We reported back in November 2016 – Cashless World: 1 out of 3 People Never Use Cash – fewer and fewer people understand the importance of using cash to protect themselves from an overarching government warlord. At the time China’s use of digitized currency was growing at about 40% per annum. This means millions of people each year freely hand over their cash and opt to use their cell phone, online currency transfers or a plastic debit/credit card to make 100% of their purchases. We see this as nothing short of happily going into the gulag of digital enslavement.
Today we learned China is taking another step toward being a cashless society. Not just any cashless society, but the largest populated nation on the planet. Please keep in mind this announcement is coming on the heels of China’s closest ally, Russia, announcing she would be issuing a crypto-ruble – Which is a digitized currency as well. Once these two nations go cashless that will be a huge blow to hard currency in circulation around the world.
In a story that seems to have gone largely unnoticed by the western press, the China Daily reported that the PBoC has successfully designed a prototype that can regulate its future supply of digital fiat currency.
In a report, “PBoC inches closer to digital currency”, the newspaper stated that China’s central bank “has completed trial runs on the algorithms needed for digital currency supply, taking it a step closer to addressing the technological challenges associated with digital currencies, according to a top official associated with the project.”
The China Daily article goes on to suggest that, while there is no timetable, “China is likely to become the first country that would deploy a digital fiat currency.”
We have been arguing these totalitarian governments, like China, the U.S., Russia and most other governments, are not going to simply hand over the mechanism that produces their power and control. We are now seeing the first real steps by a major government to maintain their control and power through the issuance of currency. If the people want to enslave themselves through the use of digital currency why wouldn’t the government be on board with that idea and fully assist the citizens in their desire to willingly hand over their sovereignty?
Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News senior judicial analyst, weighed in on the report, telling FOX Business’ Stuart Varney on “Varney & Co.,” “The significance is an FBI acknowledgement that Huma Abedin, Mrs. Anthony Weiner, when she had a top security clearance as the number two assistant to Hillary Clinton when Hillary was Secretary of State, regularly sent copies of sensitive material to her own laptop so she could look at it at night, either knowing or forgetting that her husband had access to it as well.”
Napolitano said this gives insight into the State Department’s casual approach to top secret documents under Hillary Clinton.
“This, yet again, shows the culture in the Hillary Clinton State Department of a cavalier attitude about the handling of government secrets. It also shows the FBI awareness of it. It also shows the president’s frustration with it when in a tweet this morning he said ‘there she goes again, crooked Hillary, Jim Comey let her off the hook again.’ Something I profoundly agree with him on.”
Perhaps as startling as the revelation that the FBI was investigating the Hillary Clinton/Russia/Uranium One collusion and that key figures like Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe knew about it and said nothing, is the refusal by Attorney General Jeff Sessions to remove the non-disclosure agreement gag order on the FBI informant who arguably could put Bill and Hillary Clinton and a few others in federal prison.
It was said the Jeff Sessions recused himself from all things Russian because of election campaign conflicts but is it really because he thought it would insulate him from having to divulge what he knew about Uranium One and the people who at the very least knew about the deal, some who approved the deal, including past and present members of the FBI, the DOJ, and Special Counsel Robert Miller’s team? Is Jeff Sessions part of the Uranium One cover-up? If not, then he needs to explain why he is thus far refusing Sen. Chuck Grassley’s request to lift the gag order imposed by the Obama administration as part of the Uranium One cover-up:
So why not just lift the gag order, vacate the non-disclosure agreement, which Sessions has the power to do, and let the informant come forward with information on how and why the Clintons conspired to put 20 percent of our uranium assets under Russian control while lining the pockets of the Clintons and their pay-for-play foundation? As Toensing notes, Sessions could do it, and thereby bring to light the details of this criminal enterprise...
By lifting the gag order, Sessions might have to explain the real reasons behind his recusal and why people who knew of actual collusion between Russia and the Clintons were silent, only to reappear to investigate and pursue prosecution of nonexistent collusion between Russia and Team Trump. He might have to explain why Mueller, McCabe, Rosenstein and others were allowed to hide the truth from the American people and why they should not be summarily fired. As Grassley notes, neither Sessions or anyone in the Justice Department has the authority to block the informant from testifying before Congress or issue non-disclosure agreements to thwart Congressional oversight...
Again, perhaps the reluctance of Jeff Sessions stems from the web of deceit and complicity that ensnares many in the FBI and the Justice Department. As Fox News analyst Gregg Jarrett notes on the Uranium One scandal:
It seems it was all covered up for years by the same three people who are now involved in the investigation of President Donald Trump over so-called Russian “collusion.”…
But why has there been no prosecution of Clinton? Why did the FBI and the Department of Justice during the Obama administration keep the evidence secret? Was it concealed to prevent a scandal that would poison Barack Obama’s presidency? Was Hillary Clinton being protected in her quest to succeed him?
The answer may lie with the people who were in charge of the investigation and who knew of its explosive impact. Who are they?
Eric Holder was the Attorney General when the FBI began uncovering the Russian corruption scheme in 2009. Since the FBI reports to him, he surely knew what the bureau had uncovered.
What’s more, Holder was a member of the “Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States” which approved the uranium sale to the Russians in 2010. Since the vote was unanimous, it appears Holder knowingly and deliberately countenanced a deal that was based on illegal activities and which gave Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium assets.
It gets worse. Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during the time of the Russian uranium probe, and so was his successor James Comey who took over in 2013 as the FBI was still developing the case. Rod Rosenstein, then-U.S. Attorney, was supervising the case. There is no indication that any of these men ever told Congress of all the incriminating evidence they had discovered and the connection to Clinton. The entire matter was kept secret from the American public.
It may be no coincidence that Mueller (now special counsel) and Rosenstein (now Deputy Attorney General) are the two top people currently investigating whether the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election. Mueller reports to Rosenstein, while Comey is a key witness in the case. It is not unreasonable to conclude that Mueller, Rosenstein and Comey may have covered up potential crimes involving Clinton and Russia, but are now determined to find some evidence that Trump “colluded” with Russia.
Boom. The question is now whether Jeff Sessions wants to help President Trump to drain the swamp be vacating the gag order and letting evidence come forth proving the Clintons orchestrated the greatest criminal conspiracy in U.S. history at the expense of American national security or whether he is just another swamp thing committed to clogging up the drainage pipes. Justice may be blind, but it should never be gagged.
FBN's Dobbs: Uranium One 'May Well Turn Out To Be the Biggest Scandal in American Political History'
While speaking with Peter Schweizer, the author of “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” and Breitbart News senior editor-at-large on Friday, Fox Business Network host Lou Dobbs argued that the Uranium One deal could end up being the biggest scandal in the history of American politics.
Dobbs said, “There is no clear statement as to why we would give up, for any reason, any price, 20% of our uranium in this country. And that is a question that is left open still unanswered. and secondly, have you ever heard of anyone putting $145 million, at one moment, into the hands of the Clinton foundation? And the answer is, of course not. These questions, most basic and fundamental, were armed by the very committee made up of the very agencies, departments, and individuals responsible for national security. this, this is the biggest Obama scandal. I think it may well turn out to be the biggest scandal in American political history.”
No comments:
Post a Comment