investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--U.S. 2-year yields are falling to new lows. Credit standards in the US continue to tighten for L+S f

U.S. 2-year yields are falling to new lows. Credit standards in the US continue to tighten for L+S firms. How much longer U.S. stocks can diverge from the cataclysmic collapse in the global economy?

Stock Market ‘ Not a Reflection of Strength of the Economy , ’ NYSE President In a newly released interview @ @ @ @ @ President Stacey Cunningham acknowledged that the resilient stock market does not reflect the condition of @ @ @ @ @ Keeps Distancing Itself From the Economy : El Erian With markets focusing on the improvement @ @ @ @ @ , ” that is a reduction in the rate of labor force dislocation , U.S. @ @ @ @ @ an already considerable decoupling from the real economy and will fuel the debates on Wall @ @ @ @ @ companies versus people and the well-off versus the marginalized .
Mortgage Lenders Tighten Screws on @ @ @ @ @ 2008 Mortgage rates are at record lows , but borrowers hoping to take advantage are @ @ @ @ @ standards in years .
Over the past month , lenders have put in place higher @ @ @ @ @ , and in some cases stopped issuing certain types of…

U.S. 2-year yields are falling to new lows this morning. More traders are betting the Fed will be forced to cut rates below zero. "We do not think this is justified by fundamentals as FOMC members have repeatedly stated that they do not expect to take rates negative:" TD's Misra pic.twitter.com/Q7dJqFOJeq — Lisa Abramowicz (@lisaabramowicz1) May 8, 2020
Credit standards in the US continue to tighten for L+S firms. Late in the cycle, a flat/negative yield curve causes a constraint on bank lending which tightens credit standards. The C&I Loan Survey leads US capex growth by 2Q targeting a 9% YoY drop by Q4, lowest since Q2 ‘08. pic.twitter.com/ri8D39eSgv — Julien Bittel, CFA (@BittelJulien) May 8, 2020
The tension on Wall Street is how much longer U.S. stocks can diverge from the cataclysmic collapse in the global economy, posting gains amid the worst economic reports in history. t.co/PddBzVZBz2 — Lisa Abramowicz (@lisaabramowicz1) May 8, 2020
The Services sector kept the economy alive in 2019, when manufacturing was in contraction. The collapse in services as well as manufacturing complicates the recovery. pic.twitter.com/BGCYNTHuGs — Daniel Lacalle (@dlacalle_IA) May 8, 2020
In a newly released interview, New York Stock Exchange President Stacey Cunningham acknowledged that the resilient stock market does not reflect the condition of the economy.
With markets focusing on the improvement in the “second derivative,” that is a reduction in the rate of labor force dislocation, U.S. stocks rose. This widens an already considerable decoupling from the real economy and will fuel the debates on Wall Street versus Main Street, companies versus people and the well-off versus the marginalized.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Mortgage rates are at record lows, but borrowers hoping to take advantage are running into the toughest loan-approval standards in years. Over the past month, lenders have put in place higher credit-score and down payment requirements, and in some cases stopped issuing certain types of…


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--Top Obama Admin Official Evelyn Farkas Backpedals – Now Testifies She Only Believed in Russia Collus

Top Obama Admin Official Evelyn Farkas Backpedals – Now Testifies She Only Believed in Russia Collusion After Hearing About it @ @ @ @ @ Sally Yates Testifies She Learned about the Flynn Phone Call Directly from President Obama

Top Obama Admin Official Evelyn Farkas Backpedals – Now
Testifies She Only Believed in Russia Collusion After Hearing
About it on TV
Top Obama Official Sally Yates Testifies She Learned about
the Flynn Phone Call Directly from President Obama
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
h/t dr0id


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--CNN’s Chris Cuomo Has MELTDOWN Live on the Air After Some States Begin to Open Up

Collin Rugg from Trending Politics reports , After being in self-quarantine for several weeks , CNN opinion host Chris Cuomo @ @ @ @ @ fear into Americans over re-starting the economy , saying that only “ fools ” want @ @ @ @ @

Collin Rugg from Trending Politics reports, After being in self-quarantine for several weeks, CNN opinion host Chris Cuomo returned on Monday to inject fear into Americans over re-starting the economy, saying that only “fools” want to reopen the country.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Read More/Source/Credit/FairUse:
trendingpolitics.com/cnn-s-cu…


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--Elon Musk: Neuralink will do human brain implants ‘within a year;’ could eventually enable eventuall

Elon Musk: Neuralink will do human brain implants ‘within a year;’ could eventually enable eventually enable symbiosis with AI!

Elon Musk says his Neuralink company will do human brain implants ‘ within a year ’ to help cure injuries – and the device could eventually enable symbiosis with AI Elon Musk spoke on Joe Rogan ’ s podcast about his company Neuralink Musk said the firm will have a brain implant ready ‘ within a year ’ The chip could fix brain injuries that result in aliments of the body It would be inserted to the skull by a robot that connects electrodes to the brain Musk also noted that it could become a full brain interface in just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s podcast , the billionaire said his company Neuralink will have a version of its brain implant ready ‘ within a year.
’ Musk explained that the process involves removing a chunk of the skull , robots then insert electrodes into the brain and the device into the hole , with only a small scar left behind .
Neuralink , which was founded in 2016 , is designing tiny flexible ‘ threads ’ that are ten times thinner than a human hair with the goal of treating brain injuries and trauma .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could develop into a full brain interface in just 25 years , which would enable ‘ symbiosis ’ between humans and AI

Elon Musk says his Neuralink company will do human brain implants ‘within a year’ to help cure injuries – and the device could eventually enable symbiosis with AI
Elon Musk spoke on Joe Rogan’s podcast about his company Neuralink
Musk said the firm will have a brain implant ready ‘within a year’
The chip could fix brain injuries that result in aliments of the body
It would be inserted to the skull by a robot that connects electrodes to the brain
Musk also noted that it could become a full brain interface in just 25 years
www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8298575/Elon-Musk-says-Neuralink-company-human-brain-implants-year-cure-injuries.html
Speaking on Joe Rogan’s podcast, the billionaire said his company Neuralink will have a version of its brain implant ready ‘within a year.’
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Musk explained that the process involves removing a chunk of the skull, robots then insert electrodes into the brain and the device into the hole, with only a small scar left behind.
Neuralink, which was founded in 2016, is designing tiny flexible ‘threads’ that are ten times thinner than a human hair with the goal of treating brain injuries and trauma.
The tech tycoon also revealed that the technology could develop into a full brain interface in just 25 years, which would enable ‘symbiosis’ between humans and AI
h/t DMG


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--Japan To Set Official Guidelines for UFO Encounters in Direct Response To US Pentagon Video Release

JAPAN ADOPTING OFFICIAL RULES AND GUIDELINES FOR POTENTIAL FUTURE UFO ENCOUNTERS “ To be honest , I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ Defense Minister Taro Kono revealed to The Japan Times .
“ But because the Defense @ @ @ @ @ , I would like to hear from the U.S. side about its intention and analysis.
@ @ @ @ @ ) are encountered , training will be canceled immediately , ” an unidentified source inside @ @ @ @ @ told The Japan Times .
“ We will seek to identify it from a safe @ @ @ @ @ is a drone , and report it to the Air Defense Direction Center for orders @ @

JAPAN ADOPTING OFFICIAL RULES AND GUIDELINES FOR POTENTIAL FUTURE UFO ENCOUNTERS
“To be honest, I don’t believe in UFOs,” Defense Minister Taro Kono revealed to The Japan Times. “But because the Defense Department released such a video, I would like to hear from the U.S. side about its intention and analysis.”
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
“If (UFOs) are encountered, training will be canceled immediately,” an unidentified source inside Japan’s Air Force told The Japan Times. “We will seek to identify it from a safe distance, including whether it is a drone, and report it to the Air Defense Direction Center for orders.”
www.syfy.com/syfywire/japan-adopting-new-guidelines-for-future-encounters-with-ufos


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--US withdraws some Patriot missile batteries from Middle East as tensions with Iran ease

The U.S. has removed two of its four Patriot antimissile batteries from Saudi Arabia and another two in the Mideast @ @ @ @ @ have eased from a peak earlier this year , according to a U.S. official .
@ @ @ @ @ Arabia were helping protect the country ’ s oil fields and are likely to be @ @ @ @ @ , according to the official , who asked not to be identified discussing the change @ @ @ @ @ batteries and one THAAD battery , which can intercept ballistic missiles at higher altitudes , @ @ @ @ @ the official added .

The U.S. has removed two of its four Patriot antimissile batteries from Saudi Arabia and another two in the Mideast partly because tensions with Iran have eased from a peak earlier this year, according to a U.S. official.
The two batteries in Saudi Arabia were helping protect the country’s oil fields and are likely to be replaced by Saudi Patriot batteries, according to the official, who asked not to be identified discussing the change. More than 12 Patriot batteries and one THAAD battery, which can intercept ballistic missiles at higher altitudes, remain in the region, the official added.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
theprint.in/world/us-withdraws-some-patriot-missile-batteries-from-middle-east-as-tensions-with-iran-ease/416898/


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--The Inevitable Coronavirus Censorship Crisis is Here

These professors should be charged with crimes against humanity for suggesting Chinese censorship is the way to go .
… Earlier this week , Atlantic magazine – fast becoming the favored media outlet for self-styled intellectual elites of the Aspen Institute type – ran an in-depth article of the problems free speech poses to American society in the coronavirus era .
The headline : Internet Speech Will Never Go Back to Normal In the debate over freedom versus control of the global network , China was largely correct , and the U.S. was wrong .
Authored by a pair of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Arizona , Jack Goldsmith and Andrew Keane Woods , the piece argued that the American and Chinese approaches to monitoring the Internet were already not that dissimilar : Constitutional and cultural differences mean that the private sector , rather than the federal and state governments , currently takes the lead in these practices… But the trend toward greater surveillance and speech control here , and toward the growing involvement of government , is undeniable and likely inexorable .
They went on to list all the reasons that , given that we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ path to censorship , a Chinese-style system of speech control may not be such a bad thing .
In fact , they argued , a benefit of the coronavirus was that it was waking us up to “ how technical wizardry , data centralization , and private-public collaboration can do enormous public good.
” Perhaps , they posited , Americans could be moved to reconsider their “ understanding ” of the First and Fourth Amendments , as “ the harms from digital speech ” continue to grow , and “ the social costs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

These professors should be charged with crimes against humanity for suggesting Chinese censorship is the way to go.
…
Earlier this week, Atlantic magazine – fast becoming the favored media outlet for self-styled intellectual elites of the Aspen Institute type – ran an in-depth article of the problems free speech poses to American society in the coronavirus era. The headline:
Internet Speech Will Never Go Back to Normal
In the debate over freedom versus control of the global network, China was largely correct, and the U.S. was wrong.
Authored by a pair of law professors from Harvard and the University of Arizona, Jack Goldsmith and Andrew Keane Woods, the piece argued that the American and Chinese approaches to monitoring the Internet were already not that dissimilar:
Constitutional and cultural differences mean that the private sector, rather than the federal and state governments, currently takes the lead in these practices… But the trend toward greater surveillance and speech control here, and toward the growing involvement of government, is undeniable and likely inexorable.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
They went on to list all the reasons that, given that we’re already on an “inexorable” path to censorship, a Chinese-style system of speech control may not be such a bad thing. In fact, they argued, a benefit of the coronavirus was that it was waking us up to “how technical wizardry, data centralization, and private-public collaboration can do enormous public good.”
taibbi.substack.com/p/temporary-coronavirus-censorship
Perhaps, they posited, Americans could be moved to reconsider their “understanding” of the First and Fourth Amendments, as “the harms from digital speech” continue to grow, and “the social costs of a relatively open Internet multiply.”
AC


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--RUSSIA IS NOW IN THE TOP 5 COUNTRIES MOST AFFECTED BY THE CORONAVIRUS

Asharp rise in the number of cases in Russia has seen the country become home to the fifth highest number of confirmed infections worldwide , according to data compiled by John Hopkins University .
The country reported 10,699 new cases over the past 24 hours , with a total of 187,859 infections according to the country ’ s official number of cases .
Russia now also has the second-fastest rate of new infections , behind the United States .
Russia has seen six consecutive days where the number of new cases has increased by more than 10,000 .
The total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It also means Russia has overtaken France and Germany in terms of the number of cases , with more than half of the country ’ s 177,160 cases in Moscow , leaving its healthcare system struggling to cope .
The capital ’ s mayor , Sergei Sobyanin said research suggested the actual number was nearer 300,000 , more than triple the official figure , the TASS news agency reported .
Russian President Vladimir Putin was intending to host French President Emmanuel Macron and President Xi Jinping of China in Moscow ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 75 anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany .
However , Putin now finds himself battling a crisis that has seen Russia become another European COVID-19 hotspot .
A strict lockdown has been imposed in Moscow , with 12 million people being ordered to stay at home with few exceptions .
Moscow has THREE TIMES more Coronavirus cases than officially accounted-for – Mayor Despite Russia ranking fifth in the world for confirmed Covid-19 cases , the truth might be even worse .
Moscow ’ s Mayor Sergey Sobyanin believes the real tally in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times more than the official count .
In an interview with TV channel Russia 24 , Sobyanin explained how the increased numbers are actually a positive .
“ The fact that we have identified so many cases is not a minus , but a huge plus .
Obviously , there are even more in the city .
According to screening studies , [ cases ] are in the region of 2-to-2.5 percent of the total population of Moscow ; in terms of the figures , about 300,000 , ” said the mayor .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moscow has 92,676 confirmed cases , less than a third of Sobyanin ’ s assumption .
The mayor added he had tasked the capital ’ s authorities with finding as many infected people as possible , in order to place them in quarantine and to prevent any further contact .

Asharp rise in the number of cases in Russia has seen the country become home to the fifth highest number of confirmed infections worldwide, according to data compiled by John Hopkins University.
The country reported 10,699 new cases over the past 24 hours, with a total of 187,859 infections according to the country’s official number of cases. Russia now also has the second-fastest rate of new infections, behind the United States.
Russia has seen six consecutive days where the number of new cases has increased by more than 10,000. The total number of fatalities now stands at 1,723.
It also means Russia has overtaken France and Germany in terms of the number of cases, with more than half of the country’s 177,160 cases in Moscow, leaving its healthcare system struggling to cope.
The capital’s mayor, Sergei Sobyanin said research suggested the actual number was nearer 300,000, more than triple the official figure, the TASS news agency reported.
Russian President Vladimir Putin was intending to host French President Emmanuel Macron and President Xi Jinping of China in Moscow’s Red Square this weekend to mark the 75 anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany.
However, Putin now finds himself battling a crisis that has seen Russia become another European COVID-19 hotspot.
A strict lockdown has been imposed in Moscow, with 12 million people being ordered to stay at home with few exceptions.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
www.newsweek.com/russia-covid-19-coronavirus-moscow-putin-1502737?piano_t=1
Moscow has THREE TIMES more Coronavirus cases than officially accounted-for – Mayor
Despite Russia ranking fifth in the world for confirmed Covid-19 cases, the truth might be even worse. Moscow’s Mayor Sergey Sobyanin believes the real tally in the city is about 300,000 – three times more than the official count.
In an interview with TV channel Russia 24, Sobyanin explained how the increased numbers are actually a positive.
“The fact that we have identified so many cases is not a minus, but a huge plus. Obviously, there are even more in the city. According to screening studies, [cases] are in the region of 2-to-2.5 percent of the total population of Moscow; in terms of the figures, about 300,000,” said the mayor.
According to the latest official data, Moscow has 92,676 confirmed cases, less than a third of Sobyanin’s assumption.
The mayor added he had tasked the capital’s authorities with finding as many infected people as possible, in order to place them in quarantine and to prevent any further contact.
www.rt.com/russia/488038-moscow-understate-coronavirus-cases/


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--San Francisco Admits Giving Free Alcohol and Drugs to Homeless Hotel ‘Guests’

In San Francisco , the homeless aren ’ t just boarding in hotels for free — they ’ re getting @ @ @ @ @ That was the message from the city ’ s public health department in recent days @ @ @ @ @ who describes himself as a “ formerly homeless addict ” posted a Twitter comment criticizing @ @ @ @ @ just found out that homeless placed in hotels in SF are being delivered Alcohol , @ @ @ @ @ identified as an addict/alcoholic for FREE , ” the user “ T Wolf ” wrote @ @ @ @ @ ’ re supposed to be offering treatment .
This is enabling and is wrong on @ @ @ @ @ T Wolf isn ’ t as enlightened as the sages of the San Francisco Department @ @ @ @

In San Francisco, the homeless aren’t just boarding in hotels for free — they’re getting free booze to boot.
That was the message from the city’s public health department in recent days after a social media user who describes himself as a “formerly homeless addict” posted a Twitter comment criticizing the practice.
“I just found out that homeless placed in hotels in SF are being delivered Alcohol, Weed and Methadone because they identified as an addict/alcoholic for FREE,” the user “T Wolf” wrote on Friday. “You’re supposed to be offering treatment. This is enabling and is wrong on many levels.”
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Clearly, T Wolf isn’t as enlightened as the sages of the San Francisco Department of Public Health.
I just found out that homeless placed in hotels in SF are being delivered Alcohol, Weed and Methadone because they identified as an addict/alcoholic for FREE. You're supposed to be offering treatment. This is enabling and is wrong on many levels. @SF_DPH @sfbos @LondonBreed — T Wolf (@MyTwolffamily) May 2, 2020
www.westernjournal.com/san-francisco-admits-giving-free-alcohol-drugs-homeless-hotel-guests/


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--Congress Sets Up Taxpayers to Eat $454 Billion of Wall Street’s Losses. Where Is the Outrage?

Beginning on March 24 of this year , Larry Kudlow , the White House Economic Advisor , began to roll out the most deviously designed bailout of Wall Street in the history of America .
After the Federal Reserve ’ s secret $ 29 trillion bailout of Wall Street from 2007 to 2010 , and the exposure of that by a government audit and in-depth report by the Levy Economics Institute in 2011 , Kudlow was going to have to come up with a brilliant strategy to sell another multi-trillion-dollar Wall Street bailout to the American people .
The scheme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of way ) and audacious in employing an Orwellian form of reverse-speak .
The plan to bail out Wall Street would be sold to the American people as a rescue of “ Main Street.
” It was critical , however , that all of the officials speaking to the media repeat the words “ Main Street ” over and over .
It was decided that Larry Kudlow would first announce the plan at the White House press briefing on March 24 followed by an unprecedented appearance of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is how Kudlow explained the program that was going to be tucked into the stimulus legislation known as the CARES Act at the White House press briefing on March 24 : Kudlow : “ This package will be the single largest Main Street assistance program in the history of the United States .
Phase Two delivered the sick leave for individuals , hourly workers , families and so forth .
Phase Three – a significant package for small businesses , loan guarantees will be included .
We ’ re gon na take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I want to mention the Treasury ’ s Exchange Stabilization Fund .
That will be replenished .
It ’ s important because that Fund opens the door for Federal Reserve firepower to deal in a broad-based way throughout the economy for distressed industries , for small businesses , for financial turbulence .
You ’ ve already seen the Fed take action .
They intend to take more action .
And in order to get this we have to replenish the Treasury ’ s emergency fund .
It ’ s very , very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , the total package here comes to roughly $ 6 trillion : $ 2 trillion direct assistance , roughly $ 4 trillion in Federal Reserve lending power .
Again , it will be the largest Main Street financial package in the history of the United States .
Liquidity and cash for families , small business , individuals , unemployed , to keep this thing going .
We ’ re heading for a rough period but it ’ s only gon na be weeks we think .
Weeks , months .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s for sure.
” In fact , when the dust settled , the bailout of Wall Street was structured to run 4 to 5 years while the extra $ 600 a week added to unemployment claims for workers was going to last four months .
To further prepare the public in case mainstream media caught on to what was really going on and pushed back , Fed Chairman Powell made an unprecedented appearance on the Today show on March 26 and explained the plan like this : Powell : “ In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do have the ability to essentially use our emergency lending authorities and the only limit on that will be how much backstop we get from the Treasury Department .
We ’ re required to get full security for our loans so that we don ’ t lose money .
So the Treasury puts up money as we estimate what the losses might be…Effectively $ 1 of loss absorption of backstop from Treasury is enough to support $ 10 of loans.
” The Fed was created in 1913 under the Federal Reserve Act .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 107-year history of the Fed that states or even suggests that it can lever up taxpayer money by 10 to 1 to bail out Wall Street and stick the taxpayer with the losses .
This was an outrageous plan hatched out of thin air by Kudlow , Powell and U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin with zero regard for the legality of the plan .
When the text of the final CARES Act stimulus bill was released to the public , it allotted $ 454 billion to be handed over to the Fed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 454 billion from the taxpayer would absorb the first $ 454 billion of losses of the Fed ’ s levered up $ 4.54 trillion rescue fund for Wall Street , which would include bailing out bad loans at the biggest Wall Street banks , the primary dealers ( trading houses ) , commercial paper market , money market funds , corporate bonds , junk bonds , and Exchange Traded Funds ( ETFs ) .
To underscore that secrecy on the part of the Fed might have to be invoked , Section 4009 of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Information Act for the Fed and allows it to conduct its meetings in secret until the President says the coronavirus national emergency is over .
In addition to pushing the narrative that this is all about a rescue of Main Street , not Wall Street , there is the Trump administration ’ s secondary narrative that everything was just fine with the economy and Wall Street before the coronavirus hit the U.S. At Kudlow ’ s March 24 press briefing , he also said this : “ We started the year very strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus.
” That is also a false narrative .
According to the New England Journal of Medicine , the first confirmed case of coronavirus was reported in the United States on January 20 , 2020 .
But according to the Fed ’ s own minutes , between September 17 , 2019 and December 10-11 , 2019 , the Fed had already funneled ‘ roughly $ 215 billion per day ’ in emergency loans to Wall Street ’ s trading houses or more than $ 6.23 trillion in cumulative loans .
Stress on Wall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of thousands of people getting fired from their jobs by major Wall Street firms .
See Wall Street Had Cut 68,000 Jobs and Received Trillions in Emergency Loans Prior to COVID-19 Anywhere in the World .
So where is the outrage from all of those Pulitzer prize winning newspapers across America over the second massive Wall Street bailout in 12 years ?
Their silence is deafening .

via wallstreetonparade
Beginning on March 24 of this year, Larry Kudlow, the White House Economic Advisor, began to roll out the most deviously designed bailout of Wall Street in the history of America. After the Federal Reserve’s secret $29 trillion bailout of Wall Street from 2007 to 2010, and the exposure of that by a government audit and in-depth report by the Levy Economics Institute in 2011, Kudlow was going to have to come up with a brilliant strategy to sell another multi-trillion-dollar Wall Street bailout to the American people.
The scheme was brilliant (in an evil genius sort of way) and audacious in employing an Orwellian form of reverse-speak. The plan to bail out Wall Street would be sold to the American people as a rescue of “Main Street.” It was critical, however, that all of the officials speaking to the media repeat the words “Main Street” over and over.
It was decided that Larry Kudlow would first announce the plan at the White House press briefing on March 24 followed by an unprecedented appearance of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell on the Today show on March 26.
This is how Kudlow explained the program that was going to be tucked into the stimulus legislation known as the CARES Act at the White House press briefing on March 24:
Kudlow: “This package will be the single largest Main Street assistance program in the history of the United States. Phase Two delivered the sick leave for individuals, hourly workers, families and so forth. Phase Three – a significant package for small businesses, loan guarantees will be included. We’re gonna take out expenses and lost revenues…And, finally, I want to mention the Treasury’s Exchange Stabilization Fund. That will be replenished. It’s important because that Fund opens the door for Federal Reserve firepower to deal in a broad-based way throughout the economy for distressed industries, for small businesses, for financial turbulence. You’ve already seen the Fed take action. They intend to take more action. And in order to get this we have to replenish the Treasury’s emergency fund. It’s very, very important. Not everybody understands that…
“So, the total package here comes to roughly $6 trillion: $2 trillion direct assistance, roughly $4 trillion in Federal Reserve lending power. Again, it will be the largest Main Street financial package in the history of the United States. Liquidity and cash for families, small business, individuals, unemployed, to keep this thing going. We’re heading for a rough period but it’s only gonna be weeks we think. Weeks, months. It’s not gonna be years, that’s for sure.”
In fact, when the dust settled, the bailout of Wall Street was structured to run 4 to 5 years while the extra $600 a week added to unemployment claims for workers was going to last four months.
To further prepare the public in case mainstream media caught on to what was really going on and pushed back, Fed Chairman Powell made an unprecedented appearance on the Today show on March 26 and explained the plan like this:
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Powell: “In certain circumstances like the present, we do have the ability to essentially use our emergency lending authorities and the only limit on that will be how much backstop we get from the Treasury Department. We’re required to get full security for our loans so that we don’t lose money. So the Treasury puts up money as we estimate what the losses might be…Effectively $1 of loss absorption of backstop from Treasury is enough to support $10 of loans.”
The Fed was created in 1913 under the Federal Reserve Act. There is nothing, whatsoever, in the 107-year history of the Fed that states or even suggests that it can lever up taxpayer money by 10 to 1 to bail out Wall Street and stick the taxpayer with the losses. This was an outrageous plan hatched out of thin air by Kudlow, Powell and U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin with zero regard for the legality of the plan.
When the text of the final CARES Act stimulus bill was released to the public, it allotted $454 billion to be handed over to the Fed from the U.S. Treasury. That $454 billion from the taxpayer would absorb the first $454 billion of losses of the Fed’s levered up $4.54 trillion rescue fund for Wall Street, which would include bailing out bad loans at the biggest Wall Street banks, the primary dealers (trading houses), commercial paper market, money market funds, corporate bonds, junk bonds, and Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs).
To underscore that secrecy on the part of the Fed might have to be invoked, Section 4009 of the CARES Act suspends the Freedom of Information Act for the Fed and allows it to conduct its meetings in secret until the President says the coronavirus national emergency is over.
In addition to pushing the narrative that this is all about a rescue of Main Street, not Wall Street, there is the Trump administration’s secondary narrative that everything was just fine with the economy and Wall Street before the coronavirus hit the U.S. At Kudlow’s March 24 press briefing, he also said this: “We started the year very strong and then we got hit by the coronavirus.” That is also a false narrative.
According to the New England Journal of Medicine, the first confirmed case of coronavirus was reported in the United States on January 20, 2020. But according to the Fed’s own minutes, between September 17, 2019 and December 10-11, 2019, the Fed had already funneled ‘roughly $215 billion per day’ in emergency loans to Wall Street’s trading houses or more than $6.23 trillion in cumulative loans.
Stress on Wall Street was also apparent by the tens of thousands of people getting fired from their jobs by major Wall Street firms. See Wall Street Had Cut 68,000 Jobs and Received Trillions in Emergency Loans Prior to COVID-19 Anywhere in the World.
So where is the outrage from all of those Pulitzer prize winning newspapers across America over the second massive Wall Street bailout in 12 years? Their silence is deafening.


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--MUST READ – Full Interview Transcript of AG Barr Discussing Dropping the Flynn Case…

As customary CBS only broadcast a small snippet of the interview between CBS reporter Catherine Herridge and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr .
The full interview is much longer and much more interesting than the edited narrative broadcast by CBS .
When you read the conversation you will immediately notice why CBS refused to broadcast it , and why the segment that did air was so brutally edited .
Some of the interview answers will provide hope for those who want to see justice delivered .
However , there are also cautious answers that should be considered when formulating an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ongoing intention .
Below is the transcript .
[ Transcript ] Catherine Herridge : Attorney General Barr , thank you for speaking first to CBS News .
♦ Q : What action has the Justice Department taken today in the Michael Flynn case ?
BARR : We dismissed or are moving to dismiss the charges against General Flynn .
At any stage during a proceeding , even after indictment or a conviction or a guilty plea , the Department can move to dismiss the charges if we determine that our standards of prosecution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recall , in January , General Flynn moved to withdraw his plea , and also alleged misconduct by the government .
And at that time , I asked a very seasoned U.S. attorney , who had spent ten years as an FBI agent and ten years as a career prosecutor , Jeff Jensen , from St. Louis , to come in and take a fresh look at this whole case .
And he found some additional material .
And last week , he came in and briefed me and made a recommendation that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fully agreed with , as did the U.S. attorney in D.C .
So we ’ ve moved to dismiss the case .
♦ Q : So this decision to dismiss by the Justice Department , this all came together really within the last week , based on new evidence ?
BARR : Right .
Well U.S. Attorney Jensen since January has been investigating this .
And he reported to me last week .
♦ Q : Does Judge Sullivan have a say ?
BARR : Yes .
Under the rules , the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Generally , the courts have said that that provision is in there to protect defendants , to make sure the government doesn ’ t play games by bringing a charge and then dismissing it ; bringing another charge , dismissing it .
But he does have a say .
♦ Q : But is the Flynn case effectively over today from the Justice Department ’ s point of view ?
BARR : We think the case against Flynn for false statements should be dismissed , as far as the Department of Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ depending on the judge ’ s decision , could charges be brought against General Flynn in the future for other actions he took during the presidential campaign or during the transition ?
BARR : Well , no charges like that have been brought .
And I ’ m not gon na speculate about what charges there may be .
♦ Q : All of that said , General Flynn pled guilty to lying to federal investigators during his interview in January of 2017 .
And Flynn admitted in court , quote , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ otherwise had a material impact on the FBI ’ s ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals with the campaign and Russia ’ s efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.
” Does the fact remain that General Flynn lied to federal investigators ?
BARR : Well to constitute a false statement , you need two things .
One , you need a false statement , lie .
And then it has to be material to a legitimate investigation .
And I think on the question of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Director Comey said just a few months after this episode , he said it was a closed question .
And that , while you might make that argument , it was a very closed question .
But it ’ s on the question of materiality that we feel really that a crime can not be established here because there was not , in our view , a legitimate investigation going on .
They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage , based on a perfectly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a member of the transition .
So .
Let me just also say that when he pled , the issue of materiality is related to whether the government has a bona fide investigation going on .
And that ’ s information that ’ s really within the control of the government .
The individual party would really not have that information .
So as new information just became available that has a bearing on whether there was a legitimate investigation , that requires us , our duty , we think is to dismiss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the new evidence show that the counterintelligence case against General Flynn was simply left open to lay a trap for lying ?
They had started a counterintelligence investigation during the summer , as you know , related to the campaign .
But in December , the team , the Crossfire Hurricane team , was closing that and determined they had found nothing to justify continuing with that investigation against Flynn .
On the very day they prepared the final papers , the seventh floor , that is the director ’ s office and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there , sent down word they should keep that open .
So that they could try to go and question Flynn about this call he had with the Russian ambassador .
Let me say that , at that point , he was the designated national security adviser for President-Elect Trump , and was part of the transition , which is recognized by the government and funded by the government as an important function to bring in a new administration .
And it is very typical , very common for the national security team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreign leaders .
And that call , there was nothing wrong with it whatever .
In fact , it was laudable .
He– and it was nothing inconsistent with the Obama administration ’ s policies .
And it was in U.S. interests .
He was saying to the Russians , you know , “ Don ’ t escalate.
” And they asked him if he remembered saying that , and he said he didn ’ t remember that .
♦ Q : What should Americans take away from your actions in the Flynn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as I said in my confirmation hearing , one of the reasons I came back is because I was concerned that people were feeling there were two standards of justice in this country .
And that the political and that the justice , or the law enforcement process was being used to play political games .
And I wanted to make sure that we restore confidence in the system .
There ’ s only one standard of justice .
And I believe that this case , that justice in this case requires dismissing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Q : Are the actions you ’ re taking today bigger than the Flynn case ?
Well , I think they are bigger because I hope that it sends the message that there is one standard of justice in this country .
And that ’ s the way it will be .
It doesn ’ t matter what political party you ’ re in , or , you know , whether you ’ re rich or poor .
We will follow the same standard for everybody .
Was there a crime committed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
And do we have the evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt ?
And we don ’ t think either of those standards were applicable here .
♦ Q : Has this been one of the most consequential decisions that you have made as attorney general ?
I don ’ t know .
I let other people judge that .
It ’ s certainly – I feel good about the decision because that ’ s what we ’ re here to do .
We ’ re here to do what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it an easy decision ?
BARR : It was an easy decision , yes .
I think easy because once I saw all the facts and some of the tactics used by the FBI in this instance and also the legal problems with the case , it was an easy decision .
You know , one thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yates .
Deputy Attorney General Yates , I ’ ve disagreed with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but , you know , here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice .
She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration , and they should go and tell the White House about their findings .
They and , you know , Director Comey ran around that .
♦ Q : When the special counsel report was released last year , you were accused by critics of putting your thumb on the scale in the president ’ s favor .
Are you doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Flynn ’ s case ?
No , I ’ m doing the law ’ s bidding .
I ’ m doing my duty under the law , as I see it .
♦ Q : President Trump recently tweeted about the Flynn case .
He said , “ What happened to General Flynn should never be allowed to happen to a citizen of the United States again.
” Were you influenced in any way by the president or his tweets ?
BARR : No , not at all .
And , you know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearing that I was gon na look into what happened in 2016 and ’ 17 .
I made that crystal clear .
I was very concerned about what happened .
I was gon na get to the bottom of it .
And that included the treatment of General Flynn .
And that is part of John Durham , U.S. Attorney John Durham ’ s portfolio .
The reason we had to take this action now and why U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen came in was because it was prompted by the motions that were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we had to sorta move more quickly on it .
But John Durham is still looking at all of this .
This is one particular episode , but we view it as part of a number of related acts .
And we ’ re looking at the whole pattern of conduct .
♦ Q : The whole pattern of conduct before ?
♦ Q : After the election ?
Okay .
You talk about the importance of timing in this decision .
What was the evidence that helped you decide this issue ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence here was that this was not a bona fide counterintelligence investigation – was that they were closing the investigation in December .
They started that process .
And on January 4th , they were closing it .
And that when they heard about the phone call , which is – the FBI had the transcripts too – there ’ s no question as to what was discussed .
The FBI knew exactly what was discussed .
And General Flynn , being the former director of the DIA , said to them , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you listen to everything .
You know , you know what was said.
” So there was no mystery about the call .
But they initially tried some theories of how they could open another investigation , which didn ’ t fly .
And then they found out that they had not technically closed the earlier investigation .
And they kept it open for the express purpose of trying to catch , lay a perjury trap for General Flynn .
They didn ’ t warn him , the way we usually would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Justice Department .
They bypassed the protocols at the White House and so forth .
These were things that persuaded me that there was not a legitimate counterintelligence investigation going on .
♦ Q : You know you ’ re gon na take a lot of incoming , as they say in the military , for this decision .
Are you prepared for that ?
BARR : Yeah , I ’ m prepared for that .
I also think it ’ s sad that nowadays these partisan feelings are so strong that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And the groups that usually worry about civil liberties and making sure that there ’ s proper procedures followed and standards set seem to be ignoring it and willing to destroy people ’ s lives and see great injustices done .
♦ Q : Just to be clear , you said this was your decision .
♦ Q : Did you consult or discuss the decision in any way with President Trump ?
♦ Q : Did you advise the White House that you had made this decision ?
BARR : No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the schedule , that the Department would be saying something in court .
And I said that we ’ d make up our mind what to do and file , you know , sometime before Monday .
File our responses to what was going on in court .
But other than that , no .
♦ Q : So the White House became aware of the decision when it filed today ?
♦ Q : No .
Okay .
A lot of records have come to light .
You talk about the records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those new records to you ?
Because– ♦ Q : –of Jensen ?
Okay .
All right .
In addition to those records , there are handwritten notes from January 24th , 2017 .
This was the day of Michael Flynn ’ s interview .
And the writer states , “ What is our goal ?
Truth , admission , or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired ?
” Is that a routine , by-the-book conversation between senior FBI officials ?
BARR : Well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know , it ’ s not unusual .
In the course of a bona fide investigation , when you ’ re doing a criminal investigation or a counterintelligence investigation , that has a basis it ’ s not unusual to have an interview with someone and expecting that they might lie .
But here ’ s what ’ s different here is that there was no underlying investigation that was legitimate .
And the whole exercise was just about creating the lie .
♦ Q : But that language , does it bother @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , my understanding is , just looking at the documents , the way I interpret them , is there was a disagreement .
And that one of the agents , one of the senior agents felt that “ Let ’ s not be game playing here .
We have the transcript .
Show him the transcripts and find out what you wan na find out.
” Instead of instead of , you know , essentially reading excerpts and saying , “ Do you remember saying that ?
” which seemed to be all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him in something that could be called a lie .
But , again , because the FBI knew about the call , there was nothing wrong with the call , the FBI has the transcript of the call , whether or not he remembered saying something is not material to anything .
♦ Q : Who at the FBI was driving this ?
BARR : Well , this particular episode , it looks like the impetus came from the seventh floor .
BARR : I believe it ’ s Director Comey and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Based on the evidence that you have seen , did senior FBI officials conspire to throw out the national security adviser ?
BARR : Well , as I said , this is a particular episode .
And it has some troubling features to it , as we ’ ve discussed .
But I think , you know , that ’ s a question that really has to wait an analysis of all the different episodes that occurred through the summer of 2016 and the first several months of President Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the consequences for these individuals ?
BARR : Well , you know , I don ’ t wan na , you know , we ’ re in the middle of looking at all of this .
John Durham ’ s investigation , and U.S. Attorney Jensen , I ’ m gon na ask him to do some more work on different items as well .
And I ’ m gon na wait till all the evidence is , and I get their recommendations as to what they found and how serious it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if we were to find wrongdoing , in the sense of any criminal act , you know , obviously we would , we would follow through on that .
But , again , you know , just because something may even stink to high heaven and be , you know , appear everyone to be bad we still have to apply the right standard and be convinced that there ’ s a violation of a criminal statute .
And that we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt .
The same standard applies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sounds to me like one of your objectives is to never allow the Justice Department to be used as a political weapon .
That ’ s what you ’ re saying you think happened here ?
BARR : I think , yes .
I think there was an aspect of that .
And I think , for the last several decades , the Department has been used more and more , or the efforts have been made to draw the Department into that .
And I think it ’ s very important that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know , we should choose our leaders through the election process .
And efforts to use the law enforcement process to change leaders or to disable administrations are incendiary in this country and destroy our republic .
♦ Q : Before we move on to some separate questions , many of these records should have been provided to Flynn ’ s defense team long ago .
Do you still have confidence in FBI Director Christopher Wray ?
BARR : Well , you know , Chris Wray has always supported and been very helpful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running .
He cooperated fully with Durham , cooperated fully with Jensen .
But , you know , there are a lot of cases in the Department of Justice and I don ’ t consider it the director ’ s responsibility to make sure that all the documents are produced in each case .
So I don ’ t– I wouldn ’ t say that this has affected my confidence in Director Wray .
♦ Q : Does Director Wray have what it takes to make the changes at the FBI ?
BARR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , you know , he ’ s been a great partner to me in our effort to restore the American people ’ s confidence in both the Department of Justice and the FBI .
And we work very well together .
And I think both of us know that we have to step up .
That it ’ s very important to restore the American people ’ s confidence .
♦ Q : Does he have his arms around the gravity of what happened in 2016 and 2017 ?
BARR : I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Newly declassified footnotes in the Horowitz report suggest that the Steele dossier was likely the product of Russian disinformation .
And there were multiple warnings to the FBI at that time , yet they continued to use that .
How do you explain that ?
BARR : I think that ’ s one of the most troubling aspects of this whole thing .
And , in fact , I said it in testimony on the Hill , I can ’ t remember if it was my confirmation , that I said I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dossier and Steele ’ s activities were used as a vector for the Russians to inject disinformation into the political campaign .
I think that is something that Robert Mueller was responsible for looking at under his charter , which is the potential of Russian influence .
But I think it was ignored and there was mounting indications that this could very well have been happening and no one really stopped to look at it .
♦ Q : These are very smart people who were working in the special counsel ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FBI .
So what drove them here ?
BARR : Well , I think one of the things you have to guard against , both as a prosecutor and I think as an investigator , is that if you get too wedded to a particular outcome and you ’ re pursuing a particular agenda , you close your eyes to anything that sort of doesn ’ t fit with your preconception .
And I think that ’ s probably the phenomenon we ’ re looking at here .
♦ Q : You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , since December .
Do you see more evidence of personal or political bias today ?
BARR : You know , I ’ m not gon na , again , get into reaching a conclusion at this point till I see everything .
There ’ s certainly more information that has come out that , you know , points in that direction .
But I haven ’ t reached a final conclusion .
♦ Q : Before we just move onto to a couple of off-topic questions , the last thing most Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resigned , was fired .
And that he admitted lying to the FBI .
Does the fact remain that he lied ?
BARR : Well , you know , people sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes .
And as I said , the question of lying , you know , it ’ s something he would know about .
On its face , as Director Comey said , it ’ s not so clear .
But the question of materiality is not something he would know about .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ knows about .
And we have now gotten into it , drilled down , obtained new information .
And the Department of Justice is not persuaded that this was material to any legitimate counterintelligence investigation .
So it was not a crime .
♦ Q : Before we leave this topic , is there anything that you would like to add ?
♦ Q : Okay .
Just on COVID-19 .
Some of the news of today .
The valet at the White House has tested positive .
Have you had any exposure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : I don ’ t think I have , no .
♦ Q : Do you have a view on whether the president , the vice president should self-quarantine or be separated ?
BARR : No , you know , I don ’ t have a view on that .
I don ’ t know about how close they were physically or what the medical advice is the president gets .
But we ’ re tested pretty regularly when we ’ re over at the White House to visit .
♦ Q : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BARR : It depends how frequently , though at least once a week , but sometimes , you know , if you ’ ve been around and could have been infected , you can get further testing .
♦ Q : The president said that he ’ s urging the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act when it ’ s taken up in the Supreme Court later this year .
What ’ s your position ?
Is that something the Justice Department will continue to back ?
BARR : Yes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , all the stakeholders in the administration , to discuss this , and the Department is going to be taking the position as the president states .
♦ Q : Even if that means stripping millions of Americans of their health care in the middle of a pandemic ?
BARR : Well , the case isn ’ t gon na be argued until October .
And the president ’ s made clear that he strongly supports coverage of preexisting conditions .
And there will be coverage of preexisting conditions .
And , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replace Obamacare with a better health care system .
♦ Q : If governors continue to limit the size of gatherings , including religious services , what further action is the Justice Department prepared to take ?
BARR : Well , I think initially , you know , at the very beginning of the crisis , before we knew very much — and while , in some places , the infection rates were skyrocketing and threatening to overwhelm our health care system , you know , the initial limitations may have been defensible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s harder to justify those kinds of blanket restrictions on religious practice .
I think , if people can follow social distancing by leaving space , wearing masks and so forth , there has to be accommodation to religious practice .
The Department has already entered a few cases around the country where there have been these sweeping prohibitions against religion where there were comparable secular activities are not controlled the same way .
♦ Q : On the Bureau of Prisons– currently 2,100 inmates and over 360 Bureau prison staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you make universal testing available to the inmates and the staff ?
BARR : I think over time , we ’ ll be testing and perhaps get to that point .
You know , we got , right at the beginning , I dealt with FEMA and I was able to get some of the Abbott machines .
And we ’ ve been building up our testing capacity .
And we ’ re doing more and more tests .
And , you know , we ’ ve been trying to keep our inmates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let a lot of inmates who are older and don ’ t pose a threat to the community , we ’ ve put them on home confinement to get ’ em outta the institutions .
So we ’ re taking every measure we can to protect those inmates .
Generally speaking , historically , the infection rates roughly , from what I ’ ve seen , are comparable inside the institution ( SIC ) as they are in society at large .
And we ’ ve been able to prevent our prisons from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the same lethality that they have in , you know , nursing homes and so forth .
It takes a lotta work , and the Bureau of Prisons has been working hard on that .
♦ Q : In closing , this was a big decision in the Flynn case , to– to say the least .
When history looks back on this decision , how do you think it will be written ?
What will it say about your decision making ?
BARR : Well , history is written by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ’ s writing the history .
But I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law .
It helped , it upheld the standards of the Department of Justice , and it undid what was an injustice .
BARR : I mean , it ’ s not gon na be the end of it .
♦ Q : What do you mean , it ’ s not the end of it ?
BARR : Well , I said we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what happened .
♦ Q : And later this year , do you expect a report from U.S. Attorney John Durham ?
Or do you expect indictments ?
BARR : Well , as you know , I ’ m not gon na predict the outcome .
But I said that we ’ re certainly — there probably will be a report as a byproduct of his work .
But we also are seeing if there are people who violated the law and should be brought to justice .
And that ’ s what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Q : And that would include individuals involved in the Flynn case ?
BARR : I don ’ t wan na get into particular individuals .
♦ Q : Attorney General William Barr , thank you very much for joining us here at CBS News .

Q: Does the new evidence show that the counterintelligence case against General Flynn was simply left open to lay a trap for lying? BARR: Yes. Essentially.
As customary CBS only broadcast a small snippet of the interview between CBS reporter Catherine Herridge and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr. The full interview is much longer and much more interesting than the edited narrative broadcast by CBS.
When you read the conversation you will immediately notice why CBS refused to broadcast it, and why the segment that did air was so brutally edited.
Some of the interview answers will provide hope for those who want to see justice delivered. However, there are also cautious answers that should be considered when formulating an opinion of AG Bill Barr’s ongoing intention. Below is the transcript.
[Transcript] Catherine Herridge: Attorney General Barr, thank you for speaking first to CBS News.
Attorney General William Barr: Hi, Catherine.
♦ Q: What action has the Justice Department taken today in the Michael Flynn case?
BARR: We dismissed or are moving to dismiss the charges against General Flynn. At any stage during a proceeding, even after indictment or a conviction or a guilty plea, the Department can move to dismiss the charges if we determine that our standards of prosecution have not been met.
As you recall, in January, General Flynn moved to withdraw his plea, and also alleged misconduct by the government. And at that time, I asked a very seasoned U.S. attorney, who had spent ten years as an FBI agent and ten years as a career prosecutor, Jeff Jensen, from St. Louis, to come in and take a fresh look at this whole case. And he found some additional material. And last week, he came in and briefed me and made a recommendation that we dismiss the case, which I fully agreed with, as did the U.S. attorney in D.C. So we’ve moved to dismiss the case.
♦ Q: So this decision to dismiss by the Justice Department, this all came together really within the last week, based on new evidence?
BARR: Right. Well U.S. Attorney Jensen since January has been investigating this. And he reported to me last week.
♦ Q: Does Judge Sullivan have a say?
BARR: Yes. Under the rules, the case can be dismissed with leave of court. Generally, the courts have said that that provision is in there to protect defendants, to make sure the government doesn’t play games by bringing a charge and then dismissing it; bringing another charge, dismissing it. But he does have a say.
♦ Q: But is the Flynn case effectively over today from the Justice Department’s point of view?
BARR: We think the case against Flynn for false statements should be dismissed, as far as the Department of Justice is concerned.
♦ Q: And depending on the judge’s decision, could charges be brought against General Flynn in the future for other actions he took during the presidential campaign or during the transition?
BARR: Well, no charges like that have been brought. And I’m not gonna speculate about what charges there may be.
♦ Q: All of that said, General Flynn pled guilty to lying to federal investigators during his interview in January of 2017. And Flynn admitted in court, quote, his “false statements and omissions impeded and otherwise had a material impact on the FBI’s ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals with the campaign and Russia’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.” Does the fact remain that General Flynn lied to federal investigators?
BARR: Well to constitute a false statement, you need two things. One, you need a false statement, lie. And then it has to be material to a legitimate investigation. And I think on the question of lying, it’s as Comey, Director Comey said just a few months after this episode, he said it was a closed question. And that, while you might make that argument, it was a very closed question.
But it’s on the question of materiality that we feel really that a crime cannot be established here because there was not, in our view, a legitimate investigation going on. They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage, based on a perfectly legitimate and appropriate call he made as a member of the transition. So.
Let me just also say that when he pled, the issue of materiality is related to whether the government has a bona fide investigation going on. And that’s information that’s really within the control of the government. The individual party would really not have that information. So as new information just became available that has a bearing on whether there was a legitimate investigation, that requires us, our duty, we think is to dismiss the case.
♦ Q: Does the new evidence show that the counterintelligence case against General Flynn was simply left open to lay a trap for lying?
BARR: Yes. Essentially.
They had started a counterintelligence investigation during the summer, as you know, related to the campaign. But in December, the team, the Crossfire Hurricane team, was closing that and determined they had found nothing to justify continuing with that investigation against Flynn.
On the very day they prepared the final papers, the seventh floor, that is the director’s office and the deputy director’s office up there, sent down word they should keep that open. So that they could try to go and question Flynn about this call he had with the Russian ambassador.
Let me say that, at that point, he was the designated national security adviser for President-Elect Trump, and was part of the transition, which is recognized by the government and funded by the government as an important function to bring in a new administration. And it is very typical, very common for the national security team of the incoming president to communicate with foreign leaders.
And that call, there was nothing wrong with it whatever. In fact, it was laudable. He– and it was nothing inconsistent with the Obama administration’s policies. And it was in U.S. interests. He was saying to the Russians, you know, “Don’t escalate.” And they asked him if he remembered saying that, and he said he didn’t remember that.
♦ Q: What should Americans take away from your actions in the Flynn case today?
BARR: Well, as I said in my confirmation hearing, one of the reasons I came back is because I was concerned that people were feeling there were two standards of justice in this country. And that the political and that the justice, or the law enforcement process was being used to play political games. And I wanted to make sure that we restore confidence in the system. There’s only one standard of justice. And I believe that this case, that justice in this case requires dismissing the charges against General Flynn.
♦ Q: Are the actions you’re taking today bigger than the Flynn case?
Well, I think they are bigger because I hope that it sends the message that there is one standard of justice in this country. And that’s the way it will be. It doesn’t matter what political party you’re in, or, you know, whether you’re rich or poor. We will follow the same standard for everybody. Was there a crime committed, do we believe a crime was committed? And do we have the evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? And we don’t think either of those standards were applicable here.
♦ Q: Has this been one of the most consequential decisions that you have made as attorney general?
I don’t know. I let other people judge that. It’s certainly – I feel good about the decision because that’s what we’re here to do. We’re here to do what’s right.
♦ Q: Not what’s easy.
Right.
♦ Q: Was it an easy decision?
BARR: It was an easy decision, yes. I think easy because once I saw all the facts and some of the tactics used by the FBI in this instance and also the legal problems with the case, it was an easy decision. You know, one thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yates.
Deputy Attorney General Yates, I’ve disagreed with her about a couple of things, but, you know, here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice. She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration, and they should go and tell the White House about their findings. They and, you know, Director Comey ran around that.
♦ Q: When the special counsel report was released last year, you were accused by critics of putting your thumb on the scale in the president’s favor. Are you doing the president’s bidding in General Flynn’s case?
No, I’m doing the law’s bidding. I’m doing my duty under the law, as I see it.
♦ Q: President Trump recently tweeted about the Flynn case. He said, “What happened to General Flynn should never be allowed to happen to a citizen of the United States again.” Were you influenced in any way by the president or his tweets?
BARR: No, not at all. And, you know, I made clear during my confirmation hearing that I was gonna look into what happened in 2016 and ’17. I made that crystal clear. I was very concerned about what happened. I was gonna get to the bottom of it. And that included the treatment of General Flynn.
And that is part of John Durham, U.S. Attorney John Durham’s portfolio. The reason we had to take this action now and why U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen came in was because it was prompted by the motions that were filed in that case. And so we had to sorta move more quickly on it. But John Durham is still looking at all of this.
This is one particular episode, but we view it as part of a number of related acts. And we’re looking at the whole pattern of conduct.
♦ Q: The whole pattern of conduct before?
BARR: And after.
♦ Q: And after?
BARR: Yeah, the election.
♦ Q: After the election? Okay. You talk about the importance of timing in this decision. What was the evidence that helped you decide this issue?
BARR: I think a very important evidence here was that this was not a bona fide counterintelligence investigation – was that they were closing the investigation in December. They started that process. And on January 4th, they were closing it.
And that when they heard about the phone call, which is – the FBI had the transcripts too – there’s no question as to what was discussed. The FBI knew exactly what was discussed. And General Flynn, being the former director of the DIA, said to them, you know, “You listen, you listen to everything. You know, you know what was said.”
So there was no mystery about the call. But they initially tried some theories of how they could open another investigation, which didn’t fly. And then they found out that they had not technically closed the earlier investigation. And they kept it open for the express purpose of trying to catch, lay a perjury trap for General Flynn.
They didn’t warn him, the way we usually would be required by the Department. They bypassed the Justice Department. They bypassed the protocols at the White House and so forth. These were things that persuaded me that there was not a legitimate counterintelligence investigation going on.
♦ Q: You know you’re gonna take a lot of incoming, as they say in the military, for this decision. Are you prepared for that?
BARR: Yeah, I’m prepared for that. I also think it’s sad that nowadays these partisan feelings are so strong that people have lost any sense of justice. And the groups that usually worry about civil liberties and making sure that there’s proper procedures followed and standards set seem to be ignoring it and willing to destroy people’s lives and see great injustices done.
♦ Q: Just to be clear, you said this was your decision.
BARR: Uh-huh.
♦ Q: Did you consult or discuss the decision in any way with President Trump?
BARR: No.
♦ Q: Did you advise the White House that you had made this decision?
BARR: No. They were aware, because of the schedule, that the Department would be saying something in court. And I said that we’d make up our mind what to do and file, you know, sometime before Monday. File our responses to what was going on in court. But other than that, no.
♦ Q: So the White House became aware of the decision when it filed today?
BARR: Yes.
♦ Q: Not earlier?
BARR: No.
♦ Q: No. Okay. A lot of records have come to light. You talk about the records for closing the Flynn case. Were those new records to you? Because–
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
BARR: Yes.
♦ Q: –of Jensen? Okay. All right. In addition to those records, there are handwritten notes from January 24th, 2017. This was the day of Michael Flynn’s interview. And the writer states, “What is our goal? Truth, admission, or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” Is that a routine, by-the-book conversation between senior FBI officials?
BARR: Well, as many people point out, you know, it’s not unusual. In the course of a bona fide investigation, when you’re doing a criminal investigation or a counterintelligence investigation, that has a basis it’s not unusual to have an interview with someone and expecting that they might lie. But here’s what’s different here is that there was no underlying investigation that was legitimate. And the whole exercise was just about creating the lie.
♦ Q: But that language, does it bother you at all?
BARR: Well, my understanding is, just looking at the documents, the way I interpret them, is there was a disagreement. And that one of the agents, one of the senior agents felt that “Let’s not be game playing here. We have the transcript. Show him the transcripts and find out what you wanna find out.”
Instead of instead of, you know, essentially reading excerpts and saying, “Do you remember saying that?” which seemed to be all for the purpose of trying to catch him in something that could be called a lie. But, again, because the FBI knew about the call, there was nothing wrong with the call, the FBI has the transcript of the call, whether or not he remembered saying something is not material to anything.
♦ Q: Who at the FBI was driving this?
BARR: Well, this particular episode, it looks like the impetus came from the seventh floor.
♦ Q: The seventh floor is Director Comey.
BARR: I believe it’s Director Comey and the deputy’s office.
♦ Q: Based on the evidence that you have seen, did senior FBI officials conspire to throw out the national security adviser?
BARR: Well, as I said, this is a particular episode. And it has some troubling features to it, as we’ve discussed. But I think, you know, that’s a question that really has to wait an analysis of all the different episodes that occurred through the summer of 2016 and the first several months of President Trump’s administration.
♦ Q: What are the consequences for these individuals?
BARR: Well, you know, I don’t wanna, you know, we’re in the middle of looking at all of this. John Durham’s investigation, and U.S. Attorney Jensen, I’m gonna ask him to do some more work on different items as well. And I’m gonna wait till all the evidence is, and I get their recommendations as to what they found and how serious it is.
But if, you know, if we were to find wrongdoing, in the sense of any criminal act, you know, obviously we would, we would follow through on that. But, again, you know, just because something may even stink to high heaven and be, you know, appear everyone to be bad we still have to apply the right standard and be convinced that there’s a violation of a criminal statute. And that we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The same standard applies to everybody.
♦ Q: It sounds to me like one of your objectives is to never allow the Justice Department to be used as a political weapon. That’s what you’re saying you think happened here?
BARR: I think, yes. I think there was an aspect of that. And I think, for the last several decades, the Department has been used more and more, or the efforts have been made to draw the Department into that. And I think it’s very important that that not happen.
People, you know, we should choose our leaders through the election process. And efforts to use the law enforcement process to change leaders or to disable administrations are incendiary in this country and destroy our republic.
♦ Q: Before we move on to some separate questions, many of these records should have been provided to Flynn’s defense team long ago. Do you still have confidence in FBI Director Christopher Wray?
BARR: Well, you know, Chris Wray has always supported and been very helpful in various investigations we’ve been running. He cooperated fully with Durham, cooperated fully with Jensen. But, you know, there are a lot of cases in the Department of Justice and I don’t consider it the director’s responsibility to make sure that all the documents are produced in each case. So I don’t– I wouldn’t say that this has affected my confidence in Director Wray.
♦ Q: Does Director Wray have what it takes to make the changes at the FBI?
BARR: Yeah, as I’ve said, you know, he’s been a great partner to me in our effort to restore the American people’s confidence in both the Department of Justice and the FBI. And we work very well together. And I think both of us know that we have to step up. That it’s very important to restore the American people’s confidence.
♦ Q: Does he have his arms around the gravity of what happened in 2016 and 2017?
BARR: I think he does.
♦ Q: Newly declassified footnotes in the Horowitz report suggest that the Steele dossier was likely the product of Russian disinformation. And there were multiple warnings to the FBI at that time, yet they continued to use that. How do you explain that?
BARR: I think that’s one of the most troubling aspects of this whole thing. And, in fact, I said it in testimony on the Hill, I can’t remember if it was my confirmation, that I said I was very concerned about the possibility that that dossier and Steele’s activities were used as a vector for the Russians to inject disinformation into the political campaign.
I think that is something that Robert Mueller was responsible for looking at under his charter, which is the potential of Russian influence. But I think it was ignored and there was mounting indications that this could very well have been happening and no one really stopped to look at it.
♦ Q: These are very smart people who were working in the special counsel’s office, and in senior levels of the FBI. So what drove them here?
BARR: Well, I think one of the things you have to guard against, both as a prosecutor and I think as an investigator, is that if you get too wedded to a particular outcome and you’re pursuing a particular agenda, you close your eyes to anything that sort of doesn’t fit with your preconception. And I think that’s probably the phenomenon we’re looking at here.
♦ Q: You know more about the investigation since Horowitz, since December. Do you see more evidence of personal or political bias today?
BARR: You know, I’m not gonna, again, get into reaching a conclusion at this point till I see everything. There’s certainly more information that has come out that, you know, points in that direction. But I haven’t reached a final conclusion.
♦ Q: Before we just move onto to a couple of off-topic questions, the last thing most Americans remember about General Flynn is that he resigned, was fired. And that he admitted lying to the FBI. Does the fact remain that he lied?
BARR: Well, you know, people sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes. And as I said, the question of lying, you know, it’s something he would know about. On its face, as Director Comey said, it’s not so clear. But the question of materiality is not something he would know about. That’s something that the government knows about. And we have now gotten into it, drilled down, obtained new information. And the Department of Justice is not persuaded that this was material to any legitimate counterintelligence investigation. So it was not a crime.
♦ Q: Before we leave this topic, is there anything that you would like to add?
BARR: No.
♦ Q: Okay. Just on COVID-19. Some of the news of today. The valet at the White House has tested positive. Have you had any exposure or interaction with this valet?
BARR: I don’t think I have, no.
♦ Q: Do you have a view on whether the president, the vice president should self-quarantine or be separated?
BARR: No, you know, I don’t have a view on that. I don’t know about how close they were physically or what the medical advice is the president gets. But we’re tested pretty regularly when we’re over at the White House to visit.
♦ Q: Every day, every other day?
BARR: It depends how frequently, though at least once a week, but sometimes, you know, if you’ve been around and could have been infected, you can get further testing.
♦ Q: The president said that he’s urging the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act when it’s taken up in the Supreme Court later this year. What’s your position? Is that something the Justice Department will continue to back?
BARR: Yes. You know, we had an opportunity, all the stakeholders in the administration, to discuss this, and the Department is going to be taking the position as the president states.
♦ Q: Even if that means stripping millions of Americans of their health care in the middle of a pandemic?
BARR: Well, the case isn’t gonna be argued until October. And the president’s made clear that he strongly supports coverage of preexisting conditions. And there will be coverage of preexisting conditions. And, you know, he expects to fix and replace Obamacare with a better health care system.
♦ Q: If governors continue to limit the size of gatherings, including religious services, what further action is the Justice Department prepared to take?
BARR: Well, I think initially, you know, at the very beginning of the crisis, before we knew very much — and while, in some places, the infection rates were skyrocketing and threatening to overwhelm our health care system, you know, the initial limitations may have been defensible. But as time goes by, it’s harder to justify those kinds of blanket restrictions on religious practice.
I think, if people can follow social distancing by leaving space, wearing masks and so forth, there has to be accommodation to religious practice. The Department has already entered a few cases around the country where there have been these sweeping prohibitions against religion where there were comparable secular activities are not controlled the same way.
♦ Q: On the Bureau of Prisons– currently 2,100 inmates and over 360 Bureau prison staff have tested positive for COVID-19. Will you make universal testing available to the inmates and the staff?
BARR: I think over time, we’ll be testing and perhaps get to that point. You know, we got, right at the beginning, I dealt with FEMA and I was able to get some of the Abbott machines. And we’ve been building up our testing capacity. And we’re doing more and more tests.
And, you know, we’ve been trying to keep our inmates as safe as we can. We let a lot of inmates who are older and don’t pose a threat to the community, we’ve put them on home confinement to get ’em outta the institutions. So we’re taking every measure we can to protect those inmates.
Generally speaking, historically, the infection rates roughly, from what I’ve seen, are comparable inside the institution (SIC) as they are in society at large. And we’ve been able to prevent our prisons from becoming Petri dishes where they sweep through with the same lethality that they have in, you know, nursing homes and so forth. It takes a lotta work, and the Bureau of Prisons has been working hard on that.
♦ Q: In closing, this was a big decision in the Flynn case, to– to say the least. When history looks back on this decision, how do you think it will be written? What will it say about your decision making?
BARR: Well, history is written by the winner. So it largely depends on who’s writing the history. But I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law. It helped, it upheld the standards of the Department of Justice, and it undid what was an injustice.
♦ Q: Uh-huh.
BARR: I mean, it’s not gonna be the end of it.
♦ Q: What do you mean, it’s not the end of it?
BARR: Well, I said we’re gonna get to the bottom of what happened.
♦ Q: And later this year, do you expect a report from U.S. Attorney John Durham? Or do you expect indictments?
BARR: Well, as you know, I’m not gonna predict the outcome. But I said that we’re certainly — there probably will be a report as a byproduct of his work. But we also are seeing if there are people who violated the law and should be brought to justice. And that’s what we have our eye on.
♦ Q: And that would include individuals involved in the Flynn case?
BARR: I don’t wanna get into particular individuals.
♦ Q: Attorney General William Barr, thank you very much for joining us here at CBS News.
Barr: Thank you.
[Source Link]


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--ACCOUNTABILITY: Congress Backs Australian Call for Investigation Into China Over Coronavirus Deceit.

A bipartisan delegation in Congress is showing support for the Australian government ’ s call to investigate China over its cover-up of the coronavirus pandemic , according to a letter sent Thursday to the Australian ambassador .
China has already threatened to boycott Australian goods and take other punitive measures against the country after Prime Minister Scott Morrison called for an independent investigation into the Communist Party ’ s efforts to censor information about the virus and destroy medical samples that could have been used in research .
Australian leaders have also pressed for an investigation into the World Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alleged collusion with China .
Chinese officials are using their state-controlled press organs to discredit Australia and accuse the country of being part of a U.S. plot to undermine Beijing .
The statements include calls for boycotts of Australian foods and other products .
In a sign of a growing consensus in Congress that China must be held accountable for its behavior , a group of more than 20 congressional leaders , in a letter sent to Australia ’ s ambassador to the United States , rejected Beijing ’ s intimidation tactics and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stance .
Members of both parties in the House and Senate signed on to the letter , including Sens .
James Risch ( R. , Idaho ) , Robert Menendez ( D. , N.J. ) , Ben Cardin ( D. , Md . )
, Marco Rubio ( R. , Fla. ) , and Reps. Mike Gallagher ( R. , Wis. ) , Liz Cheney ( R. , Wyo . )
, and Ted Lieu ( D. , Calif. ) , among others .
The lawmakers accused China of engaging in economic blackmail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not for the first time , Chinese government officials responded to these calls with deeply disturbing and thinly-disguised threats of retaliation , ” they wrote .
“ We unequivocally oppose this behavior and strongly support Foreign Minister Marise Payne ’ s rejection of ‘ any suggestion that economic coercion is an appropriate response to a call for such an assessment . '
” In addition to calling for boycotts , Chinese state-controlled media outlets have smeared Australia , recently calling the nation “ gum stuck to the bottom of China ’ s shoe.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ an investigation and send a sign to Western nations that China will take punitive action against those who speak out .
An investigation into the WHO and China is warranted , however , as new information indicates that the Communist Party went to great lengths to hide the virus from the world , according to the lawmakers .
“ Given the tremendous toll COVID-19 has taken on the world , it is only natural that Australia—like all nations concerned with upholding best practices for global public health—would want an objective , scientific , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ origins of the virus , ” the lawmakers wrote .

via freebeacon
A bipartisan delegation in Congress is showing support for the Australian government’s call to investigate China over its cover-up of the coronavirus pandemic, according to a letter sent Thursday to the Australian ambassador.
China has already threatened to boycott Australian goods and take other punitive measures against the country after Prime Minister Scott Morrison called for an independent investigation into the Communist Party’s efforts to censor information about the virus and destroy medical samples that could have been used in research. Australian leaders have also pressed for an investigation into the World Health Organization and its top officials over its alleged collusion with China.
Chinese officials are using their state-controlled press organs to discredit Australia and accuse the country of being part of a U.S. plot to undermine Beijing. The statements include calls for boycotts of Australian foods and other products.
In a sign of a growing consensus in Congress that China must be held accountable for its behavior, a group of more than 20 congressional leaders, in a letter sent to Australia’s ambassador to the United States, rejected Beijing’s intimidation tactics and vowed to back Australia’s tough stance. Members of both parties in the House and Senate signed on to the letter, including Sens. James Risch (R., Idaho), Robert Menendez (D., N.J.), Ben Cardin (D., Md.), Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), and Reps. Mike Gallagher (R., Wis.), Liz Cheney (R., Wyo.), and Ted Lieu (D., Calif.), among others.
The lawmakers accused China of engaging in economic blackmail against Australia.
“Unfortunately, and not for the first time, Chinese government officials responded to these calls with deeply disturbing and thinly-disguised threats of retaliation,” they wrote. “We unequivocally oppose this behavior and strongly support Foreign Minister Marise Payne’s rejection of ‘any suggestion that economic coercion is an appropriate response to a call for such an assessment.'”
In addition to calling for boycotts, Chinese state-controlled media outlets have smeared Australia, recently calling the nation “gum stuck to the bottom of China’s shoe.” These threats are meant to deter an investigation and send a sign to Western nations that China will take punitive action against those who speak out.
An investigation into the WHO and China is warranted, however, as new information indicates that the Communist Party went to great lengths to hide the virus from the world, according to the lawmakers.
“Given the tremendous toll COVID-19 has taken on the world, it is only natural that Australia—like all nations concerned with upholding best practices for global public health—would want an objective, scientific, evidence-based, and rigorous investigation into the origins of the virus,” the lawmakers wrote.


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--Joe Biden’s Virtual Rally DISASTER! Tampa Bay Speech ! OH MY…VIDEO

“ They introduce me ?
” a blurry Joe Biden asked five seconds after he appeared on-screen .
“ Am @ @ @ @ @ added , as he walked toward the camera on choppy video and removed his aviator @ @ @ @ @ to be a crisp and cool introduction instead stoked confusion .
THIS IS SO MUCH @ @ @ @ @ WATCH ?
?
OMG HAHAHAHA POOR JOE…

“They introduce me?” a blurry Joe Biden asked five seconds after he appeared on-screen. “Am I on?” he added, as he walked toward the camera on choppy video and removed his aviator sunglasses.
What was supposed to be a crisp and cool introduction instead stoked confusion.
THIS IS SO MUCH FUN I SHOULD CHARGE TO WATCH?? OMG HAHAHAHA
POOR JOE…
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
GG


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--NEIMAN MARCUS BECOMES 2ND MAJOR RETAILER TO SEEK CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY:

The move by the 112-year-old storied luxury department store chain was announced Thursday and follows the bankruptcy filing by J.Crew @ @ @ @ @ there will be more to come even as businesses start to reopen in parts of @ @ @ @ @ Florida .
More : All 97 locations of Souplantation and Sweet Tomatoes have been permanently @ @ @ @ @ of Coronavirus .
Sadly , Websites such as DeadMalls.com are going to have plenty of @ @ @ @ @ next couple of years , as shopping malls lose their anchor stores and restaurants .

via wbtv
The move by the 112-year-old storied luxury department store chain was announced Thursday and follows the bankruptcy filing by J.Crew on Monday. Experts believe there will be more to come even as businesses start to reopen in parts of the country like Texas and Florida.
Related: Nordstrom permanently closing Sacramento mall store as COVID-19 hammers economy.
More: All 97 locations of Souplantation and Sweet Tomatoes have been permanently shut down in the wake of Coronavirus.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Sadly, Websites such as DeadMalls.com are going to have plenty of opportunities for updates in the next couple of years, as shopping malls lose their anchor stores and restaurants.
h/t ED


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--Father and Son Charged in murder of Ahmaud Arbery…

I thought it was undercover cops in that video… Just two local men , who thought he was a thief… @ @ @ @ @ live in that neighborhood , or anywhere close to it ?
?
?
SAVANNAH , @ @ @ @ @ Georgia authorities arrested a white father and son Thursday and charged them with murder in @ @ @ @ @ a black man they had pursued in a truck after spotting him running in their @ @ @ @ @ more than two months after Ahmaud Arbery , 25 , was killed on a residential @ @ @ @ @ city of Brunswick .
National outrage over the case swelled this week after cellphone video @ @ @ @ @ shooting .
Those close to Arbery celebrated the news but also expressed frustration at the @ @ @ @ @ should have occurred the day it happened , ” said Akeem Baker , one of @ @ @ @ @ in Brunswick .
“ There ’ s no way without the video this would have @ @ @ @ @ just glad the light ’ s shining very bright on this situation .
”

I thought it was undercover cops in that video…
Just two local men, who thought he was a thief…
I have one question…
Did,Ahmaud Arbery, live in that neighborhood, or anywhere close to it???
apnews.com/96990a5023927df289c934d2decd90b8
SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) — Georgia authorities arrested a white father and son Thursday and charged them with murder in the February shooting death of a black man they had pursued in a truck after spotting him running in their neighborhood.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
The charges came more than two months after Ahmaud Arbery, 25, was killed on a residential street just outside the port city of Brunswick. National outrage over the case swelled this week after cellphone video that appeared to show the shooting.
Those close to Arbery celebrated the news but also expressed frustration at the long wait.
“This should have occurred the day it happened,” said Akeem Baker, one of Arbery’s close friends in Brunswick. “There’s no way without the video this would have occurred. I’m just glad the light’s shining very bright on this situation.”
www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Killing-of-Ahmaud-Arbery-draws-condemnation-15255166.php
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8299259/Two-white-men-shot-killed-unarmed-black-jogger-Ahmaud-Arbery-charged-MURDER.html
h/t COVID19


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--This is why lockdowns can’t continue much longer, even in hard-hit states.

DON ’ T JUST CUT ‘ EM , SLASH ‘ EM : ‘ Sober look ’ at public payrolls urged as bailouts tax system .
The warning comes after Boston ’ s public payroll was posted by the Herald showing 8,000 employees who earned $ 100,000 or more last year .
While first responders are on the front lines of the pandemic , others in Boston have not been furloughed .
“ We are faced with a crisis .
By necessity , the state and City of Boston must find places to tighten the belt .
They have an obligation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greg Sullivan of the Pioneer Institute , who once was the state inspector general .
.
.
.
Out of the 8,000 city employees who took home six-figure pay last year , 31 recorded gross pay of $ 300,000 or more and another 700 workers clocked in at $ 200,000 and up , records show .
There were also two large workers ’ compensation settlements in 2019 for $ 772,000 , to a school employee , and $ 401,000 , to a council worker .
.
.
.
The budget-tightening talk comes jobless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are unemployed .
“ This is the emergency we ’ ve talked about that would prod reductions , ” he added .
“ What Congress is looking to provide states and cities is mind-numbing .
We need to start now to get serious .
”

DON’T JUST CUT ‘EM, SLASH ‘EM: ‘Sober look’ at public payrolls urged as bailouts tax system.
The warning comes after Boston’s public payroll was posted by the Herald showing 8,000 employees who earned $100,000 or more last year. While first responders are on the front lines of the pandemic, others in Boston have not been furloughed.
“We are faced with a crisis. By necessity, the state and City of Boston must find places to tighten the belt. They have an obligation to do it now,” said Greg Sullivan of the Pioneer Institute, who once was the state inspector general. . . .
Out of the 8,000 city employees who took home six-figure pay last year, 31 recorded gross pay of $300,000 or more and another 700 workers clocked in at $200,000 and up, records show. There were also two large workers’ compensation settlements in 2019 for $772,000, to a school employee, and $401,000, to a council worker. . . .
The budget-tightening talk comes jobless numbers show one in four in Massachusetts are unemployed.
“This is the emergency we’ve talked about that would prod reductions,” he added. “What Congress is looking to provide states and cities is mind-numbing. We need to start now to get serious.”


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--USAF KC-135 (PEARL13) conducting flight ops just 200 kilometers off the coast of mainland #China.

Two ships went off AIS near the South China Sea and another plane shut off ADS-B south of the Phils @ @ @ @ @ played if we aren ’ t close to the real thing .

USAF KC-135 (PEARL13) conducting flight ops just 200 kilometers off the coast of mainland #China. pic.twitter.com/aFTnb7XrEa — The Intel Crab (@IntelCrab) May 7, 2020
Turning back now. Was 120 kilometers from mainland China. pic.twitter.com/wTphXF2mca — The Intel Crab (@IntelCrab) May 8, 2020
Recon mission. Future combat theatre. Retaliation. — Tordoflyer (@tordoflyer) May 8, 2020
Two ships went off AIS near the South China Sea and another plane shut off ADS-B south of the Phils.
Lots of games being played if we aren’t close to the real thing.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
h/t Builder


investmentwatchblog--2020-05-08--@RJW: “Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting wi

@RJW: “Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

The Deep State is scrambling .
Every lie they ’ ve told and had the media cover for has been @ @ @ @ @ t even bring themselves to discuss the contents of the transcripts .
They ’ re @ @ @ @ @ infighting.
” HE ’ S TOO KIND : Trump blasts Obama DOJ as “ human @ @ @ @ @ treason ” after Flynn case dropped .

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show // Remember all the #FakeNews weasels hooting and hollering when Trump accused Obama off wire-tapping his campaign? #DeepStateScum t.co/H9IcMmcfA0 — James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) May 7, 2020
The Deep State is scrambling. Every lie they’ve told and had the media cover for has been exposed. CNN can’t even bring themselves to discuss the contents of the transcripts. They’re just talking about “committee infighting.”
HE’S TOO KIND: Trump blasts Obama DOJ as “human scum” guilty of “treason” after Flynn case dropped.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
TREASON: "A big price should be paid" by "human scum" Obama administration officials who tried to setup Flynn and take down a president…"It's treason." From Trump's reaction to Flynn case dismissal: pic.twitter.com/ElCBBNwc0D — Craig Mason (@OldCraig) May 7, 2020
People having a really bad day:
-Adam Schiff
-Jerry Nadler
-Jim Comey
-Andy McCabe
-Rod Rosenstein
-Sally Yates
-Jim Clapper
-Barack Obama
-Joe Biden
People having a really good day:
-Americans who value justice — Dan Bongino (@dbongino) May 7, 2020
AC