Month: July 2016

EU Commission: Fines and Sanctions, a corrupt policy

Posted on by Helena

Spain and Portugal have failed to comply with the EU rules regarding budget deficits so the EU Commission is contemplating fining the countries up to .2% of GDP and .5% of their respective EU subsidy payments. Really? Exactly how much revenue does the EU Commission collect from ‘fines’?

The EU Commission apparently attempted to fine Greece on numerous occasions – once after a toxic waste dump was not closed down. They asked nicely in 1992 and in 2001, they finally fined Greece $19,000 per day until the dump was shut down. In 2005 the EU Commission again fined Greece for its failure to crack down on illegal landfills. This time they imposed fines in the neighborhood of $25m Euro. Greece subsequently defaulted on its payment to the IMF.  Surprise!

The concept reminds me of debtors prison – since you can’t pay some of your debts we’re going to eliminate your ability to pay ALL your debts by putting a strangle hold on you. Logical?   No of course not. So the threat looses it’s value because there is ‘no win’.

How do you create a win-win?   Incentive.

Years ago California had a great idea (once) – they offered a highway contractor a monetary incentive to finish the project early and a decentive for every day they were late. Surprise! The project came in early. Despite the fact that it was a great success, the concept was tabled. Why? Because it set an example, it proved a point, and the unions and lobbyists knew the far reaching ramifications could affect every contractor going forward. Pffft.

With BREXIT, the EU Commission lost a gainful ante into their pool of euro’s. They have a choice; either increase the net revenues each remaining member must ante, or find alternate sources, as in new members. What they cannot do is alienate their current members with excessive penalties and sanctions unless they want to unravel the entire EU.

So why are they picking on Spain and Portugal?

The problem is that just about every country in the world rides a budget deficit. The exceptions are: Kuwait, South Korea, Germany, UAE, Uzbekistan, Switzerland, Singapore, Qatar, Oman and Norway. The worst offenders are: US, Pakistan, Japan, India and the UK.

Technically, if the UK had remained in the EU it would be subject to severe austerity cuts and sanctions! And the US would never even make the cut.

The Commission most recently proposed fining EU countries that refused to comply with their refugee quota’s. The fine – 250,000 euro per refugee!  That’s a lot of moola!  At 500,000 refugees that would amount to $125billion.  What would the Commission do with all that money?  Would they give it to the refugee?  Nah.  It would become a part of the sludge of the uncategorized ‘pool’/corruption.

It would appear that the EU Commission makes quite a bounty imposing fines that tag upwards of 30+ per year on various individuals, companies, and countries. The latest haul came just this year when the Commission fined Google $3.4 billion for anti-trust violations. Intel previously had the dubious honor of having the largest fine imposed by the EU – 1.1 billion euro. And last year eight companies faced fines totaling $132million for colluding in anti-competition policies, but that was only a small part of the more than $3 billion the Commission tallies annually.

Who suffers as a result of anti-competition?  The people.  Who reaps the benefit of antitrust fines?  The government. The revenue is classified as ‘other income/revenues’ and is used to support the bureaucracy.   There is no rebate, no award given back to the victims.

But corruption within the EU is considered massive amounting to approximately 120-900 billion euro’s per year, far more than revenues from fines!

So why isn’t the Commission focusing their priorities inward, on the much more lucrative source?   Because the corruption is within the political structure and within the Commission itself. The hypocrisy is classic. Laws are made for everyone – else.   Hillary?

Hillary’s Hail Mary – Cleared!

Posted on by Helena

Who is James Comey?

This is not his first run in with the Clintons. In 1994 he served as deputy counsel in the prosecution of Bill and Hillary Clinton for the Whitewater scandal. In that investigation too, the Clintons were deemed to be innocent despite evidence that clearly indicated fraud.

Prior to being appointed Director of the FBI, Comey was a research scholar at Columbia and prior to that he was counsel at Bridgewater Associates, an investment advisory firm.  And prior to that he was with Lockheed Martin…   He had left the various government posts in 2005 to work in the private industry before being nominated by Obama in 2013 somewhat out of the blue. A notable break from past appointments where the Director typically moved through the ranks before being nominated.  ODD….

Why appoint an outsider? And while supposedly, Loretta Lynch stepped down as a source of recommendation for the Clinton email investigation, James Clapper, the Director of NSA, the other oversight to the FBI, did not.   Mr. Clapper is not Mr. Clean either.  He was caught lying under oath in testimony given before Congress when asked if the NSA gathered any data on American citizens. His response, “No sir.” Period. Subsequently, he lied about why he lied stating that he didn’t understand the question and later stating that the question was unfairly loaded. But he did apologize – for lying.

He never was punished for this travesty of law. Instead, as the go to for the FBI in the Hillarygate investigation, one liar relieved another.

Clapper’s own connection to reality comes into question as he continually compares himself and the NSA to Spider Man, Spidey Sense, and clairvoyance.  An obsession that has drawn a few eyebrows upward…

But most note worthy is the fact that Hillary knew beyond a shadow of doubt that she would never be indicted. She knew because the end result had already been determined.  She frequently made public statements to this effect because the game was rigged, as in the Kenny Rogers mantra;  know when to hold em, when to fold em, when to walk away and when to run …  

Even more odd is the fact that Comey made the decision and announcement presumably without the outcome being shared with the Justic Department, Loretta Lynch or Director of NSA, Clapper. Why? Because if the s**t hits the fan, there will be only one fall guy, Comey.

Of course Hillary had been cleared previously without due course as stated by Texas Democratic Rep, Joaquin Castro, as far back as March of this year. According to him, both Congress and the Department of Justice had already looked into the case and cleared her… A blip he was clearly not authorized to publicly announce.

She was cleared of campaign finance allegations by the Federal Election Committee in 2015, a committee appointed by Obama and headed by Matthew Peterson. His claim to fame is that he helped pass the “Help America Vote Act” of 2002. The Act has not been without its own controversies citing;   complicating the system, misappropriation of funds, deficient criteria, and mismanagement.

So what we have is the FBI Director who previously helped clear the Clintons from all wrong doing in the Whitewater scandal, making an executive decision that should have come from the Justice Department, thus over-reaching his/their authority to clear Hillary without the knowledge of the NSA Director whose job it is to monitor and prevent breaches of national security and did so outside of the knowledge of Congress for years, but whose current Director is under scrutiny for his own lack of truth telling while under oath.  GEE, I feel much better now.

The Black Holes of government would seem to layer particles upon particles of incompetence and deceit to an infinite progression of what Trump likes to label the “Good Ole Boys” mechanism of operating within the shadows and always being above the law.

Loretta Lynch: Lynched?

Posted on by Helena

Loretta Lynch, like most of her cohorts is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. Coming from a relatively lower-middle class family in North Carolina, it is interesting to note that her degrees came at a total cost of about $56,000-$60,000, a hefty sum for a father who was a preacher and a mom who worked at a library… The only source of grants and scholarships at the time included a ‘maximum’ Harvard College payout of $800 per year, and according to Harvard Law – there are no scholarships. We are thus left with a similar unclear haze not unlike Obama’s questionable education… and exactly who financed the man-puppet.

Lynch’s agenda from the beginning of her law career was purportedly as drug and violent crime prosecutor, although she claims her first job was working at Cahill, Gordon and Reindell, LLP. A quick research into this law firm and we find that its specialty is corporate finance and high stakes lawsuits, hardly the druggie prosecution bent that Lynch claims. But then, maybe she was merely an intern.

She then worked in the US Attorney’s office on Long Island which seems to focus on complex white collar crimes, terrorism, organized crime, trafficking, public corruption and weapons. Street crimes, drug crimes – the notch of Lynch, not so much. Perhaps another resume bluff.

During the time she claims to have prosecuted government officials for political corruption in Brookhaven NY, 1994 to 1998, the only case I find involves a Republican highway laborer who extorted money from ‘trash haulers’ who wanted access to the town dump. While extortion is a crime, it doesn’t entirely fit the depiction of Loretta Lynch saving the world prosecuting corrupt politicians…

And while there was a bribery case against a car dealer turned developer, John McNamara, the indictment does not mention a Loretta Lynch but references the US Attorney for the Eastern Office and the Assistant US Attorney as the ones involved.

In either/both cases, it would appear her resume is a bit inflated. Which is not a crime, but begs how she managed to get where she is today.

In addition, her classification as ‘Chief” for the US Attorney Office would seem perplexing given there is no Chief designation – there is however, ‘support staff’. Not nearly as impressive.

It wasn’t until 1999 that Mr. Bill nominated her to the position of US Attorney of the Eastern District where she remained for one year before relocating to another law firm that specialized in corporate finance, Hogan and Hartson. During her tenure, they expanded exponentially, opening offices in China, Dubai and Riyadh specializing in Middle East clients.

The most interesting aspect is the Riyadh connection. Apparently, the firm works on behalf of Saudi Arabia and the Royal family. Given the Short tenure with Bill Clinton, and Lynch’s subsequent partnership with a law firm that was picking the pockets of the Royals, perhaps it was Lynch’s connection to the law firm and a brief tenure as a board member of the Federal Reserve that gave her the power to ultimately return to the Obama legacy of appointments. Was she groomed? It would appear so.

Because otherwise, her resume is very lukewarm at best…

June 2015, Human Rights Watch, a Soros organization, wrote Mz. Lynch a letter indicating that they would be working closely with her office specifically to target: 1) the CIA’s torture policies, 2) the FBI’s anti-muslim rhetoric, 3) immigration policies that they feel are too stringent against illegals and, 4) the disparity in prison terms for drug related crimes and the need to reduce and pardon many.

Those exact four points then became the issues advocated by Loretta Lynn as her own – verbatim. In other words, HRW outlined exactly what she would do while in office and gave her notice that she was now on their payroll. Bought.

Making anti-Muslim speech a vendetta worthy of prosecution and illegal immigrants more protected than US citizens, Mz Lynch has carried forth the baton advocated by Soros. Currently, she is working alongside Obama in attempting to create a UN global police force in the US that would take precedence over our current system and Constitution, ie, nominating individuals within communities that would act as the enforcer of UN laws. The plan, entitled Strong Cities Network, would operate in a Socialist/Fascist frame of squelching freedom of speech and transferring control from our enlisted local governments to those individuals whom the UN believes are more competent.

Add to the fray of Lynchism is the most recent faux pas whereby she initiated a supposed clandestine meeting with Mr. Bill to discuss grandchildren and golf (she doesn’t play) in the midst of the Hillarygate FBI investigation for which she has the power to ‘squelch’ the entire investigation and rule ‘no indictment’. Tch, tch.

I remember the Nixon days – it wasn’t so much that he was doing anything that every other politician wasn’t also doing – it was his stupidity in getting caught! And that stupidity cost him his Presidency.

Mz Lynch, Mr. Bill, Mz. Hillary – your stupidity is in getting caught. Over and over and over again.

When will the Soros/Rothschilds simply close their door and begin again with someone a bit more competent?