Category: BlackMail

Washington Examiner

EXography: State government dependence on federal funding growing at alarming rate

By David Freddoso | APRIL 15, 2014 AT 5:18 AM

Source: Annual Survey of State Government Finances, U.S. Census Bureau

Only 11 states depended on the federal government for more than one-third of their total revenues in 2001. By 2012, 24 states found themselves in this situation.

State-by-state data from the U.S. Census Bureau, compiled by the State Budget Solutions nonprofit, illustrates the trend of increasing state dependence on federal financial assistance.

Forty-one of the 50 states have become more dependent on the federal government since 2001 — with federal dollars accounting for an increasing share of their total revenues.

This trend of increased state dependency on Washington reduces state and local control, while threatening the states’ long-run autonomy.

The reason is that with federal patronage comes federal leverage. The original Obamacare plan, for example, was to force states to expand Medicaid by threatening them with loss of all federal matching Medicaid funds if they refused.

Although that particular scheme was struck down by the Supreme Court, state governments hate to turn down revenue, and federal dollars have strings attached that force states either to operate as Washington prefers or lose the money.

This problem is exacerbated by the federal government’s control of the currency and ability to borrow virtually unlimited amounts of money.


Read More Here

Enhanced by Zemanta

corbettreport corbettreport


Published on Nov 30, 2013

Peter B. Collins, Sibel Edmonds and James Corbett of present the latest BFP series, the BFP Roundtable. In this pilot edition of the series the panel discusses the latest “reporting” on Guantanamo by 60 Minutes, the truth about the Iranian nuclear deal, and the importance of open source journalism. Stay tuned to for future editions of this series.

Sources cited:
How Many Secret Files Did Snowden Get?
Processing Distortion: “Lara Logan Isn’t the Only Problem at 60 Minutes”
Talking Turkey & The Possible Machiavellian Angle in the Latest Developments on Iran
Open Source Journalism

Enhanced by Zemanta

Document leaked by Edward Snowden shows agency sought out ‘vulnerabilities’ such as looking at explicit material online




The NSA is said to have targeted ‘radicalisers’ by collecting details that could undermine them, including online viewing habits. Photograph: Patrick Semansky/AP


The NSA has been collecting details about the online sexual activity of prominent Islamist radicals in order to undermine them, according to a new Snowden document published by the Huffington Post.

The American surveillance agency targeted six unnamed “radicalisers”, none of whom is alleged to have been involved in terror plots.

One document argues that if the vulnerabilities they are accused of were to be exposed, this could lead to their devotion to the jihadist cause being brought into question, with a corresponding loss of authority.

As an example of vulnerabilities, it lists: “Viewing sexually explicit material online or using sexually persuasive language when communicating with inexperienced young girls.”

The names of the six targeted individuals have been redacted. One is listed as having been imprisoned for inciting hatred against non-Muslims. Under vulnerabilities, the unnamed individual is listed as being involved in “online promiscuity” as well as possibly misdirecting donations.

Shawn Turner, press spokesman for the US director of national intelligence, in an email to the Huffington Post, said it was not surprising the US government “uses all of the lawful tools at our disposal to impede the efforts of valid terrorist targets who seek to harm the nation and radicalise others to violence”.


Read More Here




NSA ‘planned to discredit radicals over web-porn use’


NSA operation at Fort Meade, Maryland
The document highlights ways to embarrass six Muslim targets



The US authorities have studied online sexual activity and suggested exposing porn site visits as a way to discredit people who spread radical views, the Huffington Post news site has reported.


It published a document, leaked by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, identifying two Muslims said to be vulnerable to accusations of “online promiscuity”.


An official said this was unsurprising.


But campaign group Privacy International called it “frightening”.


“Without discussing specific individuals, it should not be surprising that the US government uses all of the lawful tools at our disposal to impede the efforts of valid terrorist targets who seek to harm the nation and radicalise others to violence,” Shawn Turner, director of public affairs for National Intelligence, told the Huffington Post.


Privacy International said: “This is not the first time we’ve seen states use intimate and private information of an individual who holds views the government doesn’t agree with, and exploit this information to undermine an individual’s message.”


The report came shortly after a group of United Nations experts adopted a “right to privacy” resolution.


It will be passed by the UN’s General Assembly before the end of the year, but is largely symbolic since it is not legally binding.


The UN’s Human Rights Committee said it was “deeply concerned at the negative impact” the interception of data “including extraterritorial surveillance” could have “in particular when carried out on a mass scale”.

‘Young girls’

The latest of Mr Snowden’s leaked documents is dated October 2012 and says it was distributed by the office of the director of the NSA to other US government officials.


It names six Muslims whom it describes as “prominent, globally resonating foreign radicalisers” about whom surveillance efforts had revealed potential “vulnerabilities that can be exploited”.


Read More Here

Related Stories



Enhanced by Zemanta

Putin’s Gambit: How the EU Lost Ukraine


Photo Gallery: Russia's Ukraine Power Play Photos

The inability of European bureaucrats to keep up with the Kremlin’s manipulations — or Kiev’s political calculations — has cost the EU a trade deal with Ukraine, and severely damaged its foreign policy.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decisive move came on Nov. 9. That day, after years of courtship, and several months of promises and threats, he met with Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich at a military airport near Moscow. The meeting was so clandestine the Russians initially denied that it had taken place at all.


Before that point, the plan had been for Yanukovich to sign a 900-page association agreement, a sort of engagement contract, with the European Union in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius on Nov. 29. But in early November near Moscow, Putin seems to have sealed an alliance with Ukraine, preempting his rivals in Brussels. And last Thursday Yanukovich postponed the signing of the EU agreement indefinitely.

After giving temporary asylum to whistleblower Edward Snowden and brokering a deal to have Syria give up its chemical weapons, it was Putin’s third recent victory over the West, albeit probably not a permanent one. After all, Yanukovich’s agreement with Putin is a marriage of convenience, not a marriage of love.

Europe’s ‘Eastern Partnership’ Dream

This tug-of-war began four years ago, when the EU proposed an “eastern partnership” with Ukraine as well as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Belarus. The EU offered cooperation, free trade and financial contributions in exchange for democratic reforms. Officials in Brussels spoke enthusiastically about the emergence of an historic Eastern European policy not unlike former German Chancellor Willy Brandt’s rapprochement with the Warsaw Pact countries in the 1970s. The planned partnership agreements were intended to facilitate visa-free travel, reduce tariffs and introduce European norms. The only thing that not offered was EU membership.

The EU’s other goal, even though it was not as openly expressed, was to limit Russia’s influence and define how far Europe extends into the east. For Russia, the struggle to win over Ukraine is not only about maintaining its geopolitical influence, but about having control over a region that was the nucleus of the Russian empire a millennium ago. The word Ukraine translates as “border country,” and many feel the capital Kiev is the mother of all Russian cities.

This helped create Cold War-style grappling between Moscow and Brussels. The Russian president, hardened by his fights in the Kremlin, is more adept than EU bureaucrats at manipulating people with venality and affections. None of the top European politicians made a serious effort to win over Ukraine, with neither German Chancellor Angela Merkel nor European Commission President José Manuel Barroso flying to Kiev to convince its wavering president.

‘Unprecendented Pressure’ from Russia

“I believe the unprecedented pressure from the Russians was the decisive factor,” says former Polish Prime Minister and intermediary Aleksander Kwaniewski. “The Russians used everything in their arsenal.” Elmar Brok, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the European Parliament, says: “Yanukovich kept all options open until the end, so as to get the best possible deal.”

The official reason for the agreement’s failure is Yulia Tymoshenko, the opposition politician who has been in prison for the last two years. The EU had made her release a condition of the agreement. Yanukovich was unwilling to release his former rival, and last week the parliament in Kiev failed to approve a bill that would have secured her release.

But then there are the financial incentives. In the end, the Russian president seems to have promised his Ukrainian counterpart several billion euros in the form of subsidies, debt forgiveness and duty-free imports. The EU, for its part, had offered Ukraine loans worth €610 million ($827 million), which it had increased at the last moment, along with the vague prospect of a €1 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Yanukovich chose Putin’s billions instead.

The EU had been banking on its radiant appeal, and on its great promise of prosperity, freedom and democracy, but now Brussels must confront the fact that, for the first time, an attempt at rapprochement was rebuffed because the price was wrong. “If Yanukovich doesn’t want to make a deal, then he simply doesn’t want to,” says Brok.

Battle of the Unions

The EU’s eastern partnership had gotten off to a rocky start even before the Ukrainian incident. Belarus dashed the EU’s hopes it would join when protesters were violently suppressed after the reelection of President Alexander Lukashenko in 2010. Armenia called off an association agreement with the EU this September.

In the case of Ukraine, it initially seemed as if the Europeans’ rational arguments would prevail over Russia’s threatening gestures. According to an internal EU analysis, joining the “Eurasian Union” — a Russia-backed proposed political and economic union including Russia, Tajikistan, Kayahkstan, Belarus and others — would severely limit Ukraine’s sovereignty. Once such a union had been formed, Kiev would no longer be able to enter into any other free trade agreements without Moscow’s approval. An alliance with Moscow would thus have the exclusive nature of a marriage. The EU’s eastern partnership, in contrast, would still allow Ukraine to enter into other alliances.

Read More Here


Aborted EU Deal: Massive Protests Rock Ukraine After Pull-Back

Photo Gallery: Kiev's Day of Protest Photos

In the wake of Ukraine’s withdrawal from EU trade deal discussions, Kiev was rocked by the biggest protests since the Orange Revolution while the daughter of imprisoned former Ukrainian leader Yulia Tymoshenko pled for Germany’s help.

On Sunday, tens of thousands of people took to the streets of Kiev to protest the Ukrainian government’s decision to call off plans for a trade deal with the European Union. The protests were the largest to take place in the country since 2004’s Orange Revolution, when accusations of corruption and electoral fraud during that year’s presidential election brought thousands of people to the streets and helped overturn the election of Viktor Yanukovych. According to police estimates, Sunday’s protest attracted 23,000 people while organizers estimated the number at over 100,000.


The protests were set off by the announcement on Thursday that the Ukrainian government would no longer pursue preparations for the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union in order to “ensure the national security of Ukraine” and “restore lost trade volumes with the Russian Federation.” The deal would have created a new framework for trade between the former Soviet republic and the EU, but was seen as worrisome by Russia, which had threatened economic sanctions and travel restrictions should the deal go through.

The Ukrainian parliament had also voted down bills last week which would have allowed imprisoned former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko — a key figure in the Orange Revolution — to go to Germany for medical treatment. The release of Tymoshenko, whose jail term for abuse of power and embezzlement is widely seen as politically motivated, was one of the conditions for the EU deal. Kiev has instead announced intentions to create a joint commission to discuss relations between Ukraine, Russia and the EU.

Read More Here



Russia ‘blackmailed Ukraine to ditch EU pact’

Yulia Tymoshenko calls for Ukrainians to take to the streets as President Yanukovych comes under pressure from Kremlin
Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich

The Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, abruptly pulled out of the deal on Thursday, leaving EU policy in shreds. Photograph: Reuters

The European Union and Russia traded charges of blackmail on Friday over the future of Ukraine.

The Kremlin threatened the country with trade losses worth billions and costing hundreds of thousands of jobs if it signed up to a strategic pact with the European Union, senior Lithuanian officials said.

President Vladimir Putin of Russia said the EU was putting pressure on Kiev and organising mass protests against President Viktor Yanukovych.

A week before a critical EU summit in Vilnius, the Lithuanian capital, that was to be capped by the Brussels-Kiev pact, Yanukovych abruptly pulled out of the deal on Thursday, leaving EU policy in shreds and Putin relishing victory in the contest for Ukraine’s future.

The volte face was a result of Russian blackmail, the Lithuanian president’s office said as senior officials in Brussels said Yanukovych was sacrificing the hopes and wishes of most of his countrymen on the altar of Russian money and contracts.

Yulia Tymoshenko, the imprisoned former prime minister and arch-rival of Yanukovych, whose release and transfer to Germany has been the central condition for the EU pact, pleaded with the president to reverse his decision.

In a letter to Yanukovych from prison, she renounced the release condition and pledged she would stay in jail in Ukraine if Yanukovych relented. Fear of facing Tymoshenko in a 2015 presidential battle is believed to be one of the main reasons for the president’s rebuff of the EU.

“I give you my word that, if you make a decision to sign the [EU] agreement, on the same day I will appeal to European leaders asking them to sign the agreement without fulfilling all criteria including the part regarding my release. I don’t know if they will listen to my appeal but I will do everything possible for the signing of the agreement even as I continue to sit in prison,” said Tymoshenko. “This is the only chance for you to survive as a politician,” she told Yanukovych. “Because now, when you are killing the agreement you are making the biggest mistake of your life.”

The thunderbolt from Yanukovych brought pro-European protesters on to the streets of central Kiev before what promises to be a weekend of campaigning climaxing in a large rally on Sunday. Around 1,500 took to the streets waving EU flags on Thursday evening. Organisers expect tens of thousands to join protests on Sunday. Jovita Neliupšiene, foreign policy aide to President Dalia Grybauskaite of Lithuania, said Yanukovych had called her before announcing he was ditching the EU pact, arguing that the pressure from Moscow was irresistible.

Yanukovych and Putin had a secret meeting last week. The Ukrainian and Russian prime ministers then met in Saint Petersburg on Wednesday.


Read More Here



Enhanced by Zemanta

TRUTHstreammedia TRUTHstreammedia·

Published on Nov 13, 2013

Following reports that someone was trying to set-up WeAreChange’s Luke Rudkowski and OathKeepers’ Stewart Rhodes, as well as an eerie e-mail from a group calling themselves “Political Hackerz Squad” claiming that it was trying to set-up dozens of alternative media figures with child porn (and claiming credit for attacks on Rudkowski/Rhodes), Truthstream Media was alerted that email attachments are being sent to prominent people posing as “Melissa Melton” and appearing to request an interview before attaching alleged child porn sent out by unknown provocateurs. These agents declared that they were “soldiers in a digital war”; in the case of Truthstream, they used an e-mail that doesn’t belong to our site but appears to as it used Melissa’s name. Please know that we are under attack; we need your prayers and support.

PLEASE NOTE that any e-mail attachments claiming to be from Truthstream Media are fraudulent and may be part of an attempt to discredit or set-up us or others in the alternative media. PLEASE DO NOT open any attachments as they are not communications from our website. It is not from us.


Luke Rudkowski’s hotel broken into computer compromised possible framing

wearechange wearechange

Published on Nov 1, 2013

We think its best that we make this public for the safety of Luke Rudkowski during his travels abroad. Other important things to note is that the wifi that Luke’s computer was on was established a day before the hack with a pass code that only he and the other speakers he mentioned had access to, that was established by them and no one else. Which makes the case for a remote hack very unlikely. Other computers were also on the scene and active but Luke’s was the only one visible targeted.

Also this looks like an unprofessional job due to leaving the obvious tracks of intrusion but from the looks of the scripts that were ran they were definitely not amateurs.

Because of multiple attempts to set up Luke in his career we think its best to make this situation public.

This situation is extremely weird surrounding the circumstances and that’s why we decided to go public with it.


Enhanced by Zemanta

…..Not to mention  direct  access to the  IRS who will garnish  your  bank accounts for fines imposed if you  cannot  afford  to  get  the  mandated  insurance.

Now let’s  see  who will be  affected , shall we?

The  poor  who  qualify  for  the assistance  programs  will be taken  care  of . 

The  rich  can  afford  any  insurance  they prefer. 

So  who  does  that  leave?

Oh  yes  ,  that’s   right the  Working Middle  Class.  The  same  Middle  Class  that  has  been  bearing the  brunt  of  the  load  of the  Deficit. 

The  same  Middle   Class   who is  having a  hard  time   keeping a  roof  over  their   families  heads  and   food on the  table. 

The  same  Middle  Class  who’s  children’s  future  has  been gambled  away  by greedy ,   inept  and entitled politicians.  Concerned  only  for the money they  are  making  for  themselves  by  selling that  same  Middle  Class  up the   river.

Excuse me  if  I  call BS and  say that the  American  People  are  being  held  hostage  by the   political  system on  both  sides  of the  aisle.   So spare me  the  holier  than  though  and  change  for a  better  future  rhetoric.  The  way  things  are   going  the only  ones   with a  better  future  on the  horizon are the   corrupt  politicians  and the  corporate  crooks  they  enable!!

~Desert Rose~


Right-Wing Republicans vs. Corporate Democrats vs. Progressive Populists
    Right-Wing Republicans vs. Corporate Democrats vs. Progressive Populists


Obamacare subjects entire nation to ransom demands of coercive government


Friday, October 04, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of (See all articles…)

(NaturalNews) You’ve probably noticed I’m not covering pure politics anymore here on Natural News, but I am covering Obamacare and health issues quite intensely. And when it comes to Obamacare, you can’t separate the insane politics from the Affordable Care Act policies, so I’ll give you an advance warning that this article delves into some hard-hitting issues of what I believe is really wrong with America today.

For starters, the rhetoric over Obamacare and the government shutdown has reached a point of insanity. Obama himself has begun using “gun to the head” rhetoric, invoking highly-inappropriate violent imagery and trying to cast it upon his political enemies. Furthermore, with Obama’s approval, White House spokespeople have also begun characterizing Republicans as “terrorists, kidnappers and arsonists” for their taking a stand against Obamacare. Even the more mild characterizations depict Republicans as “holding the nation ransom” while behaving like “suicide bombers” for daring the question the sanity of government gone insane.

Click here to read 11 more violent metaphors currently being invoked by liberals against the GOP.

I’m no water-bearer for the Republican party, as you well know, but this poisonous rhetoric from a failed, desperate administration demands to be honestly answered. If we’re going to invoke these metaphors, after all, let’s do it accurately. Because if you get right down to it, Obamacare subjects the entire nation to the ransom demands of a criminal, coercive regime that seems more rooted in Soviet-style communism than American freedom.

If Obamacare were a person passing you on the sidewalk, he would pull out a gun, stick it to your forehead and scream at you to “Give me all your money or else!” The so-called “Affordable Care Act” is built on a foundation of coercion and theft. It is not a voluntary program. It does not ask for nor require your consent. It is a grotesque example of government abuses gone terribly wrong at the hands of a wildly deceptive, insidious administration that honors no law whatsoever.

Metaphors that make sense: the Obama administration is a mafia

What’s emerging right now in the actions and rhetoric of the White House is that there is no difference whatsoever between the philosophy of the Obama administration and the philosophy of a criminal mafia. Both the mafia and the Obama administration:

• Use fear and intimidation to force people into surrendering their money.

• Threaten the use of force to coerce you into capitulating to their demands.

• Lie to the media and the public about their true intentions.

• Have a strong contradiction between their public persona of “compassion” versus their private behavior of ruthless aggression and destruction.

• Believe they have an inherent right to rule over everyone else.

• Have no respect whatsoever for individual rights, liberties or the rule of law.

• Believe they can simply invent the rules as they go along, complete outside of law.

• Believe they are exempt from the same laws and rules they force everyone else to follow.

• Blame everyone else for the problems and disruptions they have caused to society.

• Are led by sociopaths.

Unlimited theft is now the Big Government game plan

The “Affordable Care Act” is the landmark legislation of the Obama mafia, because it establishes the government’s “right” to engage in unlimited theft and confiscation of money from the American people. Thanks to Chief Justice Roberts and the U.S. Supreme Court, a dangerous precedent now exists that allows the federal government to simply seize funds out of your bank account at any time, for any amount, for any reason whatsoever, as long as they call it a “tax.”

This is a mafia-style approach to governing by coercion. Before long, Obama (or a future president) might decide that every American should buy war bonds through a mandatory “Affordable War Bonds” program. Such a program might automatically withdraw $500 from your bank account each and every month, redirecting that money to the wealthy arms manufacturers whose bombs and missiles need replacing because we’re suddenly in a war with Eurasia… or wherever.

Understand the gravity of this when I explain that the federal government now has no limits whatsoever to its powers of confiscating private wealth. This is crucial to really grasp because it means that when the government runs out of suckers willing to keep lending it more cash — and it can no longer print new money without triggering a global sell-off — there is a 100% chance it is going to resort to the nationwide confiscation of private wealth in order to keep itself afloat.

Yes, you head me right: Your retirement funds, pension funds, private bank account and investment funds will all be subject to government confiscation, much like what recently happened in Cyprus. And because there are no longer any limits to government — the Constitution apparently be damned! — there is no way to stop this cancerous plague of economic destruction from sucking a significant portion of the private wealth in America into a black hole of bureaucratic waste and crony capitalism.

Enhanced by Zemanta





Last I checked Republicans  were  not the  only political party in Congress.  From the looks  of  it   the  democrats  are  more  than  happy  to  step in  and  play the  hostage  game.

So,  when  are  we  all  going to  wake  up and  understand  that  this is  not  a  political party issue? 


It is a corrupt  system and  government  issue  and both  sides  are  rotten to the  core.  This  blame  game  may  look good from plush  offices and  homes  but  for  the  people  it stinks.   Government  spending  has  be   checked, not  something they  want  to  understand.   If the  citizens  are  expected  to  balance  their  budgets  without a  bail out then so  must  the  government.  Simply  because they have  been living  high  on the  hog  all this  time does not  excuse  them from their  lack  of  discipline  and  fiscal  responsibility.  They  have  played  fast  and  loose  with money  taken  from  the   Citizens wasting  it frivolously without a  second  thought  to  the  consequences.  Yet  again  it is   the  people  that  will pay the  price.  

The  poor  and the Working  Middle Class are  the ones  who will suffer  for  their  posturing  and manipulation.  None  of  the politicians  in  question,  and that  includes   Obama, have  to  worry  about  where  their next  meal   or  where the  money  for  rent is going to  come  from.  None  of  those  fat  cats  will have to  worry   whether  Grandma  will be  able to  afford  her medication  or be forced to choose  cat food  to  get  by  this month.  They  certainly won’t have to  concern themselves about  the baby  having  enough  diapers or  formula  to  make  it  through the  month. 

But  guess  who  does ?


I am  sick  of  the  partisan B.S..  Republicans  and Democrats  alike  are  responsible  for  this  mess and  it is  time  they  were  both  held  accountable..  They are  destroying   this  Nation and taking   us  with them  for  what? 


For a grand political  pissing  contest,  only  “We The  People” are  the  damn  target!!

~Desert Rose ~


‘Unprecedented And Catastrophic’ Things Could Happen If Republicans Force The US To Default

Business Insider

Jason Lange and Andy Sullivan, Reuters

uncle sam

REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

Broken glass covers an armed forces recruiting poster at the scene of an explosion outside the U.S. Armed Forces Career Center in New York’s Times Square, March 6, 2008.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Nobody knows exactly when America would default on its bills if Congress fails to raise a cap on government borrowing. But the recent past gives a pretty good idea of how a default could unfold.

Even the Treasury Department can’t know how much tax revenue will come in each day after October 17, when it expects to hit its $16.7 trillion debt ceiling. Nor can officials anticipate exact costs, such as how many people will apply for jobless benefits that week.

Yet we can infer how quickly the government might run out of cash by looking at the equivalent of the Treasury’s daily bank statements from that same period a year ago.

What follows is a timeline that shows what a default might look like, based on daily Treasury statements from October and November of 2012.

OCT. 17

The Treasury Department exhausts all available tools to stay under the cap on borrowing and can no longer add to the national debt. Treasury expects it would still have about $30 billion cash on hand to cover its bills. Among the many inflows and outflows that day, it takes in $6.75 billion in taxes but pays out $10.9 billion in Social Security retirement checks. By the end of the day, its cushion has eroded to $27.5 billion.

OCT. 18 – OCT. 29

Treasury’s cash reserve quickly dwindles. Washington only takes in about 70 cents for every dollar it spends and is now unable to issue new debt to cover the difference.

The tide turns briefly on October 22, when the government takes in $3.5 billion more than it spends.

But that temporary gain is soon erased. October 24 is an especially rough day: Treasury pays $1.8 billion to defense contractors, $2.2 billion to doctors and hospitals that treat elderly patients through the Medicare program, and $11.1 billion in Social Security, while taking in only $9.6 billion in taxes and other income.

One possible wild card: Treasury could lose the trust of the bond market.

Even though the government cannot add to the national debt at this point, it can legally roll over expiring debt. Investors have the opportunity to cash out about $100 billion worth of U.S. debt every week but choose to reinvest it. If fear of default causes investors to steer clear of new debt offerings, Treasury’s finances could unravel almost overnight.

“It’s very hard to predict,” said Brian Collins, an analyst at the Bipartisan Policy Center, which helped Reuters with this analysis. “It’s the same thing that causes (bank) runs or credit markets to freeze.”

OCT. 30

Default happens. By the end of the day, the government is $7 billion short of what it needs to pay all of its bills.

So who gets stiffed?

Everybody, according to the Obama administration.

Treasury says it doesn’t have the ability to pick and choose who gets paid. The last time the government faced this situation in 2011, they planned to wait until public coffers were full enough to pay a full day’s bills before cutting any checks, according to a Treasury Department watchdog report from 2012.

Read More Here


Gross Says U.S. Will Avoid ‘Catastrophic’ Default on Debt

By Cordell EddingsOct 1, 2013 3:29 PM CT

Pacific Investment Management Co.’s Bill Gross said the U.S. will avoid a “catastrophic” default on Treasury securities if lawmakers fail to extend the debt limit on the nation’s debt.
PIMCO Co-CIO Bill Gross

Pacific Investment Management Co. Co-Chief Investment Officer Bill Gross said a default would trigger a “complex series of events worldwide” throughout financial markets. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg

“The U.S. Treasury is the center of the global financial complex,” Gross, manager of the world’s biggest bond fund, said during a Bloomberg Television interview with Trish Regan and Adam Johnson. A default would be “unimaginable,” as it would have “catastrophic” consequences on U.S. borrowing costs, and would trigger a “complex series of events worldwide” that would ripple through global financial markets.

The U.S. government began its first partial shutdown in 17 years after Congress failed to break a partisan deadlock by a midnight deadline. Congressional leaders have scheduled no further negotiations on spending legislation, raising concern among some lawmakers that the shutdown may have an impact on the more consequential fight over how to raise the U.S. debt limit to avoid a first-ever default after Oct. 17.

The odds of a default are “a million-to-one” as the Treasury Department will be able to take other measures to ensure it is servicing the country’s debt, Gross said.

“The Treasury is not going to default on their debt simply because the debt ceiling isn’t going to be raised,” Gross said. “There will be other repercussions like slower economic growth. But the Treasury is not going to default.”

Read More and Watch Video Here


Enhanced by Zemanta

Devastating Trump Card

Business Insider

bridge cards trump card

Bruno Vincent/Getty

The shutdown battle has become, essentially, a high-stakes blame game.

Republicans tried to raise those stakes yesterday by offering a piecemeal plan to reopen popular parts of the federal government, in the hopes that it would be politically costly for the Democrats to oppose things like aid to veterans. The bill failed to move forward.

But in a note to clients, Potomac Research Group’s Greg Valliere says that President Obama still has one “trump card” of his own left to play, Social Security:

THE HEAVY ARTILLERY:  We have thought for weeks that Obama would play the Social Security trump card if there was no deal on the debt ceiling by mid-October. This is one of several reasons why we think a default is unlikely, and it’s one of several reasons why Boehner will capitulate; the only questions are when and under what terms. We think he may get a few crumbs, but no major concessions.


Obama Just Played His Big ‘Trump Card’ On The Debt Ceiling

Business Insider

Brett LoGiurato Oct. 3, 2013, 11:59 AM
Barack Obama
Early Thursday morning, Potomac Research Group analyst Greg Valliere predicted that if the debt-ceiling deadline grew closer, President Barack Obama would play his “trump card” in the debate. He would remind seniors that if Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling, seniors wouldn’t get their Social Security checks.”GOP strategists like Karl Rove surely know that it’s just a matter of time before President Obama throws a game-changer — warning senior citizens that their Social Security checks won’t be mailed because of John Boehner,” Valliere wrote in a note to clients.A few hours later, Obama did just that during a speech at M. Luis Construction Company in Rockville, Md. He spent much of the speech warning that while the ongoing government shutdown was damaging, failure to raise the debt ceiling by an Oct. 17 deadline would be even worse.

“In a government shutdown, Social Security checks still go out on time. In an economic shutdown — if we don’t raise the debt ceiling — they don’t go out on time,” Obama said. “In a government shutdown, disability benefits still arrive on time. In an economic shutdown, they don’t.”

Enhanced by Zemanta


Our shadow government exposes itself with Syrian flank moves on Russia

… by  Viktor Titov,   … with  New Eastern Outlook, Moscow

[ Editors Note: We have long editorialized here that it is not just the Obama administration pushing for chaos in the Mid East. Those who have always profited from regional chaos have a dog in this fight and they are not about to give up. Vikor Titov does an excellent job here dissecting the four Senator clowns selected to put Russian sanctions on the table to start ‘preparing the minds’ of the public framing Russia as a threat that needs to be addressed, when in fact Putin is reacting to our obvious threats. It is also a pleasure to see someone writing in their second language using a term like ‘losing their marbles’!

So once again, our political leadership treats us with utter contempt with their blatant special interest ploy. I deem what they are doing to be a national security threat because they are attempting to frame a false threat as a cover to an offensive one we are engaged in, where our leadership will not even bother to justify its actions other than to claim they are pursuing our ‘interests’.  But we do not know who exactly they mean using the term ‘our’…or what they mean by ‘interests’. I sense they don’t want to tell us because they know we would object, hence all the smoke and mirrors.

The two lady senators from New Hampshire were a surprise, as NH and Vermont are states where their politicians historically tend to end up on the usual strings we see attached to so many others. This four pack of Senators is an obvious construction, put together by some special interest. I am going to be calling them to today to ask they how they got involved.  If you call also, I can assure you it will get their attention. They are used to doing things like this without any negative feedback… Jim W. Dean ]

Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)         DC (202) 224-2841

Kelley Ayotte (R-NH)         DC 202-224-3324

Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)       DC (202) 224-2823

John Cornyn (R-TX)     DC Main: 202-224-2934


Senator Richard Blumenthal is heading up the Russian sanctions four-pack. He is very close to you know who.

Senator Richard Blumenthal is heading up the Russian sanctions four-pack. He is very close to you know who.

Here we go.  Not only has it gotten to the point that there have been allegations of Moscow, they say, of being a Damascus accomplice in their use of chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians, but now it’s gone as far as blackmailing Russia.

Senate proxies are threatening the possibility of sanctions against the largest Russian banks, and this is predominantly done by the government, but what faction?

As they say, all’s fair in love and war! But this is just going too far!

It seems that, from intensively thinking of how to get themselves out of a bind, which Washington has brought upon itself through Obama’s menacing and peremptory threats calling for air strike on Syria, some people on Capitol Hill have “lost their marbles”.

Although, one cannot discount the possibility that the White House is behind this move, trying to twist Russia’s arm or, at the very least, test her “resilience”.

Consequently, four American senators, two democrats and two republicans, appealed to the American government to impose sanctions against a few large Russian banks, such as Gazprombank, VTB and VEB. The reason for this, in the senators’ opinion, is that the banks, they say, finance the activities of the Syrian government.

According to the senators’ letter to the State Treasury, VEB handles payments for the delivery of S-300 missile batteries to Syria, Gazprombank provides a financial channel to pay for supplies of Syrian oil and VTB holds assets of the president Bashar al-Assad.

The letter addressed to the Finance Minister Jacob Lew was signed by senator-democrats Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut) and Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire), and the republicans John Cornyn (Texas) and Kelly Ayotte (New Hampshire).

Read More Here



US Senators slander Russian banks


<p>Senator Kelly Ayotte, one of the accusers (seen here in March, 2013, with Senator Lindsey Graham).</p>

Senator Kelly Ayotte, one of the accusers (seen here in March, 2013, with Senator Lindsey Graham).

WASHINGTON (VOR)— On September 13 U.S. Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), John Cornyn (R-TX), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) formally requested Treasury Secretary Jack Lew to take action against Russian banks for allegedly working to support the regime of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

But did they have any real evidence? On Wednesday VTB Bank categorically denied any involvement with the Syrian leadership, telling Voice of Russia:

«As is standard practice in our industry and in accordance with legislation, VTB takes client confidentiality extremely seriously, and would normally never comment on any allegations of this sort. However, given the defamatory and highly public nature of these claims, and their relevance to an extremely delicate geopolitical situation, we feel we have no other option but to state that the allegations made by the four U.S. senators are completely unfounded.

VTB does not hold funds belonging to President Assad or any other member of the Syrian leadership. We consider these allegations to be a deliberate attempt to mislead the American people. These irresponsible insinuations are clearly intended to ratchet up tensions around Syria’s economic and financial situation, and to derail the recently launched peace process at any cost».

To dig into the U.S. Senators’ arguments and motives, VOR’s Ric Young spoke with Blaise Misztal, the acting director of the Foreign Policy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Hot News 2

Published on Aug 22, 2013

The NSA surveillance of millions of emails and phone calls. The dogged pursuit of whistleblower Edward Snowden across the globe, regardless of the diplomatic fallout. And the sentencing of Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison for giving a cache of government files to the website WikiLeaks. Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg sees these events as signs that the United States is becoming a police state.

“We have not only the capability of a police state, but certain beginnings of it right now,” Ellsberg said. “And I absolutely agree with Edward Snowden. It’s worth a person’s life, prospect of assassination, or life in prison or life in exile — it’s worth that to try to restore our liberties and make this a democratic country.”

Ellsberg was a military analyst with the RAND Corporation in 1969 when he secretly copied thousands of classified documents about U.S. decision-making during the Vietnam War. In 1971, he leaked the files (known as the Pentagon Papers) to The New York Times and 18 other newspapers.

Although the Nixon administration tried to prevent the publication of the files, the Supreme Court ruled in New York Times Co. v. United States that the newspaper could continue publishing the files.

Ellsberg was later tried on 12 felony counts under the Espionage Act of 1917, and faced a possible sentence of 115 years in prison. His case was dismissed in 1973 on the grounds of gross governmental misconduct.

As a candidate in 2008, Barack Obama praised instances of whistle-blowing as “acts of courage and patriotism.” Since becoming president, however, his administration has charged more people under the Espionage Act than all other presidents combined.

Enhanced by Zemanta