS to “deliver” Turkey’s gold to Basel, providing some much needed yellow metal in a world in which the ongoing global physical gold shortage prompted banks to scrap reporting the gold forward rate (GOFO) – a benchmark of physical gold scarcity – in January 2015.

* * *

As noted above, Turkey has been one of several countries which have moved their gold from the world’s biggest, and allegedly most secure gold vault, that located 95 feet below sea level at 33 Liberty Street in Manhattan, better known as the New York Fed.

The repatriation wave began in 2012, when Venezuela announced it was withdrawing all of its 160 tons of gold at the NY Fed, valued at around $9 billion. Germany’s Bundesbank then demanded 300 tons be returned, with the Fed saying it would take seven years to do so; a scrambling Germany was able to complete the process 3 years ahead of schedule. The Netherlands has also repatriated 122.5 tons of gold.

As a result, according to the latest Fed data, the amount of physical gold stored at the NY Fed has dropped to the lowest on record, or 5,750 tonnes, following a withdrawal scramble that started in 2014 and continued until the end of 2016. After a 15 month hiatus, withdrawals resumed in 2018, with 28 tons of gold repatriated between January and March, an amount which we assume is mostly Turkey.

“The central banks started the repatriation a few years ago, meaning before we had Brexit, Catalonia, Trump, AFD or the rising tensions between the Politburo in Brussels and the nations of Eastern Europe,” Claudio Grass of Precious Metal Advisory in Switzerland said recently.

According to him, the world is becoming less centralized. “If we follow this trend, it should be obvious that the next step should be an even bigger break up into smaller units than the nation state. With such geopolitical fragmentation comes also the decentralization of power.”

Perhaps… but until that happens, the NY Fed still hold the world hostage thanks to its custodial holdings of 5,750 thousand tons of foreign-owned gold.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2IxAWvn Tyler Durden

How Seattle’s New Tax To Fight Homelessness Could Ruin Its Economy

Authored by Travis Brown, op-ed via MSN.com,

In a shortsighted effort to fight homelessness, Seattle’s city council has approved a new employee “head tax” on companies based in the city. The policy pits growth and progress against each other in a zero-sum game that will do far more harm than good.

The head tax is exactly what it sounds like: a straight levy of $0.14 per hour per employee—about $275 a year for a full-time worker—targeting every business in Seattle with revenues of $20 million or more. The proposal’s backers aim to raise around $48 million per year to fund various affordable housing initiatives in order to combat homelessness and provide low-income families with affordable options in the city.

These are laudable aims, but it’s hard to imagine a more destructive strategy for realizing them. The potential damage to Seattle’s economy from this blunt instrument runs into the billions of dollars. Some may believe that California businesses could still flee their high-tax environment for Seattle, but in reality, Seattle is competing with many other cities for this income. One example is Phoenix, which has posted the best income growth of any Metropolitan Statistic Area (MSA) since 1992. Phoenix has capitalized on its proximity to California by luring businesses and people with a low-tax environment that nets them $1,539 in income every single minute. Compared to Seattle, this is nearly $1,200 more per minute, or $70,348 more per day. The numbers are staggering, and Seattle can’t risk putting itself further behind.

Seattle’s $20 million benchmark for the new tax refers to gross receipts, not income, meaning it will hit high-volume, low-margin businesses (think grocery stores or construction wholesalers) just as hard as more lucrative counterparts, promising price increases for consumers as businesses pass along costs. Service industries with big headcounts are firmly in the crosshairs, threatening this key employment category for young and low-skilled workers. The list includes Starbucks — no surprise, there are quite a few coffee shops in Seattle — as well as big retailers like Walmart and grocery store chains, both national and regional. Other big, low-margin employers, including logging and agricultural cooperatives, are also on the hook. And the relatively low cutoff means hundreds of medium-sized enterprises are on the hook too.

Not that soaking the city’s global champions is a good idea, either—it’s a disaster, jeopardizing thousands of current and potential future jobs, as Seattle’s biggest employers and most dynamic companies look elsewhere for expansion. Exhibit A is Amazon’s decision, announced earlier this month, to halt construction of a new office tower just north of downtown, citing the proposed tax, which will cost the online retailer over $10 million per year. Although construction has resumed, Amazon blasted the “hostile approach and rhetoric toward larger businesses, which forces us to question our growth here,” it said, making it clear that Seattle’s relationship with its biggest employer is hanging by a thread. Amazon employs over 40,000 people in Seattle, or over 10% of the city’s current total workforce of 384,000, but the new tax on jobs provides no incentive to grow that number, and every reason to shrink it.

Amazon isn’t the only big employer eyeing the exits. Real estate portal Zillow, another new economy trailblazer, faces millions in additional tax burden. Alaska Airlines, Expedia, PayScale, Whitepages Inc., and Coinstar opposed the tax in vain, pleading in an open letter to the city council and mayor that taxing companies for creating jobs is like “telling a classroom that the students who do the most homework will be singled out for detention.” It may not be long until these tech companies pack their bags and move south for a city like Las Vegas, which boasts the second-largest wealth growth of any MSA since 1992, gaining $1,048 of income per minute thanks to its zero-income tax policy.

Perhaps the most frustrating part of this exercise in illogic is the city government’s failure to enact other commonsense measures to combat homelessness: zoning reforms and infrastructure improvements to facilitate construction of affordable housing; shifting funds from underperforming shelters to ones that deliver; and coordination of the city’s homeless strategy with other municipalities in King County. In a statement from Starbucks opposing the head tax, senior exec John Kelly emphasized that priority should be given to a raft of much-needed reforms, including revamping the shelter system and more outreach to homeless families, lamenting that “we’re missing the opportunity to reform and to focus on a compassionate need of hundreds of children sleeping in cars in Seattle… Our strong belief is quite simply reform first.”

Kelly and other advocates for reform are right. Seattle and other cities across America urgently need to tackle social ills like homelessness. But economic self-immolation is not the way to do it.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2KI1Z7J Tyler Durden

Trump Demands DOJ Surrender Documents On FBI Campaign “Infiltrator” To Congress

President Trump has called for the DOJ to “release or review” a cache of documents that will allow Congressional investigators to get to the bottom of revelations that the FBI sent an informant to infiltrate the Trump campaign. That informant, identified as 73-year-old University of Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, a U.S. citizen living in London who approached four campaign aides during the 2016 US election for purposes of espionage on behalf of the FBI, according to reports last week in the New York Times and Washington Post

es·pi·o·nage

noun

  1. the practice of spying or of using spies, typically by governments to obtain political and military information.

    synonyms: spying, infiltration;

Halper – a longtime FBI and CIA asset whose former father-in-law was former Deputy CIA Director Ray Cline, notably got caught spying on the Carter administration during the 1980 election, “reportedly under the direction of former CIA Director and then-Vice-Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush,” according to The Intercept.

The plot involved CIA operatives passing classified information about Carter’s foreign policy to Reagan campaign officials in order to ensure the Reagan campaign knew of any foreign policy decisions that Carter was considering. –The Intercept

In a Saturday afternoon tweet, President Trump said “If the FBI or DOJ was infiltrating a campaign for the benefit of another campaign, that is a really big deal,” adding “Only the release or review of documents that the House Intelligence Committee (also, Senate Judiciary) is asking for can give the conclusive answers. Drain the Swamp!

How did we get to Stefan Halper again?

August 22, 2017Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson told Congressional investigators that former MI6 spy Christopher Steele said the FBI had corroborated parts of the salacious and unverified “Trump-Russia’ dossier with “a human source from inside the Trump organization. 

March 25 of this year, the Daily Caller exclusively reported that Cambridge professor Stefan Halper had met with Trump aide George Papadopoulos and “two other campaign advisers,” including Carter Page. In September 2016, Halper contacted Papadopoulos and lured him to London for work on a foreign policy paper for the sum of $3,000. Halper reportedly asked “George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?” The Trump aide reportedly told Halper he didn’t know anything about them, and the topic was dropped.

George Papadopoulos, Stefan Halper, Carter Page

May 8, a fierce battle between House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) and the DOJ’s Rod Rosenstein over the cache of documents detailing the “human source” came to a head, after The Washington Post reported that Nunes had been denied access to the intelligence – which had already been seen by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The White House agreed with the DOJ that the materials were too hot to give Congress – and “could risk lives by potentially exposing the source, a U.S. citizen who has provided intelligence to the CIA and FBI.”

May 9, the DOJ reversed course, allowing Nunes and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) to receive a classified briefing on the documents (not the documents themselves, as Trump referred top in his tweet). 

May 10, journalist Kimberly Strassel, a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board, penned an op-ed in the WSJ in which she said she knew who the informant was.

May 11, journalist Paul Sperry noted an entry in Stefan Halper’s Wikipedia page that read “He has been exposed as a CIA and M-16 spy behind the FBI Russiagate investigations of the Trump Campaign and is an informant to the Mueller Special Prosecutor investigation” – which was quickly taken down.

Sperry also tweeted “In summer 2016, Brennan with his FBI liaison Strzok, along with help from Kerry @ State, were trying to set Russian espionage traps for minor players in the Trump campaign through cultivated intel assets.” 

May 15, the Daily Caller reported that Congressional investigators were reviewing Glenn Simpson’s August 2017 testimony regarding the “human source from within the Trump organization.”

May 16, the New York Times revealed that “at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos.” The Wednesday report also disclosed the existence of “Operation Crossfire Hurricane” – the FBI’s code name for their early Trump-Russia investigation, which they say originated after the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer told authorities that the Trump aide bragged in May 2016 that he knew the Russians had Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Alexander Downer, George Papadopoulos

Given Sperry’s tweet above, it strongly suggests that then-CIA Director John Brennan, FBI agent Peter Strzok and Secretary of State John Kerry were working with the informant (Halper) to set “Russian espionage traps” for members of Trump’s campaign as part of Operation Crossfire Hurricane.

Finally, on Friday, May 18, the Washington Post and New York Times published reports which don’t mention the informant’s name, but included enough detail to easily identify him as Halper even without the Daily Caller‘s article from March.

For example, The New York Times describes the informant as “an American academic who teaches in Britain,” who “made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos.” While The Post reports “For years, the professor has provided information to the FBI and the CIA.

These descriptions corroborate the March report from the Daily Caller which described Halper as a “Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA” who contacted Papadopoulos “Two months before the 2016 election.

Halper has ostensibly been a spook for decades – enlisted by the FBI in the summer of 2016 to spy on members of the Trump campaign. As such, he was probably sweating bullets on November 9, 2016 – the day Hillary was supposed to have won the election.

Meanwhile, the MSM seems to be splitting hairs over the definition of “spy” and “informant,” as they are trying to sell the FBI/DOJ spy operation as simply “helping” Trump by looking out for pesky Russian moles his campaign.

At the end of the day, according to all accounts – the US Intelligence community was categorically, by definition, spying on the Trump campaign no matter how hard the MSM tries to spin things.

And now we wait to see if the DOJ will hand over those documents.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2rYJjJl Tyler Durden

Hunger Hoaxes Hinder Food-Stamp Reform

Authored by James Bovard, op-ed via The Hill,

The Trump administration is pushing radical changes in the food stamp program as part of the farm bill. Reform efforts may be derailed by activists who vastly exaggerate hunger and portray food handouts as the epitome of social justice. But federal food handouts have already done far too much damage to Americans’ health.

Food stamps are now feeding 42 million people. Twitter activists created a #HandsOffSNAP hashtag to seek to block any efforts at reform. But, while politicians portray food stamps as a nutrition program (Congress changed the name to Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, or SNAP, in 2008), they are actually a blank check to buy more calories.

Food stamps have long been a dietary disaster. Walter Willett, chair of Harvard University’s Department of Nutrition, observed, “We’ve analyzed what (food stamp) participants are eating and it’s horrible food. It’s a diet designed to produce obesity and diabetes.” 2017 public health study found that food stamp recipients were twice as likely to be obese as eligible non-recipients. Similarly, a 2015 USDA report revealed that food stamp recipients are more likely to be obese than eligible non-recipients (40 percent vs. 32 percent).

Food stamps are a perpetual bailout for the junk food industry.2016 USDA report revealed that soft drinks are the most common commodity purchased in food stamp households. Together, “sweetened beverages, desserts, salty snacks, candy and sugar” account for 20 percent of food stamp expenditures. Food stamp recipients consume twice as many of their daily calories from sugar-sweetened beverages as do higher incomes groups (12 percent vs. 6 percent), according to a 2015 study in Preventive Medicine.

A federal program designed simply to boost calorie consumption makes no sense at a time when obesity is rampant. Forty-four percent of low-income women are obese; the rate is even higher for black (56 percent) and Hispanic (49 percent).

Food stamps are justified to prevent hunger but the federal government does not even attempt to collect data on how many Americans actually go hungry.  The National Academy of Sciences urged USDA to create a hunger gauge in 2006 but the agency has done nothing on that score. Instead, USDA conducts annual surveys measuring a vaporous notion of “food security” — which can simply mean uncertainty about being able to afford groceries in the future or not being able to afford the organic food one prefers. Though USDA stresses that the survey is not a measure of hunger, its results (and those of similar surveys) are perennially twisted to maximize teeth-gnashing.

According to the Share Our Strength No Hungry Kids’ campaign, “1 in 6 kids in the U.S. face hunger.” According to the National Coalition for the Homeless, “one in five children go to bed and awaken hungry.” A sparsely-responded food security survey released last month by Temple University sociologist Sara Goldrick-Rah implied that 36 percent of college students were suffering from hunger (the report is titled “Still Hungry and Homeless in College”). The tactic helped spur ludicrous headlines claiming her report showed “starvation” among students.

After equating food insecurity with hunger, handout advocates acknowledge that food insecurity is connected to weight gain. Throughout most of human history, hungry people were portrayed as gaunt, if not emaciated. But nowadays, a profusion of XXL shirt sizes is apparently proof that more free food is needed more than ever before. Blaming obesity on hunger or food insecurity is a way for these advocates to absolve millions of overweight people for every Big Gulp Pepsi they ever drank.  

A far more accurate gauge of Americans’ food deprivation is available from international data. The United Nations estimated last year that fewer than 2.5 percent of Americans are undernourished and that 1.4 percent suffered from severe food insecurity. This report tracks with a 2012 Journal of the American Medical Association analysis that noted that “seven times as many (low-income) children are obese as are underweight.”

The Trump administration proposes replacing much of the food stamp program with boxes of government-issued food. Though a similar program helped protect people against severe hunger prior to the creation of food stamps, switching to food distribution at this point would likely be confusing, if not counterproductive.

It would be far more effective to reform food stamps based on the Womens Infant Children program, which provides coupons only for specific relatively healthy foods. A 2014 Stanford University studyconcluded that prohibiting the use of food stamps for sugary drinks would prevent 141,000 kids from becoming fat and save a quarter million adults from Type 2 diabetes. Restricting food stamp purchases for junk food (a popular bipartisan reform with the nation’s governors and mayors) would have far greater health benefits.

The latest controversies around food stamps are a reminder that hysteria is a poor substitute for hard facts. There is no constitutional right to free junk food. America can aid the truly hungry without creating an illusory safety net that does more to spur obesity than to improve diets.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2GD4gPu Tyler Durden

Mnuchin: US-China Trade War “On Hold”, But NAFTA Still “Far Apart”

In what looks to us like confirmation that the US has officially kicked the can down the road, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Sunday that China and the US were putting a trade war “on hold” as the two sides work to hammer out a comprehensive trade agreement that will be acceptable to both sides.

Mnuchin, who was in Beijing last week for trade talks with top Chinese officials, emphasized that Trump isn’t giving up on holding China accountable – the process is just taking longer than some had hoped.

“Right now Chris we’re going to put the trade war on hold…we made very meaningful progress and we agreed on a framework. The framework includes their agreement to substantially reduce the trade deficit by increasing their purchases of goods,” Mnuchin said, adding the two sides have agreed to numerical targets but the he didn’t want to disclose them.

“We’re putting the trade war on hold, right now, we have agreed to put the tariffs on hold while we try to executive the framework,” Mnuchin said.

Mnuchin’s comments come after China and the US on Saturday released a joint statement in which China proposed to “significantly increase purchases” of US goods.

Moving on to the subject of ZTE, which President Trump said he’d work to get ZTE “back into business” at the request of Chinese President Xi Jinping, Mnuchin said that “President Xi asked President Trump” to look into the situation at the Chinese telecoms giant, which isn’t a surprise, he said. Still, Mnuchin insisted that Trump wants us to be “very tough” on ZTE.

“The president wants us to be very tough on ZTE. And all he did was ask the secretary to look into this,” Mnuchin said, referring to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.

Of course, while “no trade war with China” is the headline that the Trump administration wants investors to focus on, the real news is that there might not be a Nafta deal until next year as Mnuchin says we’re still “far apart” on Nafta.

Mnuchin added that Trump is more concerned with striking a good deal on Nafta than rushing something through this year.

“The president is more determined to have a good deal than he’s worried about any deadline…So, whether we pass it in this Congress or we pass it in the new Congress, the president is determined that we renegotiate NAFTA.

Still, that doesn’t mean Trump won’t follow through on threats to withdraw from the pact or take other action, if he decides that’s the best option, Mnuchin indicated.

“He has all his alternatives. I’m just saying right now we’re focused on negotiating a good deal and we’re not focused on specific deadlines,” Mnuchin said.

“We’re still far apart, but we’re working every day to renegotiate this agreement.”

The Trump administration blew a Thursday deadline set by House Speaker Paul Ryan for finishing the agreement. Ryan had said the Office of the US Trade Representative would need to wrap up negotiations by May 17 in order for Congress to vote on it this year because of various statutorily mandated notification and consultation periods involved in the consideration of trade deals. However, Ryan later said there might be some “wiggle room”, hinting at a two-week extension of Congress’s Nafta deadline.

That represents a significant de-escalation from when the US had threatened to slap $150 billion in tariffs on Chinese imports to punish Beijing for violating American intellectual property. China has vowed to retaliate by slapping tariffs on everything from US soybeans to airplanes. Yet a meeting between Vice Premier Liu He and President Trump in Washington, as well as the meeting between Mnuchin and other US officials with senior Chinese officials in Beijing, has significantly dampened tensions as the US has likely realized that it can’t just strong-arm China into doing what it wants.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2KDTiLO Tyler Durden